Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
A site we have has seen decent results for over 2 years, all of a sudden today all SERPS have dropped for us by about 4-10 pages lower all at once.
This is very odd, we have worked very hard to put out decent content and relevant content.
Any reasons for this, is their some sort of weird dance taking place?
We adjusted the page two days ago to make it better for the reader and seems we got slammed very badly for this.
Google fresh date (on serps) shows a date April 24, 06 but when clicking on the "Cached" link on the results page it shows a date of April 18, 06
Curious to what the webmasters think of this out there.
Waa waaa, who f in cares! - E-mail the sh__ out of him.
I'm done with PPC on Google, already getting more conversions switching over to Yahoo, thank gosh.
Hollywood
[edited by: Hollywood at 2:25 pm (utc) on May 16, 2006]
bostonpubcon2006 at gmail.com
Was the latest email address Google provided.
Reseller - I believe more than just Matt read the feedback - and it is very important that Google get as much information as possible to fix.
One of my personal sites, which has long held the #1 position for my main keyword (not super competitive), dropped to #3 this morning. The thing that is really making me mad is the following:
1. The new #1 site is flash with the only text being hidden keyword spam
2. Google is using that hidden keyword spam for the site description!
My god Googleplexers, did someone give you guys a bad bag of ganja, or what?
I'd like to think that was the case, but unfortunately for me at least its not and probably many other webmasters too - when G coughs we all lose out and thanks to BD today I've seen a 40% drop in traffic, so although you would like to think everyone you speak with use Y they don't from my stats
Anyone else receive same type/sequence of Google responses?
Question is, was the last email another automated reply?
Or did someone actually look at my site and find a problem referred to in this google guideline answer?
I always thought, that if I were a programmer at Google :), I would implement this simple test:if there is a link somewhere on website A to website B
and
vice-versa (back links)
and
the pages in both cases are named "resources" or "links" or ... a few other possibilities
and
Google can find one of the following on those websites: "links exchange", "add/submit link/url" and possibly otherthen : let's ban both websites.
And that more anti-link-exchange changes could appear recently. Yesterday I looked at Matt Cutts' blog and what do I see?
Look at "indexing timeline" post.
An excerpt:
"I’d think about the quality of your links if you’d prefer to have more pages crawled. As these indexing changes have rolled out, we’ve improving how we handle reciprocal link exchanges and link buying/selling."
(no, that wasn't about my site)
Nobody said that, so I will: I was right :) Are there any awards for that?
Simply the more percent of your links are reciprocal, the bigger BSR ("Black Seo Rank", my own name:) you get. The same with simply linking to "bad sites" (with high BSR), even without back links - in other words linking to bad neighbourhood. And now G simply detects it more accurately.
Oh, and did I mention that I was right? :)
Within a matter of days, the pages dropped rank, and our visitors were a trickle.
We went back and removed the REL="nofollow" and all the pages recovered within a week.
You might want to try getting rid of the REL="nofollow" and the javascipt VOID and see if it makes a difference.
This comment
"I’d think about the quality of your links if you’d prefer to have more pages crawled. As these indexing changes have rolled out, we’ve improving how we handle reciprocal link exchanges and link buying/selling."
Does not mean Google are doing this
if there is a link somewhere on website A to website B and
vice-versa (back links) and the pages in both cases are named "resources" or "links" or ... a few other possibilities and Google can find one of the following on those websites: "links exchange", "add/submit link/url" and possibly other
then : let's ban both websites.
Its such a stretch.
So
No
I don;t think you are right. I think Google is working out ways to detect quality of links, but is not penalising simply for recip links. Ditto on paid links, or it would be a snap to buy them for someone else's site, and take it down.
not recips in themselves, just recips clearly for the purpose of rankings only.
All my sites do recip links, very strict quality control, only relevant sites linked to, and having no problems at all maintaining high rankings and keeping pages indexed.
getting 30 links per day is spam
well, if that is the scheme, I am doomed! I have set up a huge file sales site, getting around 5-10 new merchants every day (independent musicians, authors, ebay image hosters, etc.)...
so, my site grows with around 1000 pages daily. sometimes good unique stuff, sometimes just a few new songs with 1 line description...
All merchants link to their products, sometimes with 100 or more incoming links per day. I was expecting a jump from PR6 to 8 in the next update.
I have spotted around 500 scraper sites of my content.
Today my site dropped from over 3M pages to below 300.000 pages in the G index.
I understand, that some pages are not worth being listed, especially if it is a photo of the latest biker meeting in montana...
But this drop is connected to some serious changes Google is up to. I am sorry, that I get up to 100 incoming links daily.
P!
So, this thread is now closed.