Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Forum Moderators: open
What is the reason for this?
Does FastAlltheweb attach more importance to Meta tags (decription, keywords)?
Does paid inclusion significantly improve ranking?
I would be very interested to hear any views
A simple calculation:
+2 Bill pages index.
-0,001% (probably much less) paid pages.
How many top positions can be occupied by paid pages?
Fact of the matter is, Fast doesn't give any boost to paid pages at all. That's what some folks have been complaining about... what, I pay for inclusion and I don't get a boost..?
I have not paid to be included in Fast/Alltheweb, and I have 4 sites all ranking well in Google and Fast.
The only (big) difference I have noticed between Fast and Google is that the keywords must be in the title to rank well on Fast. This isn't necessarily true of Google ... although it does help a lot.
Of the four sites I mentioned, only one has ever been PFI on any engines (LookSmart and Yahoo). The others are all enjoying a free ride.
If it is the site in your profile, I would beef up the keywords. The vast majority represent less than 1 percent of your overall word count.
Paying has NOTHING to do with ranking and, again, I highly doubt that Fast would penalize paid pages.
Why should they?
I think there is a big difference between paying for frequent spidering (as per many PFI's) and paying for rank (as per most PFC).
The reason why any PFI program may drop non-paid pages from a site with a few paid for pages is to encourage you to pay for even more pages as you see you 'free' pages disappearing.
This is certainly my main concern with Fast and AV's PFI program.
BUT, don't go overboard with density. Don't stuff your pages with lots and lots of repetition of the keyword(s).
Heini also mentions this elsewhere; linkpop is not as important to Fast as it is to Google. You can't rank high on just a few high PR-like pages in Fast as you can in Google.
BTW, I just checked 3 domains and they all have both paid and non-paid pages in the db. Over time I haven't be able to see any difference in rankings between those. In fact Lycos comes in in the top 10 of most referring sites, but it's also ranking very good on a number of popular keywords. It's a B2C site selling comsumer oriented products. The traffic is there, you just have to work a little hard to get it.
On the site it isnt possible to produce another home page as it would appear as a "mirror" page and get it banned totaly!
All the site traffic comes from MSN and Google so I need to sort it out preety damn quick. I might produce a totaly new site using the same database and submit one to either search engine with some coding to avoid the other engine from spidering it.
Always gald to hear what you guys think.
I'm wondering if newer sites are getting less consideration in hopes people will pay for a boost.
I also looked at my stats in my older site and even though I am up on the top in my prime search words on both alltheweb and google I only get 1 visitor from alltheweb to 350 visitors from Google. Makes alltheweb pretty minor in terms of bringing in visitors.