Google Updates and SERP Changes - April 2018

[kewlchat]

System: The following message was cut out of thread at: https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4889357.htm [webmasterworld.com] by robert_charlton - 5:32 pm on Apr 1, 2018 (PDT -8)


Seems after 3 years traffics picked up some, should we dare to dream?

[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 1:39 am (utc) on Apr 2, 2018]
[edit reason] Moved and reformatted message to new month [/edit]

[aristotle]

I would have thought that the sites are constantly recalculated by fresh/new organized content.

In reading WebMasterWorld over the years, I've noticed that people who are always making changes to their sites usually don't do well in google, in either the short or the long term.

[JaviP]

Good point! Thank you aristotle

[seoskunk]

Sorry aristotle but adding fresh content, and "making changes to their sites" are two seperate things, global changes can be very dangerous I agree and reset your positions, adding fresh content done right can be a benefit imho.

[keyplyr]

In reading WebMasterWorld over the years, I've noticed that people who are always making changes to their sites usually don't do well in google, in either the short or the long term.

That statement is too broad... what changes, what type of site, what niche?

In order to gain "fresh content" favor, I update once a week; adding/removing content.

[Cralamarre]

Obviously aristotle did not mean that people who add new content don't do well in Google. He said "always making changes to their sites", not "adding new content to their sites".

[Nutterum]

@aristotle - you are correct. Many people go the false assumption road that if they turn their informational site to any kind of shop site they can benefit from the audience, only to lose that audience because their website is no longer informational, thus Google instead relocating the property to compete for the money search intent niche where Amazon and whoever else is competing. Witnessed this myself where the leading local brand who had huge amounts of in-house information on their product decided to convert to online shop, losing 80% of the traffic and ending up hurting their brick and mortar front, where they got the brunt of their business.

Never assume people would buy something just because its now easily accessible over the internet. USPs like order to your home, save time, etc. associated with online shops are no longer valid, as they are expected from _ALL_ online shops. So unless you really make your service better by selling something online, don't go that road.

The opposite is true. I had a client a few years back who dominated the money keywords niche but transitioned to more informational site from their purely send a request b2b site. This brought them 40% more traffic but relocated the site in to a niche where people searched for information not purchase, thus sales dropped massively. Even small things at a first glance can seem big in the eyes of Google like having or not having products on your front page.

[mosxu]

@Nutterum

Interesting what you are saying about being relocated for money search intent and loosing the business,

Once you have a shopping cart it may be that a quota based on adwards account history is instated.

[samwest]

Once weather warmed up, traffic and conversions evaporated. Happens every year in my niche.

[glakes]

This is an extremely complex algorithm with some of the worlds smartest people developing and tweeking every day.

Yet Bing can still send higher quality traffic that produces a conversion rate 2 times+ greater than Google. I would argue the excessive Amazon and big brand crowding illustrates just how much trouble Google has determining a page or site's value if it is not already a household name. That's one theory which assumes Google is applying the same rules to everyone equally, which I know I'm among a much larger group of business owners who think otherwise.

[Shaddows]

Once you have a shopping cart it may be that a quota based on adwards account history is instated.

Or possibly the tonnage of tinfoil purchased in the last year.

Adwords and organic traffic are unrelated.

Do feel free to undertake a study. There are few variables, all you need is cash, and I'm sure plenty of people would love to have evidence of this in order to launch the biggest anti-trust case in history, against one of the most cash-rich companies in history.

[Shaddows]

Google is applying the same rules to everyone equally,

Google may be applying the same ruleset, if not the same rules, for everyone. But Google will always return brands because people expect to see those brands. If the brand is missing, your average searcher will assume Google is broken.

As such, brand-iness trumps crapiness every time. Sad.

[NickMNS]

I lost another chunk of traffic over the weekend, down 10 to 15%. Down 50% since early May.

[Cralamarre]

Sorry to hear that, @NickMNS. My traffic seems to be holding steady, up 6% yesterday from the previous Sunday and 12% from the week before that. This morning it's averaging 10% higher than last Monday.

[NickMNS]

@Cralamarre I think our sites are negatively correlated!

[Cralamarre]

@NickMNS Well, don't get me wrong though. My traffic may be up since early March, but it's still down a good 35% from what it was a year ago. I wish I could point to something I've done recently and say "This is why my traffic increased", but there's really nothing. Since my big traffic drop last year, I've been adding lots of new content, I've gone back and improved the readability of older content, and probably the biggest change is that I've started making YouTube videos of my articles and embedding them into the article pages. Maybe that has something to do with it, but I honestly don't know.

[engine]

Just for the record, this is the statement from Google's Search Liaison from last week.

On Monday, we released a broad core algorithm update, as we routinely do throughout the year.

[twitter.com...]

[mosxu]

Sites under quotas may try to spend in Adwards as much as they like but at the end of the week/month sales are still not higher.

There is plenty of traffic to buy but it does not convert for some reason. We call it zombies.

[edited by: mosxu at 2:48 pm (utc) on Apr 23, 2018]

[samwest]

Remember, Google reads minds, so think less about how the algo works and your traffic will magically go up. ;)

[Shaddows]

zombies

I guarantee I have thought about and analysed "zombies" for longer and to a greater extent than almost anyone here (I'm on record in 2010, at the beginning, but did not coin the term). I just gave up talking about it when every serious discussion splits into two unbridgeable tribes. Like Brexit, Trump or atheism (no, I do not recommend those discussions here either).

In any event adwords are not the mechanism for zombies.

And again, there is no point posting trivially provable conjectures that remain unproven. Proving a link between adwords and organic traffic would be easy and profitable, yet no one has done it. And the only people claiming it are the, um, less data-driven contributors.

at the end of the week/month sales are still not higher

Yeah, it's not good for Google that people who spend money with them are less successful. I prefer the other tinfoil theory that adword customers get better SERPs. At least that makes sense, despite being wrong.

Google reads minds, so think less about how the algo works and your traffic will magically go up

I agree with the sentiment, but not the mechanism :p

[penitentman]

Yet Bing can still send higher quality traffic that produces a conversion rate 2 times+ greater than Google. I would argue the excessive Amazon and big brand crowding illustrates just how much trouble Google has determining a page or site's value if it is not already a household name.

@glakes, Like I've said before. Google considers webmasters as business owners and views them with the standard as traditional brick and mortar companies. If you have a breakthrough idea(like bezos), you work hard, build an amazing company, you are successful and rewarded. Amazon is rewarded because Bezos was the first. A pioneer who built an amazing brand with the best prices and service. Other companies can come along and take a piece of the market share pie. Or a new company can specialize in a specific product or niche and take market share, but unless amazon somehow starts being a bad company with a bad reputation it will continue to rank high. Just like your local italian restaurant that has been around forever with a great reputation and comfort level with the community. That's how I look at it and don't really get mad that Amazon and wikipedia rank for everything anymore.

[BushyTop]

In the past hour, some of the high traffic keywords we saw gains for have started to dial back.

[mosxu]

@shaddows

A lot of things do not make sense this is the reason for debate. We see zombies in both adwards and organic. How serious it is we do not know but no one pays 1 billion for something that is not serious enough...

[edited by: mosxu at 2:58 pm (utc) on Apr 23, 2018]

[Cralamarre]

@BushyTop I've actually been noticing a slight increase in Google traffic over the past hour. Might be unrelated. I don't know anything anymore.

[mosxu]

@samwest

Brain computer interface might have been invented a long time ago. It definitely works for some people...

[NickMNS]

When comparing today to last Monday I see a definite "crossing" at 3am (EDT), where my weak weekend traffic seems to have returned to normal levels and possibly a slight increase. It is too early to tell for the increase as I haven't reached my peak traffic yet. Fingers crossed.

[Travis]

I see a continuous increase of traffic over the last month and a half.

[NeapTide]

The so called Zombie traffic is caused by traffic from irrelevant users who were searching for something and they were shown something else. They would visit few more pages on your site before going back thus low bounce rate too.

And if Google could read minds, they would had kicked me out a long time ago. :|

[Cralamarre]

If zombie traffic is a real thing, then the obvious way to benefit from it is to create a website that sells brains. :)

[Shaddows]

How serious it is we do not know but no one pays 1 billion for something that is not serious enough

Ok, well Google's revenue comes from Adwords. Their revenue is public record, and 1 billion is not a lot compared to, say, their quarterly earnings.

If that revenue had been gained via misrepresentation, a class action lawsuit would follow.

And anyway, 1 billion is not necessary, since you believe it can be conclusively proved on your ad spend. Which is probably less than 1 billion, depending on your unspecified currency.
_______

Back on topic, we have yet to see stable traffic patterns since it all went crazy 9th March. It's not just headline traffic that is variable, but which pages it comes in on.

Revenue is down, but that seems to be due to lower order values (lower value products), rather than lower sales.

[samwest]

I guarantee I have thought about and analysed "zombies" for longer and to a greater extent than almost anyone here (I'm on record in 2010, at the beginning, but did not coin the term).

Yup, that was what I coined it back on June 7 2010 at 10:35am when I posted Msg#4148067 as "backdraft7". [webmasterworld.com...]
In fact, I eventually got so much grief about talking "zombie traffic" that I got fed up and 86'd that handle because everyone thought I was a kook. Problem is, everyone still thinks I'm a kook...at the time, only our late friend Tedster agreed with my observations. The topic hasn't been touched since last fall....but it's still out there, and especially so after this last Saturday.