Forum Moderators: open
Kackle - can you explain the "dictionary" for me? And how I might benefit from it - Im reading your posts hard but dont see where youre coming from.
Sure. But you have to act quickly. Google will fix this one just like they fixed the hyphen.
1. Google is depreciating pages/sites that are over-optimized for certain keywords or keyword combinations. It does this by looking up search terms in a dictionary of target keywords or keyword pairs that it has compiled. This dictionary is Top Secret, because if you knew what was in the dictionary, you could avoid these words in your optimization efforts.
2. If the search term or terms hit on a dictionary entry, the search results for that user's search are flagged. This means that before the results are delivered, the order of the links, or even the inclusion of links, are adjusted so as to penalize pages that have overoptimizated for those terms. Most likely the title, headlines, links and anchor text are examined. It's possible that external anchor text pointing to that page has also been pre-collected and is available for scanning, but this is much less likely. (Besides, external links are not something within your immediate control, so don't worry about it right now.)
3. You want to find out which keywords that are relevant to your site are in Google's dictionary. Compile as many relevant keywords you can think of that searchers might use to find your site. Now take these words singly and in pairs, according to how users might search. Run two searches for each combination and compare the results.
4. If the results are strikingly different for the pre-filter and the post-filter search on a particular term or combination of terms, it means that some variation of those terms has been flagged because something was found in Google's dictionary.
5. Do lots of searches and you can come up with a list of "sensitive" words that you'll want to avoid when you re-optimize your pages.
It's a nice weekend project.
What is curious is that there has been no statement from GG and no news headlines (as far as I can find by doing a news search).
Outside of SEO forums an average surfer would think this is a non-event.
I've also noticed that a few online retail sites in the UK have dropped dramatically as their company names happen to be "money keyword ltd" or similar as a lot of other sites link to them with the anchor text "money keyword ltd" as you would expect. Of the 4 or 5 sites I have noticed, (online retailers) none of them have reciprocal links, so the linking is solely inbound. Yet it appears that because on the page they have "welcome to money keyword" or something similar with some anchor text also featuring "money keyword" they have suffered.
I understand why Google has implemented an algo change in order to combat spam, but I think they have turned the dial a little too far and lots of good sites have been hit.
Personally I have not been effected by the changes as my sites are non commercial and fortunately they have held their positions, but I am seeing what the rest of you are seeing as the results for some searches do seem a little odd.
Once I calmed down however, I realized that many, if not the almost all of my competitors suffered the same fate. If you punch in some of the most popular keywords for my industry (services oriented) you will see that the results you get currently on Google's live site are almost all non-commercial sites in the top 30. For example, you get enthusiast sites who mention my service industry with some links, but no actual providers are showing up.
This puzzled me for a short time, and I was thinking that Google was in chaos, not providing relevant links. Then, it struck me. Why wouldn't Google wipe out organic results for commercial sites and basically force them to use AdWords. In my industry, many terms are going for $3+ on Adwords and Overture. Google is losing some serious $$ to the top five or six organically placed companies. Why not remove them from the listings under the guise of 'search purity' in order to both convince end-users that they are getting better, non-commercial laden results as well as seriously fattening their bottom line with increased AdWord revenue as the commecial sites are forced to use this avenue (Adwords) to drive customers to their site. It is a win-win for Google and a lose-lose for commercial sites. I am concerned.
In common with many here I've had my golden goose shot. A big earning page that has been at #1 has been wiped from the results for the most important two word search in the key market that it is targetted at.
I'm sure that it is not as simple as this but...
I noticed that another page in the same site has retained #1 spot for another two word search and do you know what it doesn't have any <h> tags on the page. And the page that has been dropped has only (apparently) been dropped for the two word phrase that is in the <h> tags.
One particular two word phrase pulls in (or used to) something like 70% of traffic to one of my sites and guess what, I put it in <h1> and <h2> tags. This page has been dropped.
In my search for a solution I just did a search for those two words and none of the top 10 sites had properly formed <h> tags. 8 of them had no <h> tags at all and the others had style code enclosed in the tag.
Has anyone else here noticed this effect?
I guess that <h> tags are an easy target. Google was known to weigh these highly and with a bit of CSS you can easily change the viewable text to look like body text or whatever.
I would be interested to hear comments on this hypothesis.
Best wishes
Sid
I have noticed the same thing. My competitor has no H1 text, and has remained at #1. I have one <h1 text and it was at the very bottom of the web page, containing the two word combo and I got nuked for that combo.
Everything else is basically the same, between the competitor and I.
Can anybody else confirm this.
Update: Non of my top 10 for my keywords has any <H1> or <H2> text.
Of the top twenty listings for my missing page, NONE of them have the phrase in an H1 tag. Two do have the phrase in H2 tag. Most dont have any h tags at all.
(My missing page DOES have the phrase in H1 tag)
Interesting. A majority of the 10 on my keyword search, do not have H1 tags. The ones that do, don't have the keywords in the tags.
[edited by: bull at 4:03 pm (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
I will keep everybody informed,if my home page comes back from the depths of despair.
Bull and Prejustic, your profile indicates that you are
outside North America, I wonder if this may have anything to
do with you being unable to confirm the results, (i.e. Google has not delt with european sites yet).
A site that was optimized about 5 months ago absolutely failed to rank for a fairly easy 3 keyword phrase. Now it pretty much owns the 1 st page for that search.
Another page (different site) that never used to show up for that same phrase started showing up mid week but then the page was modified using h2 tags and starting last night disapeared for that phrase. H2 tags are now being removed and we will see quickly if it makes a difference. (site gets freshed daily)
Write two keywords:
Okay, so you're not content with widgets, they also have to be blue. Or is it that you're not content with blue, it must also be widgets? Or it it really blue gadgets you want, but you don't know the name? Before this would get closer matches, now the broad match kicks in.
With great respect, this doesn't explain what we see. We have a number of sites in different cateogories. Only one of them is in a competitive adwords category, and that category pre-Florida saw a mix of well-SEO'd and over-SEO'd (spammy) sites in the top spots.
Our sites in the less competitve categories are up in traffic. The one site in the competitive category saw its index page drop from page 2 to page 37, then gone altogether.
Since Florida, this one competitive category now shows SERP's dominated by directory pages (and not even the best choices; probably the broad match factor), news sites, book sites, and .edu / .gov sites with varying degrees of connection to the topic. With one exception, all of the sites in the previous top 20 spots are gone.
If the broad matching *without severe filtering* were the case, one would have expected to see at least some of the very clean sites from the past still showing up. They are good sites, high traffic, relevant, etc. True, they were SEO'd...but in a way consistent with Bretts 12 rules and without spam.
If I saw the spammy sites get blown away and a majority of clean ones remain - mixed in with the broader match results - I could agree that this is a broad match push. But when a massive number of clean, relevant sites gets wiped away along with the spammy ones, then the baby has been thrown out with the bathwater, and it seems clear that broad matching alone is not all that is at work here. Broad matching might or might not improve the SERP's. But broad matching, if it eliminates previously relevant, clean pages, is surely not something any thinking SE would choose.
Thus, unless I'm missing something, I'm left with Kackle's suppositions as the best, if somewhat improbable, explanations for what I see.
That said, I see an exception so far for every one-factor-only rule in the theory.
The one site that I noted above (the one that slips thru to remain in the current SERP's of this competitive category) continues to show KW densities of 10%-12% for two-word and three-word keyphrases that are clearly in the 'dictionary' if the dictionary exists (based on the "-ljxasldj -kdjakdls" test). Both of these phrases are in the site's title, and on-page with high density. Also, the homepage uses <H1> tags with both phrases.
So if the dictionary exists, it must trigger a filter that contains multiple conditions. And I can confirm that the conditions are not simply:
--"keyword phrase in title"
--"high keyword phrase density"
--"use of <H1> tags"
--any combination of the above...
I'm still searching for a set of conditional IF's that can be proven to exclude sites across all examples...
One question: do people believe this dictionary, if it exists, is tied only to homepages right now?
My sites have plunged.
All else seems equal (Titles, etc.)
Of course the older sites do have more backlinks.
So # of backlinks and/or age makes a difference?
-c
Cayenne, our site has been in Google since day 1 and has ranked well on our key phrases since January 2001 and it has tanked.
Caveman I don't think it is the h tag alone but there is a nugget there that says all else being equal the h tag will do you in.
Not seeing any comments on the huge number of amazon results that have re-appeared.
Google is in the spotlight big time in financial circles.
Fortunately for them this is a slow media week in the US.
-c
Now here's the SEO deal. For the main 2-word phrase, it ranks #2. For the main 3-word phrase (which contains the 2-word phrase as the first two words), it ranks #1. It is not optimized for any other phrases. It is ranked out of 2,000,000 results.
PR was a 4 and is now a 5 on -va. There are only 21 backlinks to the site (which are reciprocated via the seven backlinks at the bottom of the page - so obviously some of the links to this site appear more than once on the other sites).
It uses H1 tags for both phrases.
All of the incoming links use either the 2-word phrase or the 3-word phrase as the anchor text.
2-word phrase - 10% density
3-word phrase - 10% density
url is hyphenated using all 3 words as the url.
title begins with the 3-word phrase.
[added] because it is a 1-page site, there are no internal link issues. i do have seven links to external sites at the bottom of the page, none of which include either of the optimized phrases.[end of added]
i hadn't really analyzed this site until now because frankly, i never really even think about that site. but looking at it now, it contradicts all the things that i thought might be wrong with my missing site's page.
the ONLY difference is that the phrase is not a huge moneykeyword. it does show 4 adwords ads when searching the phrase, but it's not one of the big money phrases, so if the "dictionary" exists, its not in there. (just confirmed that adding -dkdkdk to the end doesn't change the results).
not sure what to make of this analysis. any thoughts?
[edited by: dazzlindonna at 5:05 pm (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
Fortunately for them this is a slow media week in the US.
I doubt that anyone will notice but webmasters.
The press won't be bothered that pages have been replaced by other pages.
However if a major player that users Googles database decides to withdraw or move to another company due to the poor results then you would have a story.
As for what we have at the moment is just pure webmaster only news.
I must say however that your very useful example fits a set of conditions I'm looking at that might exist within Kackle's theory.
I believe it's possible to have all those factors you mentioned in place, and not be banished even if your KW phrases are in the dictionary. If I can find no exceptions to the set after more testing, I'll post it for scrutiny.
[edited by: caveman at 4:51 pm (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
To add a bit to wild theories, there is no comment from in the know people because this super amazing long thread is an in detail analysis of google results by hundreds or more people. ( which is being replicated on every other seo forum). Could you even buy this kind of analysis?
I feel like a lab rat at this point.
To add a bit to wild theories, there is no comment from in the know people because this super amazing long thread
And why should they comment?
At the end of the day Google is just another web site like the rest of us.
They can update and change the way they operate as much as they like. Long term we all know Google is looking to improve their results and be the best web site (search engine) for users to find web sites.
WebmasterWorld is a great place for webmasters to share their ideas and opinions relating to webmaster topics from Php to on-line marketing. Google doesn't answer to anyone even if this thread went to Part 6, which I can see it will.
WW is not a place to put pressure on Google to speak up or to make them change the way they operate. Like most big companies they will look out for any feedback and comments from forums like WW and other media.
They do a great job and have come along way and it won't end here.
Create your sites for your business and not for Google its the only way :)
<<I would say the update is done and has been since at least tuesday.>>
Ahh..a hint of reason among the insanity.
[edited by: mfishy at 5:08 pm (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
To make matters worse, an Amazon.com book page is in the #1 position--which seems pretty dumb, since people who are looking for information on [keyphrase] obviously want the information, not an ad for a book.
Fortunately, most of my traffic arrives on inside pages, and one of my other inside pages is #6 for the keyphrase, so I probably won't see any major traffic impact while waiting for the next tweak in Google's algorithm. There's a lot to be said for not having all of one's eggs in one .htm or .html basket!
Side note: This thread was 70 pages long when I hit the sack this morning. Do we need to start saving pages so we can later reference?
I've faired ok with this update except for the two word combo that is my top search in my niche that I have deliberately targeted using the methods outlined in WW. (nothing excessive)
I thought since this is the only area I'm lacking in at the moment, I'd crank up my bid for this two word combo. Interesting enough, no matter how much I bid I can't seem to raise my position in the adwords column. This "could" just be a time delay thing, and I'll report later if my position raises.
The interesting thing about this is, all my other keyword phrases that I'm using adwords with show the "interest" meter at 100%, but for this 2 words main phrase that my site is optimized for, it's at 50%.
Any possibility that there's some penalty in play that shows up on the adwords "interest" bar?
Check your adwords for your missing 2 keyword combos and see if the "interest" meter on the adwords window is less than 50%.
Unca
oops...change that to less than 100%
Unca
Welcome to WebmasterWorld, Europforvisitors! :)
Do you see now, that you can write "editorial" content to your hearts content and Google will still drop you into obscurity in a heartbeat?
Sure, having tons of pages and sites is, and will always be the best insurance for google, but it would be easier if they just returned the proper results.
We have several sites serving different locations which are built basically on the same structure. In fact it is so similar that it's not worth discussing the differences. All sites are highly optimized.
However - the thing is that keyword popularity bears no relation to the sites which were dropped.
We had one site completely dropped on keywords which hardly register on Google's radar, yet another stayed right on top for very popular and lucrative keywords.
We also admittedly had a site dropped which was on popular keywords.
But then we had a single page go straight in at number 1 on a term I would expect to be found in such a dictionary and it is full of dead links. It wasn't supposed to be indexed, but the single page is optimised for those keywords.
My conclusion is that this is not related to the popularity (or any other reason to enter them in a dictionary) of the keywords. This is a simple penalty determined by on-page or on-site factors.
We had a very interesting site which gave a good indication of what that might be. One the home page there were links to internal pages like this:
location1 widget
location2 widget
location3 widget
location4 widget
.
.
.
location10 widget
Locations 1 to 3 were dropped from the Google results. 4 to 10 were not. What was the difference? Locations 1,2 and 3 were also named in the page title. I think it's as simple as that. It's a filter triggered by too much SEO. No doubt other factors came into play such as keyword density, but this was the only clear example on all our sites where I could see exactly what was wrong.
(In other words, it hadn't been a part of the "disappearing index page problem" that other Webmasters had reported.)
To make matters worse, an Amazon.com book page is in the #1 position--which seems pretty dumb, since people who are looking for information on (keyphrase) obviously want the information, not an ad for a book.
Sounds like you have just joined the rest of us.
Bit by bit more and more white hatters are being dropped. Europeforvisitors I like your sites and have links on them, it goes to show that the filter knob has been turned to far.
Or
Florida update has still a long way to go before finishing. (which is what i believe)
This keyword that I'm having an issue with is a VERY high profile topic in the news today.
When I have myproduct/highprofilekeyword all over my page, why would my adwords "interest" meter only show 50% for this 2 word keyword combination, and why no matter how high I bid for this exclusive two word combo can I not raise above my competitors on the adwords column?
It's as if G is not seeing this keyword. (in the dictionary maybe?)
I was scoffing about conspiracy theories and dictionaries early, but maybe there's something to it.
Unca
In a particular search niche, there is one website that seems to be the exception to the over optimization of keywords and anchortext....This site is not spammy, bu they definetly have high keyword density in title, text, and anchortext....so why are they holding position?
I just noticed that they are using the Google Search Tool! They pay $599 per month for it: check out google/services/silver_gold.html (URL www in front).
If Google is making an exception for their customers who pay for their services...then this is really starting to stink...Does anyone else know of a website using the Google Search Tool (the pay one that searches your own website, NOT the free one)?
If so, could you do some tests to see if the same results may be true.
If this turns out to be true, then it looks like whoever is calling the shots at Google now is no longer the friendly Stanford computer geeks....looks like the Bill Gates, Larry Olson, sick and twisted business tactics may be creeping their way into Google....and YES, I have noticed a lot more AMAZON listings as well....I hope this is not the case, but it is starting to look fishy, especially when taking into account that Google is about to go public....exploiting the Google cash cow may be a little too tempting for some of these rape and pillage CEO types.
NOT trying to start another CONSPIRACY, so please don't react, just run some tests to see if you find Google 'pay for' products on any of the listings that seem to be holding their positions...also question the possibility of Google making deals with Amazon, and other big internet vendors.... Let's see if there seems to be a trend.
If "MS" theory were to hold true then they have made a very poor move - HECK we (webmasters/public) are the reason they (google) became popular. We are the ones that always recommended them to our friends and family.
1 person told 4, those 4 told 16, those 16 told 64, and exponentially the popularity increased! I believe that works in both directions - E.G. if a group (webmasters) started hammering back it would just as easily crumble!
1) It makes the SERPS look super clean - if a bit stodgy.
2) More people who are looking to buy will click the little green boxes on the right side of the screen.
I saw a post earlier in this thread siting a precident that Google could face legal action by delivering biased SERPS when pay per click results were also delivered. This is unlikely I think, because Google has the right to counter attempts to manipulate its results. It has plent of evidence to show that over time sites have become more and more optimised to take advantage of its algorithm.... And it also has a right to deliver non commercial results.
Having said that I think the fact that they have done it without telegraphing it is totally self centered and ignores the communities which rely on Google for their existence. There didn't have to be such collateral damage. Google could have had its "clean sites" and we could have maintained our positions too.
Are you saying that simply linking to a sub page from a homepage where the link text said "location1 widget" and the title of the page linked to was identical, that this got those pages nixed?
If so, Heaven help us.
Q: Are the files names of those three pages also the same? And if so, are they hyphenated?
HECK we (webmasters/public) are the reason they (google) became popular
I think its the
Google technology,
the ability to index 3 billion web pages,
produce relevent results in less then 0.10 seconds
produce fresh listings everyday,
create useful tools to enhance the users surfing experience and help find information
...oh and its free
thats what made it so popular.
:)
If so, could you do some tests to see if the same results may be true
not true
and speaking of this update there are exceptions for every theory mentioned here
Webmasters submitted the sites :) When webmasters start utilizing googlebot dissallow - those #'s will go down! The SERPS will then be full of amazons, ISP - user pages, deep links, and similar CRAP!
produce relevent results in less then 0.10 seconds
relevent? Ive been searching KW phrases today and looking at the sites in the top places - those KW phrases are no where to be found on the site. Thats not relevancy!
create useful tools
usefull tools?
...oh and its free
Free to search yes, but not free to list - theyre looking to make more off of adsense /adwords by providing crap results hoping users will click the ads.
If your site(s) havnt been affected yet - Im confident they soon will! Thats assuming your a white hat - Im certain there are some techniques they havent been able to filter yet, but once those sites float to the top they will be much easier to manually boot!
Its now obvious after a week of watching whats going on!
This means they want to show different types of information including commercial, informational, etc, each containing the searched-for phrase.
Chances are, if your site is buried in the SERPs, then you do not rank towards the top of your 'category'.
So, if you want to rank high for your lost phrases, you will need to either a) rank at the top of your category; or b) change the focus of your site to a different, less competitive category.
I don't know how to identify which categories are being shown, though. However, earlier in the week I did see Google actually list all the categories from which results were drawn, (underneath the SERPs, at the foot of the page). About 6-7 categories were listed in green underneath a heading: categories
Google's directory is showing the results they intend it to. Everything is in their directory now (even if you can't see it in their 'public' directory). Everything is categorised.
[edited by: James_Dale at 6:17 pm (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
'Not true' is pretty ambiguos...do you see a site that uses the 'pay for' Google search tool that has been dropped by florida?
I can only find one 1 site right now that uses this ;pay for' toool, so could you be specific... Do you know of another site that uses it?
We have ranked in the top for our category for years, and
we knew who our closest competition was also. Except for one competitor, we all got dropped.
we were dropped along with many of our best competitors. Removed kw1 from a search for kw1 kw2 region and we show up. kw1 appears to be the "bad" word causing us to drop.
What to do about it, when it describes what we do - I haven't decided. Hoping that Google will wake up.
LisaB
When you carry out a standard search in Google now, it shows the same results as their directory search. This is not a coincidence or a mistake.
if your site is bluewidgets.com, and you are optomized for blue widgets with many incoming 'blue widgets' anchortest links....YOU HAVE VANISHED,
BUT, if you have paid to place an ad page on a huge broad info page ith PR6-7-8 related to your niche (example: widgetworld.com which has thousands of pages about all different widget subjects), that page could do very well, quite possibly #1.
Example: Place a full page ad on widgetworld.com so the URL is: widgetworld.com/bluewidgets.html
As long as this ad page is not over optimized, then it should do very well in the current state of google. A key reason is: it's not an index page, and it should have very few backlinks...nobody pays for backlinks to their ad page. Your home page may have 200 backlinks, but your ad page would have maybe 1 or 2..and only an internal link from widgetworld.com.
There are about 6 of these ad pages in the top 10 for my niche, while the home pages for these same companies have vanished.
This would explain a lot of the Amazon listings as well.
CORRECTION: all 15 of the top 15 results for a 3 keyword search combo are NOT homepages!
CORRECTION 2: This seems to be true because all of the homepages for my niche are a maximum of PR5...so the pages on worldwigets.com (PR7 for this site) for those companies (wordlwidgets.com/bluewidgets.html) has a higher PR than the home pages of individual company sites...If you want to advertise, forget banners and links.... you need a fully dedicated page on a decent PR site.
Thanks in advance
SOD That's the best theory I've heard yet. G would maintain its quality search characteristics for non-commercial research on the web & also drive more adwords revenue.
Maybe the free ride is over...besides if your business model cannot withstand having to spend a percentage of revenues on advertising, then maybe its not a viable business model to begin with.
If this is what is happening, it's not such a bad thing.
(Don't throw eggs at me now ok?)
-c
i dont think my sites are being filtered - its just that my index pages are gone from the index.
whats going on? is it a bug or what?
Do you see now, that you can write "editorial" content to your hearts content and Google will still drop you into obscurity in a heartbeat?
Well, they dropped three of my pages out of 3,500+ into obscurity in a heartbeat. :-)
Sure, having tons of pages and sites is, and will always be the best insurance for google, but it would be easier if they just returned the proper results.
I certainly wouldn't argue with that. But finding the recipe that delivers optimum search results can't be easy, and collateral damage tends not to be permanent.
I would suggest that Google crank back the setting that gives #1 search rankings to Amazon.com catalog pages. (I'm guessing those pages are ranking high because they're "fresh." If freshness is the main criterion for a #1 ranking, that's a major weakness in the algorithm because it creates an opening for "freshness spam.")
We have found, if we call up any short phrase from the index page it comes up #1 or #2, (except if it is included in the title) but the only KW from the title that works is the company name.
and they are busy implementing a different algo for each keyphrase - just to keep us guessing
GG is laughing so much his hands can't hit the keyboard
and yes, I've been nuked too - very selectively, for non spammy pages but for keyphrases of obvious interest
Could somebody please explain what the -fufufu -xyzxyz or -dfdf dfdfd means? Is there special signifigance to each letter? I know what they are doing because I can see the different results when they are used. I just don't know what they are.
These are nonsense "exclusion" terms. They can be any combination of characters immediately preceded by a hyphen (i.e., a minus sign). If you enter one or more of these in the search box, Google interprets this as meaning that you want all pages that fulfill your search request except pages that contain these terms. If the characters are nonsense, then it means that you are asking Google to exclude something which would not exist on any page to begin with.
There are two thresholds for this "filter" penalty. One is the dictionary lookup for "bad" words or word pairs. Once you hit in the dictionary, there is a second threshold for whether a page in the SERPs is over-optimized on that dictionary hit. Leading suspects for this second threshold are titles, headlines, anchor text, URLs on the page (domain, path, filename), and URL/anchor text in external links to that page. If both thresholds are met, that page tends to drop like a rock in the SERPs for that particular searcher's request.
There is substantial evidence that the dictionary is mostly "money" words or terms. Noncommercial sites have not been affected. There is even speculation that the dictionary is nothing more than Google's list of Adword terms. This would be very controversial, if it is true.
It appears that adding nonsense exclusion terms to a search confuses the dictionary lookup, so that in many cases the lookup fails. If this first threshold (the lookup) fails, the second threshold (the over-optimization) has no keywords to use, so the page is not penalized. In some cases, more than one exclusion term makes a difference. This could mean that depending on how the search box terms are parsed, a douple pass at the dictionary might be done for some searches. Or, just a greater number of terms in the search box tends to exempt you from the dictionary lookup in the first place.
What many have been noticing is that when the penalty is applied, it's like a sniper attack rather than a shotgun blast. Very specific sites drop completely, while others are unaffected. This argues against those who think that there are some new broad matching rules in place rather than the process I just described.
Bek
[edited by: James_Dale at 7:21 pm (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
You know ladies and gentlemen, I've been living with this stress for two years now, and frankly I've had enough. I'm certainly not paying for Adwords - I've tried them before, spent £4,000 and my sales volume increased by £3000, profit by £1000. £3000 loss.
So I guess it is probably time to pack it all in - I haven't had a single sale for 24 hours.
Huh?
>>since before yahoo dropped its own directory in favor of google.
Did I miss something?
Thought Yahoo was getting rid of Google :)
Which may explain why we have not seen him on the Florida post lately. At 56K, it would take a week to read all the Florida posts. You think they would pay googleguy enough to get broadband for his family :)
[edited by: lgn1 at 7:41 pm (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
>>since before yahoo dropped its own directory in favor of google.
I think you mean Yahoo decided to mix the Yahoo directory to the Google search results. Yahoo never dropped its directory for Googles directory, slight typo there.
Anyway still think this update has a long way to go :)
I just read in another post that googleguy is back home on a 56K modem.
The poor guy spends his free time in WW and all he gets is name calling and abuse. Not surprising he's taking a break, specially when he does it out of free will.
[edited by: lasko at 7:42 pm (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
Anyway still think this update has a long way to go
Yes - there are still some relevant sites that need to filter down in favor of the "amazons" of the world. :(
Run an affiliate oriented site? Not any more!
KW KW KWs dropped out of existance (as good as)
But the following gives #1 slot:
KW KWs KWs
So we know the middle KW is the bad-boy, it just happens to be the one everyone uses to source our service.!
We used it in adwords so yes it is used there.
I wish Google looked a bit more like Yahoogle does now. It's relevant and not too spammy. Best of all, I'm back on page one! Same with Altavista, but being top of Altavista is like being the best swimmer in the Sahara.
