Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from

Forum Moderators: mack

Message Too Old, No Replies

Microsoft Expands its Reach - part 2

Continuation of http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum97/278.htm


Pass the Dutchie

10:51 am on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

SERP results on MSN Beta for my targeted key phrases are soooooo poor. Not because my sites perform better in other SE's but because websites that link to my sites are out ranking my site. These sites are not optimised by any means for these search terms. In some cases these sites are only relevant to my topic because of my link text!


8:20 am on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

Google sandbox does exist. There are so many cookie/KW cutter, affiliate/doorway pages through the listings that it's the only way they can stop it.

I can see a site at position 2 it has 23,000 cutter pages that just can't be detected because it's all on page. And there is no change that Google or any other search engine will be able to find a reason why to boot it!

If you're one of those people saying "no such thing as a sandbox" then in my opinion you're lucky. I've always said that the prevalence of being a sandbox domain was checked by the prevalence of adwords and the dependent strength of the keywords. Or put another way "does the keyword sounds like it will get you lots of positions?" Unlikely for results. If domain = new forget it without a link from a PR7.

The funny thing is that when Google decided to dampen its results giving less predictability to SEO masters who traditionally were getting good results for Google for on-page algorithmic SEO what they did was they basically said "you will not get positions for strong keywords". To which the reply (if you check the volumes of pages in the indexes was) "fine, we'll then just create 100,000 pages on all the secondary keywords and have Googlebot crawl those instead". Which it does!

I still use Google every day but my partner tried to look for a hotel the other day in Italy. "All I found was popups and afffiliates". That's lucky, most Internet Users will just book through an affiliate/white label site not knowing that the best deal can usually be found on the suppliers site directly. But if you go looking for them in the search engines you won't find them because they start coming up on page 5.

Round and round we go...


2:35 pm on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

Sorry to add to this huge thread, but I noticed a lot of people saying the sandbox does not exist. I know for certainty that it does, but I guess peoples perception of what a sandbox actually is will differ somewhat (mine included).

I have launched many sites over the past couple of years and seen almost all of them doing very well in search results (google) and all getting PR as expected. But one site I launched almost 5 months ago still has PR0 and only showing for very irrelavant keywords many pages down. There is certainly some kind of filter applied here as the site has many unique pages, optimised as per all my other sites, and has over 5K backlinks from PR5-Pr8 pages (and has done for over 4 months). Now I know google has indexed about 10K pages from this sites, BUT because it has PR0 the results are very bad. I have to admit the site does have popular keywords in the domain (and a .org), and this has got to be the reason for the problems. But I still have faith it will do well sooner or later.... sooner is best for me. BTW.... it's number 1 in MSN beta for the most competitive keywords!

To me this is proof of some filters being applied, but is it the sandbox everyone is talking about? who knows.


2:54 pm on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

not knowing that the best deal can usually be found on the suppliers site directly

thats not true at all. In fact one of the largest MAIN sites charges the user a booking fee off of it own site while the affiliate sites do not charge that booking fee making them cheaper.


6:04 pm on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

Does Google only sandbox new sites that have a lot of links to them? Maybe that is the mistake people are making? Going out and getting a ton of links for a site that is new makes it pretty obvious that it is simply link exchange spam. It would take time for a new site to build links in a natural way.

If a site was worth being up, normally it was put up over a year ago

Where do you get this? Look in the phone book for any category and see how many businesses have web sites. I think we have a long way to go with new site building.


6:46 pm on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

My previous post looks like I think the sandbox doesn't exist at all. I believe it exists but not in the automatic blanket that it seemed or that some believe. I think it's possible to get a site up quick but exactly how is unknown. There are variables that we don't know. Maybe it's the heavy linking early on. In a natural state, a website would take a long time to get a lot of links...slowly growing over days, weeks, months and years. Many people throw up a site and manufacture a bunch of links in no time. I think that could be a trigger.


9:48 pm on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

I have a very simple and effective solution for MSN to make their new index more attractive then googl's. Add another slider or checkbox that controls filtering of pages with AdSence and such. Easy to do end very effective. I'm pretty sure lots of people will turn this filter on, myself included. Hey, MSNdude, what do you think about that?


10:47 pm on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

If a site was worth being up, normally it was put up over a year ago

Where do you get this? Look in the phone book for any category and see how many businesses have web sites. I think we have a long way to go with new site building.

When searching for "<cityname> plumber" does it matter if you get 20 or 200 good options? From a user perspective, I think not.



11:33 pm on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

and check out this thread here: [webmasterworld.com...]



6:11 pm on Dec 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

When searching for "<cityname> plumber" does it matter if you get 20 or 200 good options?

Of course it matters, I might not be as picky about a plumber as I am a remodeler but the reason I am using the web instead of a phone book is because I want more info on who I am hiring than just a lousy phone number.


10:05 am on Dec 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

So far, the MSN beta looks reasonably decent to me. It certainly needs work (like being able to better differentiate between plural and singular words), but so far I'm generally quite happy with the results being displayed.

I think the best thing that MSN beta has going for it is the ability to answer the question, "Tell me something I don't already know." With Google, if you do a search in a specific field, ie. movies, it's always the same long-established sites that have been around forever that show up front and center in the results. As people continue to search the web for info on a specific film, and continue to get results from the same sites, there's always the risk that these search results won't be what people are looking for because they already know of these old sites, and are looking for a new voice in the field, and Google just can't do that because of it's sandbox.

As the internet grows older, and people become more and more savvy at searching it, they will want to know of alternate places to get their information on a given subject, and since MSN's beta is able to do it, they can and will attract searchers.

I really get the impression that a portion of the pro-Google crowd don't like the MSN beta results simply because their site doesn't place well in the Microsoft search, yet they place well in Google. The thing is, why would MSN want a search engine with results exactly the same as it's competitors? What MSN is doing with their new search is giving a very viable alternative to what Google has to offer, and in order to be an alternative it has to be different. Thankfully, it is also managing to be relevant thus far as well. There are obviously people that are trying to work the system, but from the searches that I've done so far, it doesn't seem nearly as bad as some of the people here crying bloody murder are claiming.


5:20 pm on Dec 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

I know that Google uses "mathematical calculations" for their ranking, but something is flawed. For the record, I did not do anything illegal. I did not break any rules. Yet, I'm forced into the darkness. Nobody can answer the question. Why am I not even on the first 5 pages? My product's name happens to also be the url. I rank #2 on Yahoo for my key words, and #3 on MSN (all great spots). In fact, I'm on the first page of every major search engine for my key words. It makes sense. For some reason, I was not on google at all for over 6 months. Well, ANY forum I used to post my product on would show up in the search query. I love google, but hate this problem.


5:22 pm on Dec 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

One more separate note...

I didn't rank until I signed up for Google's adsense program. Now, instead of not showing up, I'm on page 50 for my product's key words. First page of every other search engine, but not google's. :-/


6:35 pm on Dec 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

I think UK and US webmasters competing with English language sites from other countries are the ones that like MSN beta the most.

Several of my sites rank highly on Y and G and also on beta.search.msn.se but since they are in English almost nobody search for the keywords.
These otherwise high-ranking pages just cannot be found using beta.search.msn.co.uk or beta.search.msn.com

I dearly hope that MSN beta serach will tune down their weird concept of geographical targeting. I do believe in the future success of msn search, but it will mean that I migh have to get UK and US based mirrors.


12:48 pm on Dec 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

I dearly hope that MSN beta serach will tune down their weird concept of geographical targeting

I don't think that will be likely - quite the opposite infact. But they are going much further than that in The US and eventually UK side too I would guess, gradually bringing the "near me" option more into play.

So - just getting a US and a UK server in itself won't be enough. You'll potentially be wanting mailing addresses in every city for some types of business! OK - probably not that necessary - but I am quite keen on the idea of a user in Birmingham seeing different results to a user in London - not necessarily from an SEO point of view (although I can make money out of that) but from the user's perspective. I like the idea that bricks and mortar businesses have their "place" on the web and the "place" relates to where they are geographically. With a bit of luck, I get to work for a major bank, optimising every branch web presence as well as the main brand. (Or Pizza company or Shoe shop chain - I am not fussed).

Anyroad - for me, the Geographical "mood" seems a logical step. The Internet has become too big to be without some form of catagorization and since the death of directories as a business model, geographically dependent results seems a positive step forward.


11:46 am on Dec 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

Someone previously mentioned the sites that have been popping up everywhere to make money through ad sense by only displaying the ads and nothing else, I donít think these are necessarily a bad thing if done professionally and the ads are displayed in relevant sections such as Home-Bedroom-Mattresses. I get a lot of hits from these sites with a good conversion.

Really they are just small paid for directories and the vast majority of sites using ad words offer a good service, so they are very useful for finding companies that sell what you are looking for.

I think that while search engines spending a lot of effort filtering spamy sites out, if there were a search for online shops and catalogue type websites and a different search for just information, this could perhaps improve the SERPís.

I either search for information or products.

This 45 message thread spans 2 pages: 45

Featured Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month