Google Updates and SERP Changes - May 2018

[Shaddows]

System: The following message was cut out of thread at: https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4894234.htm [webmasterworld.com] by robert_charlton - 11:34 am on May 1, 2018 (PDT -8)

---

We've seen a huge shift in traffic patterns today. Traffic and conversions are relatively stable, but destination pages are very different.

In terms of products sold, it is very similar to the pre-March profile (which is different to the various iterations over the last 6 weeks)

[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 7:51 pm (utc) on May 1, 2018]
[edit reason] Split to new thread. [/edit]

[Shaddows]

Regarding an Amazon bias - do you not think that the bias is just towards big websites in general?

It depends on what you mean by "bias". Brand signals are baked in to the algo, post Vince (cf Eric Schmidt, re: cesspool). Largeness of website tends to correlate with a brand, so there is crossover.

But basically I agree. All big brands have a huge advantage in their niche. And very large sites covering multiple niches have advantages in all those niches. Amazon get a lot of attention because they compete with almost all of us eCommers, because of their breadth.

However, they are really just winning in a lot of niches simultaneously, by virtue of their brandiness (amongst other, observable, things).

If others here believe there is no Amazon bias in Google's SERPS, they can most certainly chime in.

I'm well aware that there is a majority in favour of the Amazon-bias theory. Fortunately, sanity is not statistical, although Big Brother is undoubtedly watching.

[JesterMagic]

I agree with glitterball, the bias is towards large websites (usually ones that cover a number of different niches). Amazon just happens to be one of the largest websites and if it happens to be one of your direct competitors then it takes more to out compete them.

I have found with the last few Google updates this bias has grown more. I think it may deal with backlinks and the use of nofollow by everybody. We regularly get popular sites linking to us but most now nofollow all outbound links to be “safe”. This is crippling for smaller niche sites. Larger websites are able to survive since they cover multiple niches (but their content is not nearly as good) and their back links profile is much larger.

Speaking from the point of view for searching for brands or widgets…

The problem now days is that if you are not on the first page of the SERPs then you will get virtually no traffic.

Because of this Google really needs to rethink how they show results. They need to combine listings to allow other sites more exposure.

1)For example Youtube (or any site) doesn’t need to have 3 listings in a row. There should only be 1. If multiple links are warranted then they should be listed with the listing similarly to how Google has been doing listings for forum posts.
2)Those info boxes at the top of the results in most cases (at least in our niche) are garbage and usually contain incorrect, outdated or fluff information. A lot of these need to be removed.
3)Most websites have social media pages like Facebook or Twitter (or even apps that are on iTunes, Google Play, Amazon). Stop displaying these as separate listings and combine them into one larger listing if needed. Websites can identify other properties (like social media pages and apps) via the Search console.
4)To many ads and most are above the fold. Ads blur to easily with organic search.
5)etc…

Google does get some things right and I realize the above is wishful thinking but I felt like venting a bit 😊

[mosxu]

Since when brand signals have anything to do with great user experience?

The branded traffic that keeps growing needs to get monetised. If the user goes direct in the browser and types that brand website instead of searching it, there will be no chance to get any intelligence and no monetisation.

Unfortunately quality is misunderstood, bias or not.

Amazon is a different animal we can only assume that some deals take place.

[EditorialGuy]

Regarding an Amazon bias - do you not think that the bias is just towards big websites in general?

Or maybe it's just a bias toward sites that offer a lot of information and have great user metrics.

[meagain121]

There must be deals taking place. Eric & Jeff probably have a little chat about it at the Bilderberg meetings.
Amazon are treated favorably for a reason - probably so the shareholders at both companies remain happy.

If Google hated Amazon, they would make one little change to their algo and destroy Amazon profits overnight.
If Amazon hated Google, they would create their own search engine and destroy Google profits overnight.

There is no chance the Worlds richest man just happened to be one of the "under rewarded sites" in March.
Amazon do not add their products to google shopping like the little people do (think ebay). Why is that?
Google algorithm changes must go through manual reviews. When the Google engineers tweek things, do you think it is a just a happy coincidence for Jeff that Amazon rank top all the time?

Obviously, Amazon appears a lot "organically". But, like the sun orbiting the earth, just because something can be "visually confirmed" and is a "factual reality", it doesn't mean it is true.

[seoskunk]

This will be my last post.

You guys didn't listen to what I said.

EG for the record if Google theoretically poured petrol on your grandmother and set her alight in the street, would you claim it was spontaneous human combustion ?

Cya to the webmasters, 4Q to the sockpuppets!

[meagain121]

This will be my last post.
You guys didn't listen to what I said.

Don't stop. I like your posts particularly the leaked google vid!

EG for the record if Google theoretically poured petrol on your grandmother and set her alight in the street, would you claim it was spontaneous human combustion ?

No, I would say Google were being evil.... although, my grandmother may have deserved it - she liked spam too much, kept bad links & moved so slow that she annoyed everyone.

Cya to the webmasters, 4Q to the sockpuppets!

I am new here but i'm not trying to deceive anyone, just stating my opinion trying to figure out whats going on :(

I see Amazon all the time in the serps and think there's more to their relationship with Google than meets the eye.
Google state that Amazon are their biggest search competitor - if that is the case, why do they treat them so well? I know I would be tempted to put them on page 2 or 3 occasionally.
Maybe the lack of variety is because Amazon are in cahoots with google? Maybe google want to make more ad revenue? Maybe google are pushing anti net neutrality? Or maybe they are just trying to serve the best answers every time...
Whatever the answer - I think, long term - most webmasters are screwed. As the AI becomes better, results will become fewer. I don't know anymore - I want to be optimistic, but it's hard not to feel like a victim of a kansas city shuffle [youtube.com...]

[aristotle]

Well in order for a search algorithm to work at all, it has to be "biased" -- biased in favor of sites that have certain characteristics. So it comes down to which characteristics are included and how they are weighted.

In other words, the biases will boost certain types of sites. So the argument should be about which types of sites should be favored, not about whether there are biases. A search algorithm has to have biases.

[NickMNS]

Google state that Amazon are their biggest search competitor - if that is the case, why do they treat them so well?

You answered your own question. Amazon is their biggest competitor, thus treating them differently would be acting anti-competitively. So as long as their biggest competitor remains in the search results they can't possibly be stifling competition.

[samwest]

More oddball traffic patterns...three days in a row, one conversion at 7am +/- 15min...then nothing the rest of the day. Traffic coming in drip fashion again, same old same old. Referral spam is rampant.

[BushyTop]

We're seeing a completely different set of results today. Much more like the results from 3 months ago... more tweaks?

[mosxu]

It is more to do with learning a user shopping behaviour on the web, if the user keeps searching with Google and ends up buying 9 out 10 with Amazon, the search engine can’t take Amazon out of this user eyes because will get no more shopping behaviour nor a chance to get some cents from Amazon.

The sad part for the search engine is that most of the users get smarter and use the Amazon app only.

[BushyTop]

[semrush.com...] **MonkeyFace**

[EditorialGuy]

Well in order for a search algorithm to work at all, it has to be "biased" -- biased in favor of sites that have certain characteristics. So it comes down to which characteristics are included and how they are weighted.

Exactly--which is why I mentioned informational content and user metrics.

Like it or not, folks, Amazon packs a lot of valuable informational content on its pages. I can't think of any other e-commerce sites that consistently have as many "answers" and user reviews as Amazon does, for example. (I've used Amazon reviews for tech support on occasion--they're often that good.)

Just as important, Amazon is synonymous with "e-commerce" for millions of people, so it stands to reason that a search engine would rank Amazon's pages high for shopping queries. You may not think that's fair, but as John F. Kennedy famously said, life isn't fair. (I'm sure there are plenty of first novelists who resent their inability to compete on an even footing with with Stephen King, and there are plenty of indy filmmakers who'd be happier if the theater chains stopped favoring the big studios.)

[EditorialGuy]

More on "mobile-first indexing":

I mentioned earlier that we'd seen a modest boost for our mobile traffic since Google enabled mobile-first indexing for our main site. Yesterday, the site's desktop traffic was up 0.85 per cent over the same weekday two weeks ago, but tablet traffic was up nearly 18 percent, and mobile traffic was up almost 22 percent. I suppose it's possible that the boost in mobile/tablet traffic is a coincidence, but that seems unlikely. (Too bad mobile traffic doesn't generate as much revenue for us as desktop traffic does.)

[glakes]

Well in order for a search algorithm to work at all, it has to be "biased" -- biased in favor of sites that have certain characteristics. So it comes down to which characteristics are included and how they are weighted.

Which is entirely true. The search results are man-made and even if AI is in play would also be under the control of man. However, Google's bias towards Amazon is not merely displayed in Amazon almost always ranking in the top 3 organic search results, but often dominating most or all of the top search results for products. IMO, Amazon ranking at or near the top of Google's search results can be defended all day long. But crowding or as I call spamming Amazon listings with 2, 3 and as others have pointed out 4 listings in a row at the top can't be defended. It's the indefensible crowded Amazon listings that are a public display of Google's bias.

It's not the year 2000 anymore. There are a lot of sites in play for any given topic or product, and some can argue that multiple sites are worthy of being ranked #1. So why devote so much real estate to one source who is nothing more than a super affiliate? It's pretty obvious that if businesses selling products can't be seen in the search results, because Google's crowds them out with Amazon listings, they are more likely to pay to be seen. But thankfully it's 2018 and buyer trends have changed. What may have worked as an Adwords money driver for Google a few years back no longer is viable as shoppers have largely abandoned search engines. Instead of trying to break into Google's organic crowded Amazon SERPS for products, or pay to be above them, it's less hassle to simply sell on Amazon.

[lostshootingstar]

I'm seeing a moderate shakeup in the SERps today, automotive services. We operate nationwide, and one very weird thing I'm seeing today is that in ONE very large US city our page that has ranked top 3 for about 8 years is completely gone; like not even on the top 15 pages of Google. Every other city is mostly normal with a +1 or -1 which is typical. This one page magically disappearing is making me pretty nervous though.

I did check to make sure the page is indexed, it shows up with a "<brand name> <city>" search.

[McPheeSees]

Here's something that I've seen and it has to do with IP's. It came to my attention a short time ago, possibly a few weeks ago, that the IP's that were coming in to a website we manage are being masked with the last octet being at zero. No matter what the IP is, the ending number is dot zero. I looked it up in Google analytics, which we don't use but I test on occasion. They do mention that they do some IP masking with the dot zero at the end. Does this mean anything? For a while we used cloud flare and we thought that's what was causing this IP masking. We dumped them because something wasn't seeming right, traffic seemed to be down and we noticed this masking going on. When we took them off it went away, and then I figured that's what it was. Now strangely today the IP masking has occurred again. We don't use Google analytics because they don't show the IP addresses in real time. When the IP addresses show properly, traffic seems better, there's more phone calls and I get the normal number of spam emails. Does anybody know what this masking is and does it have an effect on traffic? Does this have something to do with zombie behavior? I'm asking the question because I really don't know. With all things being the same, we seem to get better results from non-masked IP addresses. When it goes into this mode, it's not as good or just plain bad. Is this what GDPR is all about?

[vmysla]

Seeing a big drop in 10% vs last Thursday for all SEO traffic from Google. The drop is happening across all types of pages and all categories.

[aristotle]

came to my attention a short time ago, possibly a few weeks ago, that the IP's that were coming in to a website we manage are being masked with the last octet being at zero. No matter what the IP is, the ending number is dot zero.

Where do you see this "masking"? Do you see it in your server logs or somewhere else?

[penitentman]

@lostshootingstar I've seen a big shakeup in my niche this week. Gradually since Monday of this week traffic has dropped. I receive nationwide traffic to different city pages on my website. Seems to be Fred/Maccabees signals. My websites were hit hard by those confirmed updates but have since recovered. Keyword permutations for different city traffic. The top ranking websites are all "not for profit" now in my niche. Even filling up the first page with multiple pages from 1 website. Doesn't look good this time for me I just hope the google dance ends and traffic levels off so I can evaluate more analytical data and come up with a plan.

[lostshootingstar]

@penitentman, sounds exactly like me as well. We also were hit heavily by Fred and "Maccabees" and target city/state permutations. Top rankings in our industry are definitely for-profit though, and almost all of them are now thin affiliate sites (who by the way are also just per-mutating city/state combos).

It's been a frustrating 18+ months.

[penitentman]

@lostshootingstar how exactly do you monetize your traffic? My websites have 1 discrete affiliate link and 1 adsense ad per page. I have a lot of hand written quality content on almost every page. Very very thin not for profit sites are dominating page 1 now for the thousands of longtail kw's I have battled for. I have about 3 big competitors that are for profit sites like mine in the niche. I have the least amount of monetization of the 4 of us so it looks like I'm the first for profit site in the serps now. I'd say I'm currently down 50% of my traffic since last Thursday. I haven't checked if any of my pages were completely deindexed but since you saw that I'm going to check.

[lostshootingstar]

We are an actual nationwide service provider, so we make our money directly from customers paying for our service. We have no ads or affiliate links.

[McPheeSees]

@aristotle

Seeing it in my analytics software...non-google

[aristotle]

Seeing it in my analytics software...non-google

My suggestion is to start your investigation with your server logs. If there's no masking there, then it must be happening downstream. Also, your logs should tell you whether it's humans or bots, which you were wondering about.,

[Awarn]

As a shareholder of Google I am not pleased with the stock performance. I have several much better. It is one of the first I will dump. I sell on Amazon too and not impressed there either. These are companies trying to get a cut of everyone's sales.

[Robbo55]

@Halaspike, @MayankParmar, @thepointer
I have also seen the number of indexed pages on GSC rise by twice the number of articles that I am posting since early March
Site traffic is down significantly since then for me too
How did you overcome this issue? And have you seen an improvement in traffic since doing so?
Any help you could offer would be much appreciated
Thanks
Rob

[mosxu]

@mcpheesees

Are the most of the IPs being masked? None of these IPs convert I assume.

[Shaddows]

Technically, how can an IP be masked, if the user actually wants to see your site?

Any "masked" IPs are nonsensical at OSI Layer 3.

Your analytics package has probably just become GDPR-compliant without shouting about it.