Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
I was hit hard by the Dec 7th change and I know several others too. I'd like to get some feedback from those affected hopefully track down what our sites have in common so we can hopefully do something about it. Here's what I believe to be the relevant stats about my site. Please post some stats about yours and whether or not you were affected (positive or negative) by this change.
Type of Site: credit cards
Age: 2.5 years
Inbound Links:
- 50% from syndicating articles
- 20% bought
- 10% from link directories
- 20% "natural"
Outbound Links: Only one, but ROS exchange with an Australian credit card site
Has outbound affiliate links: Yes
Does url re-writing: Yes
Sub-Domains: One for a forum
Rank before: 1-5 for primary keywords
Rank after: 18 - not found for primary keywords
[edited by: tedster at 3:34 am (utc) on Dec. 14, 2006]
[edited by: Pirates at 2:06 am (utc) on Dec. 15, 2006]
Nah mate your a scraper. Not gonna help you. And by the way incase you really are german (I think your polish) 2 world wars and 1 world cup ENGLAND!
So Google's updates are linked to Englands pathetic and overrated performance in football ... hmm.. well it's some form of hypothesis.. :D
So Google's updates are linked to Englands constant pathetic and overrated performance in football ... hmm.. well it's some form of hypothesis.. :D
PMSL. Thats Great really made me laugh.
Could there be a coherence between the downdate and google sitemaps?
Maybe sites without sitemaps spiral downwards.
If one of the dropped site is equipped with a google sitmeap wen can exclude that.
I've got no sitemap, but a good internal link system. Maybe it isn't enough at present?!
Could there be a coherence between the downdate and google sitemaps?
Maybe sites without sitemaps spiral downwards.
Nope i've got a cronjob running on sitemaps. By now it's the english and not the German website that gets hit. German is PR 6 and the english is PR 5 ( was 6 until the PR oscillation started), both 9 years old and linked since 9 years all over the world.
I've got adsense, analytics, coop search, sitemaps and so on.. around 5 million PI in November.
[edited by: mattg3 at 2:18 am (utc) on Dec. 15, 2006]
[edited by: Pirates at 2:18 am (utc) on Dec. 15, 2006]
I could prove an answer on this but as for a fact I know you scrape other peoples content I am gonna reply by saying nothing at all.
Doubtlessly showing someone an undeserved red card.. :))
OT: what I notice on both servers that PI does not fall proportionate to vistor number. Maybe they do some "clever" return vistor stuff, ie trying to send people that are supposedly interested in the subject..
In analytics, one server has doubled it's return visitors. 2 digits so not just from 1 % to to 2% ;)
[edited by: mattg3 at 2:24 am (utc) on Dec. 15, 2006]
I kind of a matt cutts fan. So please tell me exactly how he's a puppet, isn't infact your talking #*$! and are just a muppett.
All other sites listed in the top ten are stabil like a concrete wall, the only site which is swinging is mine :o(
On those DC's, I get the #7 , the positions #7, 8, 9, 10 shifting one ' upwards all other places are identically whith the bad ones.
If you weren't affected by the change and don't have any insight on it, please don't post pointless comments. If you were affected, please provide some information about your site so we can determine what it is we all have in common.
If I'm sliding throug the datacenters, I think I'm drunken, because they're changing the serps every minute.
Yesterday I had problems with video.google while other google services was reachable. Maybe they have again data storage problems.
Do you ever play poker mate. If you do you will know a tell sign. Same thing online.
please provide some information about your site so we can determine what it is we all have in common.
Apparently not much.
Given that supposedly nothing happened according to MC, this must be some form of bug or male chicken up..
Given the amount of data they have sooner or later the system must be so complex that it becomes untrackable.
Given that supposedly nothing happened according to MC, this must be some form of bug or male chicken up..
I hope they're working on it... If the missing adsense takings continues, maybe they'll be sold out in january ;O) Uncle Bill already lurks...
Cool so you think you have the answer.........you don't
Given the data, I am only guessing ...
Essential is one fact: We have nothing common, but completely different sites and structures, IT MUST BE A BUG!
You are not gonna like this.
But in a system as complex as Google, I would expect they accept a certain error rate and the effort to fix this error might not be profitable. We are then acceptable collateral damage.
In the moment I just hope that their constant and persitent fiddling will bring that site back, it did in the past.
Additionally I have to have two other jobs and can't improve the quality as Google is unreliable, although I could live on the Google income. But it would be madness to trust Google.
In their quality algorithm mania they have forgotten imo a psychological assesment of the effects of their constant updates on webmasters. Unreliabilty means less time spent on the website and therefore actually counteracts their "goal" on the long run as with constant changing the error will hit more and more people sooner or later.
Question for them is only, given the abundance of webmasters, when do they need to care. Probably never ..
I love that expression. Its far easier than holding your hand up and saying I have failed on seo guv.
So its not a penalisation its collateral damage.
Its not a duplicate penalty its collateral damage.
Excellent!
Collateral DamageI love that expression. Its far easier than holding your hand up and saying I have failed on seo guv.
So its not a penalisation its collateral damage.
Its not a duplicate penalty its collateral damage.
Excellent!
It's actually not really worth finding out to be honest... waste of time. If Google doesn't know what's up, how should we know.. ;)
I've never done much SEO, I am not gonna start now.
I am sure they took out lots of spam sites with this. The problem is that they took out plenty of excellent sites too. This is where ethics enters the equation, and they don't seem to have too much of that from where I'm sitting.
I remain convinced that it is caused by and influx of incoming site wide links. Outside our control, and potentially usable for malicious purposes.
I remain convinced that it is caused by and influx of incoming site wide links. Outside our control, and potentially usable for malicious purposes.
Interesting we have loads of inbound links by scrapers and pseudo directories.
Finally, I hate to say this, but sites which are penalised, for so-called "over-optimisation" or many other things
It might not fit into your perfect Google world picture, but the variations I am seeing are normal for my site. Only the frequency has escalated.
I have sites that haven't dropped which are very similar. You are just imagining that you have more control than you actually have within this increasing update circus.
Imagine you buy the Michelin Guide for Restaurants and on your drive to the restaurant that guide has changed it's opinion about that restaurant you are driving to 3 times .. That's the Big Daddy situation..
But this time i've noticed something strange which might shed some light on the issue.
We've got a page on our site, "a.html" which ranks highly for both terms "Widget A" and "Widget B". With this shake up this month the page no longer ranks for the term "Widget A" but still ranks where it was before for "Widget B".
Now on [72.14.207.107...] its rank has come back for "Widget A", but a few positions lower and a URL only listing. if I append &filter=0 the URL only listing becomes a normal listing w/ snippet. This is the first time I'm seeing this happen so far.
What I dont understand is if the page has been penalised, why does it only lose its ranking and become URL only for SOME of its terms and not all.
I doubt this is a penalty on our domain as we still hold our pre-Decemeber ranks for many other terms.
[edited by: Inspired at 12:30 pm (utc) on Dec. 15, 2006]
