Forum Moderators: open
Without really thinking about it I signed up for sitematch for one of my pages that was doing well on inktomi. The thousand and one emails from ineedhits saying sign up sign up twisted my arm.
Now im lost!, my positioning on yahoo was ok before the the implementation of site match, due to mour directory submit in January, but before the change over to sitematch from ink I was sitting at position 2 on both .com and .co.uk engines.
The problem is im trying to distinguish between my free indexed results (pre sitematch) and the sitematch results. I paid for yahoo directory inclusion in January 04.
I have just deactivated my sitematch service and my URL is still at position 2...
Can you tell from the link if the results are by that of crawled pages or sitematch?
Just a quick other note, i see yahoo-vertical crawler in my logs, and Slurp everyday..
Hope someone can shed some light on this, I dont want to be throwing money away on PPC sitematch results when my free listings are doing the job.
There may be some other of your URLs which are in the index via the free crawl. So that is why you may see more than your Site Match URL.
As has been explained before, if you sign up for Site Match and then discontinue your service, your URL will return to the status it had before participating in Site Match.
I understand that Yahoo now owns Overture, AllTheWeb, Altavista, Fast and more. Having paid for the inclusion of 2 URLs I expect my site will appear on relevant searches throughout this network of SEs.
However, am I paying PPC throughout the network or only on Overture? If the answer is that I am paying for all clicks then wouldn't it simply encourage users to only register low user value affiliate/sales pages which will lead to very poor search results from the point of view of Yahoo?
My site was already high on many searches across this network before paying the fee on the 2 URLs so I'm not sure what advantage I've gained.
In addition, the CPP of 30c with Sitematch is only 10c for many of my relevant keyword phrases when bidding directly at Overture.
Lots of great articles here to help you out :)
"I understand that Yahoo now owns Overture, AllTheWeb, Altavista, Fast and more. Having paid for the inclusion of 2 URLs I expect my site will appear on relevant searches throughout this network of SEs."
Site Match provides results to the Yahoo! Search Technology, which feeds:
* The previous Inktomi distribution
* Yahoo!
* AlltheWeb / Fast and the previous distribution
* AltaVista.
Unless you have used the geotargeting features, you will be appearing on that distribution.
"However, am I paying PPC throughout the network or only on Overture? If the answer is that I am paying for all clicks then wouldn't it simply encourage users to only register low user value affiliate/sales pages which will lead to very poor search results from the point of view of Yahoo? "
You are paying across the entire network.
Each URL must go through a Quality Review, which is very strict. Affilate sites are ones that are deffinately being targeted and not passing Quality Review.
"My site was already high on many searches across this network before paying the fee on the 2 URLs so I'm not sure what advantage I've gained."
OSM - like any other form of paid inclusion - DOES NOT boost ranking. What it does give you is rapid inclusion, 48 hour refresh, guaranteed inclusion for the subscription period (provided there is a positive balance) and reporting.
"In addition, the CPP of 30c with Sitematch is only 10c for many of my relevant keyword phrases when bidding directly at Overture."
Some people click on ads, some people click on SERPS. Being in both sets of results is a good idea because it allows you to capture a wider auidance.
It comes down to your ROI. If you know your ROI, you know how much you can afford to spend acquiring a customer.
Warren
Do we know what the "affiliate" criteria is based on?
I submitted a number of sites that I previously had in the Inktomi paid inclusion program.
However, a number of them have been rejected and it doesn't make sense.
Surely all those involved in Site Match would have a lot to gain if people could be give the specifics
as to why their pages are rejected. They could then do something to correct them, resubmit and then Bob's your uncle! What do you reckon? Wouldn't this make more sense than leaving people with a mystery as to why they are rejected? A lot more money to be had this way and the customers would want the service. Personally I don't want to pay any more under the current set up.
Sites that are "overly affilate" are being rejected. i.e. that don't have any content are just a bunch of afiliate links.
Sites which are forming an "affiliate ring" are so being hit quite hard.
The quality review not only looks at the URL submitted but the entire site and various links.
"I submitted a number of sites that I previously had in the Inktomi paid inclusion program.
However, a number of them have been rejected and it doesn't make sense."
It does. Inktomi submissions never underwent any Quality Review. Site Match does give a quality review, so of course some URLs are going to be rejected.
"Surely all those involved in Site Match would have a lot to gain if people could be give the specifics
as to why their pages are rejected. They could then do something to correct them, resubmit and then Bob's your uncle! What do you reckon?"
Don't hold me to this but I believe that something along these lines may happen in the future.
All I can recommend, is that prior to submitting to OSM, is to make sure you site is clean - no black hat tactics, not overly optimized and provides some quality content that is unque. I am yet to see a good quality of site fail the quality review.
