Forum Moderators: open
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
benefits:
1) Control over which URLs they include in the index (subject to content
guidelines)
2) Frequent refresh
3) Clearly defined way to interact with us (for example: clear feed
specifications)
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.
Not yet. But we are very hopeful though. Because the penalty was an automated one (placed on us by the engine not a person) it appears that it is more complex to remove. We are practicing patience to the nth degree. ;)
Tim spoke at Pubcon about adding an element of customer service to PI that hasn't been there in the past. It was VERY encouraging!
For anyone who thinks I am bluffing or blowing smoke... a few weeks ago, we hired an very reputable and well known SEO firm to go through our entire site in search of any possible reason for any penalty (and yes, we paid quite a bit for it too). They were baffled and simply confirmed what we already knew... they couldn't find anything. They guessed that the only possible reason would be lots of inbound links from our own Yahoo store (navigational purposes only to get from our Yahoo store to the other content areas of our site).
In fairness to Ink... perhaps this was some penalty that was levied more than a year ago, before I owned the site. And maybe it just didn't surfaced or affect us until we signed up for Paid Inclusion. I really don't know.
We had two Inktomi editors go through our entire site with "a fine-toothed comb" (It's a big site) and they couldn't find anything warranting a spam penalty at all.
If you went thru all that, and INK themselves can't tell you what the matter was, what kind of hope is there for anyone else? Amazing story. If I didn't want to cry, I'd laugh.
same feeling over here, things are not looking good. Kanetrain, how did you even get the Ink guys to check the site? I'm curious.
This is the new Yahoo PFI program explained in detail.
Just when Tim had me convinced that the "new" Yahoo PFi was going to somehow be different than the old Inktomi PFI, this proves that Yahoo has not learned anything.
Look at this quote:
"Choose Pages for Inclusion: Submit a few pages of content or include your entire site to maximize your exposure."
Yahoo is admitting here that if you want to get your whole site indexed, you need to PAY to include all that content. In other words, if you submit just a "few pages", those are the only pages that will get indexed.
This means that, just like Inktomi, they care more about the quick buck than spidering the whole web and refreshing it often to provide the best possible index. The folks at Yahoo know that that it's deceptive to allow paid listing in the "pure" results, but they also know that 80% of people click on the natural listtings... and they just cant resist the temptation to monetize it.
... just wait until the FTC knocks on their door with deceptive advertising claims. Perhaps that's the only way they will be forced to change their ways.
Subscribers <b>then pay a fixed cost-per-click for each customer lead that clicks on their listing</b>. For most content categories, the cost-per-click is $0.15, while select categories are priced at $0.30 per click."
Adding it it's one thing, you will have to pay per click too. I guess some people can afford it.
Who knows what else they have hidden in there!
Intern: "We could always do a Looksmart?".
Chairman & Board "Hurrah!"
Doubtful, as this would lead to a small index.
That's insane!
Why would I want to pay for an inclusion program when I could use the content match and be displayed first?
I don't get it..
Why pay 49$ then 0,15 cents per click when you could just use the old overture system and avoid the review fee.
The 15 cents per click is just horrible.
Something is really, really wrong with this idea.
[edited by: cyberfyber at 6:50 am (utc) on Mar. 2, 2004]
[edited by: Abigail at 7:01 am (utc) on Mar. 2, 2004]
Search engine analysts generally applauded Yahoo's move, saying it could open a rich new vein of content that's lacking from all Internet search engines. But the fees are likely to raise worries about Yahoo creating an online caste system.
From this page:
[freep.com...]
Site Match is part of a larger content acquisition strategy which targets public domain sites such as the library of content. This should benefit the user and improve the comprehensiveness of the Index.
Only an idiot would say that. Pathetic "journalism".
[edited by: steveb at 8:39 am (utc) on Mar. 2, 2004]
I'm glad they are trying new things at Yahoo, but I can't figure out why they are putting so much weight on Ink when they also have other SE's that are faster and have a much more complete database.
First, you should have launched the free Add URL first. Announcing this other thing first is just dumb.
Second, I'll eat my computer if public domain sites use this.
