Update Allegra - Google Update 2-2-2005

[illusionist]

My site which came back on december 26 update, seems to have disappeared again on this data center [216.239.53.99...] . Its notwhere to be found even in allinanchor, allintitle etc? I see majot change on that data center, is this a new update?

[Freedom]

Don't forget the adorable anti-USA jab he took.

[bnhall]

On either DC I still have the problem where a search for mycompanyname (a made up word) still doesn't show my site in the SERPs.

My site has been in the top of SERPs for most of my major terms for years, and has ALWAYS been #1 for mycompanyname.

Perhaps the answer is lost in the 24 pages of content - but does anyone have ideas what happened with the update to kill searches for mycompanyname? I see a lot of people mentioning this problem

[trader]

by Walkman...First they let the 302 redirect issue unsolved for months

Walkman, please explain what you mean by that.

I have several high traffic sites where G refuses to count the traffic because it comes from redirets using htaccess. i.e. 1700/vists/day but less than 100 ad impressions are counted, according to my url channels.

An explanation would be appreciated regarding redirects, I am not even sure what a 302 redirect is, does that mean traffic going to a non-existant webpage, which is my main issue?

P.S. G does not explain why my impressions are not counted other than canned mechanical replies which are non-relevant or not applicable.

[edited by: trader at 6:22 pm (utc) on Feb. 8, 2005]

[diddlydazz]

ltedesco

I dont think Googleguy will make any comments until the update is settled.

dazz

[steveb]

On 216.239.39.104 I'm seeing meta description shown for sites with one, and ransom notes for those without. Wish that would stick.

[angiolo]

Monitoring several sites, I got this impressions:

- The title in DMOZ is important
- The links in Dmoz and other BIG directories are important
- The age of the links is important
- The natural increase of link is important

Several sites increased the visitors despite the fact that they had a lower rankings in the targeted keywords.

[donb01]

I need to ask about redirects too. I am using AWSTATS, and one of the things I always notice is a number of 302 redirects show up in the statistics.

I have never known where they are from, because I have never done anything to redirect a page - it's either there or deleted.

BUT, I saw a comment in an earlier post that may just have shed some light on it and I want to know if anyone can answer my question... I am using a custom 404 page so that if anyone comes to my site from an outdated search engine link or a direct bookmark to a deleted page they are still held within my site and not given some generic error message. Is THAT where the redirects are coming from? If that is the case, could I consider that value to be the number of times someone is trying to access pages that no longer exist?

BTW, trying to stay on topic, I have my google filter set to show me English pages only, so I know what I get is not my true position in the serps, but I went from averaging about #38, then down in the 80's for several weeks, and then last night I was up to #24. However, I have not yet seen any increase in traffic from Google - it is still a trickle.

[xcomm]

And if they have problems with there (sic) capacity servers (sic) how come they're devoting processing power to updating the directory?

I hope it helps to improve the SERPs a little bit over this running update as there are some little signs of this, but...

They should simply spent more of their money to the SE as core business instead as open a new shop along the way every week.

They are looking short in crawling for over a half year now at least for me. MSN is leading before them with Yahoo. Also Ask seems to have not to low capacity.

It looks as Big G is devoting to much of their computing power to Adwords/sense last time (This 'SERPs' were described here as better some times).

I'd drop Adsense for my site to give G some resources for the SE back. :-) Believe it or not this month they crawling my site earlier and more...

In terms of computing G has to do some real engagement (invest money!) into breaking the 32Bit barrier. This could not be such an issue for a technology company.

[walkman]

"I need to ask about redirects too."

the problem I was reffering to is detailed here: [webmasterworld.com...] (close to 400 messages :))

[ezrydr]

- The age of the links is important

I think Google has been factoring in the age of links for nearly a year now. It is why, IMO, new sites have been sandboxed since early last year - their links aren't "counted" until they are aged a certain amount of time. It would explain why sandboxed sites are indexed and can rank well for obsure terms (the links are recognized and followed, sites are indexed yet don't need the power of links to rank for the obsure terms) but why they don't rank for competitive terms (the power of links isn't applied because they are too "new").

The occasional exception would probably be explained by links from white listed sites, in which case those links would be applied immediately.

G did this to counter buying links (no bang for your buck) and it negates the short-term, large-scale link exchange campaigns meant to influence SERPs.