Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
Must be nice to disregard the "theories" about big brands. Just rumors. Whatever. I'm completely disgusted.
People who know it all stagnate. They don't get better. It's because you know it all. If you know everything about the internet and all keywords then certainly you can't be convinced of ANYTHING. You know it all.
As said before we need to understand why wikipedia is so highly regarded.
I'm lumping Panda in with Google SERPS if that makes sense.
joined:Dec 29, 2003
So, if even these billion dollar conglomerates with well branded sites get hit, then there must be more to it than that. Were they in fact also providing too thin content? Were they scraping content from other sites, or purchasing data feeds that are used by others?
I can only concur with you because of the data evidence that I've seen. I never bought into the Panda/brands connection - it was a theory that some people floated because their sites were Pandalised and they saw some big brands ranking well.
The idea gained viral/myth status pretty quickly, but I'd say there's more truth to alligators in the NYC sewer system.
unless a site's troubles (or blessings) occurred on one of the Panda dates
making your web site a brandis just conjecture. And anyway, what does it mean to make a brand online? And how do you know you have obtained it? People searching your domain in Google?
People searching your domain in Google?