Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.108.40.206
Forum Moderators: martinibuster
We supplement this free crawl with the paid inclusion program, which allows us to add dynamic database content and other content that we could not otherwise discover and crawl. Currently less than 1% of our index is content that is included via our inclusion programs.
Our paid inclusion programs provide a superior way for sites to interact with us in a clearly structured fashion. These sites get the following
1) Control over which URLs they include in the index (subject to content
2) Frequent refresh
3) Clearly defined way to interact with us (for example: clear feed
4) Quality review and consultation (for feed customers)
5) Detailed reporting to track and optimize performance
6) Customer service
Participation in Yahoo!'s paid inclusion program does not guarantee rank in the search results. URLs are ranked in search results in the same way as all other URLs from the free crawl. The key drivers of ranking are keyword-specific relevance and site quality, as assessed by our regular search relevance algorithms with input from the quality review process.
(Note that Inktomi Index Connect clients are receiving Yahoo! Search traffic going forward, and Inktomi Search Submit customers are receiving a free trial of Yahoo! traffic until 4/15/04.)
We will also be launching free URL submission during the week of 3/1. This service allows content providers to suggest that the crawler should visit a site during the main crawl cycle. This service is different than paid inclusion in two ways:
1) There is no guarantee that we will crawl and include the URL in the index.
2) As this site potentially could be added to the main crawl, Yahoo! Slurp will follow links from that URL.
This service will reside on the Yahoo.com site and be accessible via a Yahoo! login. This service has been available for the AltaVista and Alltheweb Indices previously and the tradition will continue with Yahoo! Search.
First up, they charge you $299 for a directory listing.. and then once they've signed people up, drop them from the SERPs. Then, they imply that Yahoo will be running on Inktomi results, and actually feed Yahoo results from Inktomi with the net result that a whole load of webmasters sign up.. and then they announce they're dropping Inktomi to go for some even more stupidly expensive solution to extract money from webmasters.
Well.. this model has been tried before by Looksmart, and they are basically dead in the water. So Google is breathing a HUGE sigh of relief here, because not only has Yahoo p*ssed off most of its customers AGAIN, but it has adopted a business model which has been shown to fail.
OK.. I have to admit that the Yahoo/Inktomi confidence trick fooled me completely and I needlessly shelled out $1000 on this scam. But I swear that I will never spend another cent with Yahoo.
At least when Google shafts you, you can be pretty sure that it's because they're *trying* to sort out the SERPs. When Yahoo shafts you, it's merely because they're trying to screw more money out of you.
OK.. I'm angry, but I'm laughing at the same time, because in one swoop Yahoo have created a system which is not only too expensive for most of its customers, but also looks like it's going to provide totally crappy results for visitors.
Kanetrain, Overture for quite a few years has subsidized its index with results from Inktomi. The results after the sponsored links in Overture are from Inktomi. I've never percieved it as differing databases. Just one big database that calls up the search engine results first on the engine you happen to be using. Its that intermingling of results that are causing problems with the Ink/Yahoo PFI customers now. I wouldn't be surprised to see Overture customers having problems eventually because Looksmart customers did.
1) As the Web marketing manager for a consumer product retailer, our average sale and gross margin can in no way justify a PFI that includes a $.15 CPC. No, I would not pay for inclusion. So, the main thing that's important to me is that Yahoo follows through on their claim they will still crawl "aggressively" and my client's site gets lots of pages indexed. I would hope that our competitors also conclude it is too expensive (we're in the same business), but I also believe our regular SERPs would beat them anyway.
2) Rankings can definitely be affected with PFI. Yes, the algorithm will be applied the same, but as any of us would do, we'd be tweaking constantly to get better and better positioning. Plus, as written in Search Day "As part of this structured relationship, Yahoo is establishing guidelines for what it considers to be quality content. This should help content owners have a better understanding of the ranking criteria Yahoo uses, without revealing too much detail that could be helpful to spammers." This sounds to me like Yahoo will help PFI partners optimize the site so they get higher positions and more clicks, thus more revenue for Yahoo(makes sense to me). So, technically, it may be true PFI URLs are ranked the same, but PFI partners have a competitive advantage by getting greater opportunities to improve their ranking.
3) Yahoo believes the surveys that say relevant results are most important and credible results are second. I agree if a PFI site gets constantly optimized to rise to the top for a particular search term, it may be more relevant. But what if, especially in competitive categories, all the top results are PFI *and* searchers are increasingly aware of this? Which way would the surveys go? Yahoo is taking a chance that searchers priorities do not change, otherwise Google will jump all over it.
Anyone have any idea how long they will continue?
On a seperate note I have just put my first site through to the new Overture service, and how disgusted I was to find that when it says 1st URL = $49.00, 2nd - 10 = $25.00 and 10th+ $10, what it REALLY means is that your URL has to have exactly the same domain name, for example; www.aaaaa.com as the first, www.aaaaa.com/aaa.html as the second etc etc. This is the only way to qualify for this discount, you cant add one site and then a different one to qualify for the discount I am told by ineedhits.
I really feel the move is a terrible one, tell me what is the point in paying .30c a click and not even be guaranteed a particular position when for .50c a click you can probably get on the first page in a sponsored position through the traditional Overture PPC...all very strange!...
New Yahoo Inclusion Program Unveiled Posted in Yahoo by Tim
As announced at the WebmasterWorld Publishers Conference, Yahoo starts a new Inclusion Program: "The primary means of generating our index is via our free crawl.... We supplement this free crawl with the paid inclusion program."
And guess what we're discussing?
As many have said in this thread, we should be greatful and encouraging Yahoo! to do new stuff. Tim, who has a high "Director of Product Management" position (I think) at Yahoo, spends hours answering hundred's of questions which could be easily answered if the user asking the question does a search on Google, with the "site:webmasterworld.com" field.
sidyadav, ya being silly here, aren't ya?
Hey, even though you are angry, Tim is still a member here at WebmasterWorld. Please treat him with the same respect that you would others.
After all these Ink PFI thingy complains - I'm sure Yahoo might be working on something (better), especially knowing that the person who posts here on the behalf of Yahoo has great powered in the company itself.
[edited by: sidyadav at 11:32 pm (utc) on Mar. 2, 2004]
And I do not believe for one second that Y! is including pages through PFI so that it can have pages in it's index just so it can have results from non crawlable sites...it's all about the money.
It insults our intellegence to say other wise.
I stopped using MSN the day they implemented Looksmart with their .15 per click traffic stuff...the results were horrible.
Why Y! seems to go down the same road is beyond me.
Tim, please address what Yahoo's intentions are about monetizing traffic.
Already, a significant number of searches have the "free" results below the fold because of PPC. With the addition of SiteMatch, can you honestly say that Yahoo's strategic direction is not towards fully monetizing as much traffic as possible?
Some people around here are under the misconception that Yahoo is not moving towards full monetization even though it is already obvious that you are well on your way.
i highly recommend, if you have never done it, to stand behind a few casual internet users and see how they use a search engine. it is an eye opening experience to be sure. i mean what person in their right mind would type in good sightseeing tours or cheap airline flights to try and find what they are actually looking for!
After receiving Yahoovertures notice last night here on the left coast at 10pm - i quickly had a large glass of grand marnier and went to bed. Slept through the night. And awoke this morning to realize the sky wasnt falling (once again) and that the natural progression of things continues to march on.
More and more I find myself helping clients convert their traffic to sales, working on usability issues and things that at first blush really have nothing to do with SEO. Things change kiddos. You've got to be flexible and willing to analyze how you can benefit from change because it happens with or without you anyway.
Peace - out
This is a very painful disservice to newcomers who might leave with the misunderstanding that building websites which depend on free traffic from Yahoo is a good idea.
Hmmm - seems like you have an agenda Logic - i have never come across a site whose business model uses adsense or affiliate programs (except way back at the advent and even then...) that wasnt much more than a hobby site. We must surf in different circles.
Monetization costs my clients more ad dollars too. They have to take away the money from something else to ante up to the bar and many have to choose between adWords and Overjerks to make ends meet - so i am certainly not arguing the point with you. I agree
Take the time to read what I have to say, thanks.
I need some explanation.
The new Yahoo! Inclusion program sounds like the directory fiasco when they stopped using it's results.
When I mean fiasco I am talking about the money issues.
Give me one simple reason why I should choose "Site Match" instead of "Content Match".
Content Match (old overture system)
- You are displayed first.
- You don't have a review fee
- There isn't a ranking issue
- You don't need to wait for a bot to change what you want to be displayed
- No ranking guaranteed
- Review Fee
- A fixed price of 15 cents or 30 cents per click once your pages are approved
Anyone with some common sense will find the "Site Match" program completely insane. There isn't any advantage, reward.. Anything, NONE. No reason at all to join this program.
It's like asking me to write down the positive aspect of smoking. There is nothing positive.
This is the worst long-term strategy I've ever heard
If you want to be a player in the SE game long-term, you NEED to provide the best & most accurate search results.
Yahoo will make some quick money from this, but the search results will suffer and people will continue to migrate over to other search engines as they have been because people are looking for relevant results. Not a competition between huge corporations.
Allright, you are talking about a "free submit" option. Ok. Another reason why I shouldn't choose the "Site Match" option. Especially if there isn't any "ranking improvement".
What do I get with "site match"? Well, my pages are refreshed every 48 hours. That's still not good enough for me to pay for that program.
Something is wrong, really wrong with this idea..