Forum Moderators: open
I like it.
allintext rankings most closely match SERPS, followed by allinrl results, then allintitle.
Can't see any real pattern with inbound links which are all over the map. Also I'm finding that for some odd reason I can only check the PR of the first result on a SERP page. All others are greyed out.
Does this match other peoples' observations?
? But history would tell us that these are very important factors to determine the ending SERP. I would think that is common knowledge by now, obviously not everything turns out to matter, but often times these factors go into the final www. results
Which is about as irrelevant as an allinanchor: search to all but the sort of folks that hang out here. What counts is SERPs.
And so you are going to count on results that are not taking backlinks in consideration.... makes sense to me....
Edited: now I remember why I never post in this thread...lol
Looks to me like the new backlinks are already factored in on -ex and -in, but NOT on -va. -va was just the first to show that data, which doesn't mean it is incorporated. The SERPs on -va are the same moldy, old ones.
I am confident that Google will correct the situation not because it benefits me but because it benefits them.
If the results are as bad across the board as they are in my keywords, people will slowly learn that Google does not provide the best results and will slowly move from Google just like they moved to Google. Google will not be able to sell their services and without people coming to Google AdWords will not generate as much money.
The consumer will determine who a good search engine is, not Google and surely not me. Right now I follow Google results because Google is used by the most consumers. If they move to another search engine, so will I. I may be hurt in the short run (and right now I'm down significantly). But if I had in the bank just 10% of what Google has to lose, I sure wouldn't care what Google or anybody else was doing.
5 years ago nobody knew what a 'Google' was. We'll see in 5 more years.
Looks to me like the new backlinks are already factored in on -ex and -in, but NOT on -va. -va was just the first to show that data, which doesn't mean it is incorporated. The SERPs on -va are the same moldy, old ones.
Sorry to disagree but -va is the only data center that shows over 400 newly counted backlinks to my hobby site that include several from Yahoo....it is also the only datacenter showing new backlinks for clients sites...
Not going to convince me ;)
Edited: Why not wait until things settle before jumping to conclusions? Will it make a difference jumping from DC to DC? The chips will fall where they do and nothing that is posted is going to change the result :)
[edited by: The_Contractor at 2:47 am (utc) on Nov. 19, 2003]
You haven't shown any evidence to contradict what I wrote. Have all these sites hit #1 in the SERPs on -va now that these new backlinks are showing?
Remember back in the day when AltaVista was the top search engine and they changed their index...and then Google became the top search engine because of all the problems with AltaVista search results....I wonder if this is the changing of the guard for a new search engine....the results on Google right now are ridiculous.
I think we hear this argument every time there's an update. Some people say that everyone's fleeing to AllTheWeb, while others speculate that Teoma will become the new Google. A few even claim that Inktomi gives better search results than Google.
All I know is that when I search on (team mascot) football, I get the University of (state) football team. When I search on (major city) tourist information, the #1 result is for the leading tourism site of that major city. When I search on (brand name) cameras, the top result is for that camera company's site. When I type in a certain type of roof shingles, the top result is an article on that type of roof shingles. For that matter, when I search on the name of an impotence drug that's probably generated more e-mail spam and SEO efforts than any other drug on the market, I get the drug company's Web site for that pill.
Obviously, some terms are going to give lower-quality search results just because they're so general. But even a single-keyword search on a certain money-related "f" word yields better results than one might expect, with listings that range from Yahoo! Finance to a Ministry of Finance to The Motley Fool. One might expect such a term to yield nothing but heavily optimized affiliate and e-commerce spam, but it doesn't. Of course, to the marketers who wish they scored in the top 10 for that keyword, those largely informational search results may be unwelcome, but that doesn't make them bad.
Mind you, Google isn't perfect; searches on certain destination-related travel keyphrases tend to yield a disproportionately high number of "SEO-intensive" boilerplate affiliate and booking sites. But on the whole, I don't see how anybody who's reasonably objective can say that Google's current results are "ridiculous"--at least, not with a straight face. :-)
Dave
You haven't shown any evidence to contradict what I wrote. Have all these sites hit #1 in the SERPs on -va now that these new backlinks are showing?
Now c'mon like you have proof for what you wrote? Is the sky really blue? What came first the chic...
Pure conjecture.... sorry, I don't normally post to these threads and will not participate in pure speculation on something that will not change the outcome...
europeforvisitors is one I can agree with :)
Edited
The four truths:
1.Google is updating
2.Outcome is pure speculation until everything is factored in.
3. when it's done - it's done
4. some will laugh and some will cry
[edited by: The_Contractor at 3:20 am (utc) on Nov. 19, 2003]
Yeah. All the -va SERPs at this moment I check are the same moldy, old ones.
I think.