Forum Moderators: open
The same programme also commented on the irrelevance of results returned by just typing in keywords. Pointing out most sites returned for their search of "shelving" were comparison shopping sites, plus an educational site.
They also encouraged viewers to use the advanced search facility or to put search terms in quotes, which I have noticed also obviates the new filter.
The item was accompanied by sob stories from small co's and an expert from a UK Internet magazine stating the purpose was to reduce the amount of spam in searches.
IMHO, I think that, while Google's efforts are valiant, the results are a miserable failure - at least in the areas I monitor. In trying to kick out the spam, which wasn't such a problem anyway, they just got rid of all the most relevant matches! And the pages from certain top price comparison sites are still there - even when they only say "your search for widgets didn't return any matches.... are you interested in oozamewotsits instead?"!
Regards,
Suggy
because I don't need 10,000 new competitors reverse-engeneering my sites.
What a load of rubbish, that is simply NOT possible! BTW I wonder if all here appreciate you implying that they are that type of persons?
then you haven't done your homework.
I have done enough homework to constantly increase my Google traffic.
Why don't you ask yourself that? ;)
hmmm, this is the 2nd time my URL has been taken out of my profile. I'm not doing it so it must be an editor?
We are earning more money after Florida than pre-florida, but that doesn't stop me from saying the serps suck.
Perhaps they do, (although I still say they dont on the whole) but that does not mean Google is not the best to search on.
I notice that not ONE person took on the question of;
If Google is SO bad, then why bother with them at all? Just focus on the other SE's. If you are all so correct (I still say you are not) then it will not be long before users start using another SE.
I think the answer is, most are only judging the SERP's by their own sites position and they know the Google is still no 1.
BTW any good Google site will have hundreds of pages so the loss of one is minimal. Most here keeping saying "my site has gone..." Is that all pages or just 1?
Dave
That may be the case in the serps you watch. I can tell you my industry (it is NOT high profile like real estate, pharm, adult, casino etc.) has been decimated. There are some survivors - mainly older sites - but the bulk of the serps are now filled with government/institution in-house documents and order forms. It not a case of slight movement downward - clean, highly relevant sites are nowhere to be found on highly critical keywords. Stats like this speak volumes for my industry :
"These 76 links are missing from the top 100"
"These 84 links are missing from the top 100"
"These 78 links are missing from the top 100"
Even search strings consisting of 4 words read
"These 86 links are missing from the top 100"
There will be bankruptcies, foreclosures and all the related socio-economic problems. My industry involves capital intensive equipment and many of the players are family owned and operated. For all those who have survived consider yourself extremely fortunate - for now. Google has without warning betrayed honest webmasters and indeed an industry who folllowed their guidelines. I have always used AdWords even with good rankings; however, right now they are slightly delaying the inevitable for many operations.
>>>>If Google is SO bad, then why bother with them at all<<<
Its kind of hard to ignore a 900lb gorilla.
Its kind of hard to ignore a 900lb gorilla.
Yes they are aren't they! Ever wondered why? Surely if what you are all saying is correct they will soon become a 50lb monkey. If you truly believe what you (and many others here) are saying you are trying to get back in to a SE that will soon be dead in the water.
Dave
dot-org sites weren't affected.
...
No one I've come across has ever claimed differently in the last two weeks.
As for the thread topic, I dont know the implications for Google and I doubt they are that worried yet, but among industry specific media that doesnt usually touch this update stuff, there is a now a lot of chatter. The louder it grows, the more people notice irregularities they may have overlooked before. The media now listens to those who would throw dirt at Google, legit or not, and feel like they have justification to print it.
The real estate industry is the most powerful and organized lobby in the US, unlike travel, and has credibility, unlike the adult biz. As more and more players in this industry openly question what has happened and start to reference the BBS, NYTimes, Fortune and others, not to mention the impact on their own online entities, the "rant of a few SEO's who cant find their pet projects" becomes legit, real or otherwise, like it or not.
I guess if I hope to find real answers, I'll have to pay the cover charge for the back room.
Good one.
Just kidding Dave. Sorry mods.
1.Google has decimated a pile of honest businesses and clean websites.
2.In order to survive the companies that have had critical keywords obliterated need to find a way to get back into the radar on Google - not AltaVista. People that have to pay mortages and put food in mouths do not have time to speculate on the future of search engines.
3.Glad to hear you site is doing well consider yourself lucky. Do not tell the companies in dire straits that content is the key - far to many exceptions to that idea.
Dave, many of us are not debating the future of Google
That is correct, there is no debate. Many here keep saying the Google SERP's are terrible, crap, poor, useless, utter &**^ etc etc. There is no debate at all, if anyone dares to say otherwise they are often attacked.
There are MANY here making it well know that they believe Google will fall, yet are still frantically trying to get good Google postions. That is ludicrous, why waste time on a dying giant?
The media now listens to those who would throw dirt at Google, legit or not, and feel like they have justification to print it.
Yes they do! They listen to all tall poppy cutting. All stories I have seen so far give me the strong impression they have an angle to them. I.e friend is a reporter etc. I have *always* been one to be sceptical of this type of journalism (for want of a better word).
Dave
Google is only penalizing those of us that don't have our sites in our profiles :o
If anything I'd think it would be the other way round... "WebmasterWorld member, oh yeah he's an SEO ban him! Stop poking my precious cubs!" :P No, I don't think google would ever do that I'm just kidding! :)
I think we safely assume the non inclusion of URL's in profiles is due to many not playing by the rules.
Dave
I think we safely assume the non inclusion of URL's in profiles is due to many not playing by the rules.
We really shouldn't open this can of worms here, but I can think of many legitimate reasons why someone would not put their site in their profile. You make some rather harsh assumptions.
All stories I have seen so far give me the strong impression they have an angle to them. I.e friend is a reporter etc. I have *always* been one to be sceptical of this type of journalism (for want of a better word).
You do however raise a good valid point, and of course all the journalist's will jump on it because they will jump on anything that looks big ;)
We really shouldn't open this can of worms here, but I can think of many legitimate reasons why someone would not put their site in their profile.
Such as?
Dave
As long as Powdork insists on violating the charter over and over...
Notice this site is riddled with duplicate content. Florists.htm and Florists.asp etc etc.
Instead of the crazy theories, why not look about what is right in front of people's noses time and again. Perhaps it is "Google's fault" that it is not handling duplicate content at all well right now, but this isn't a case of an innocent webmaster. It's lame webmastering.
[edited by: steveb at 7:29 am (utc) on Dec. 5, 2003]
Larry - I do not think this new update worked out to well?
Sergey - Maybe we should turn the update clock back because these website owners are getting ticked off...
Sergey - We all know that their websites are our bread and butter.. I think you are right Larry lets tweak this thing...And now we are getting bad press!
Larry: Someone's going to figure out that this is not our usual way of doing business. It is only good business to let these small business know some of the fundamental rules.
Suddenly a dark shadow enters from the left right corner of my dream and shouts:
Shadowy Figure - SHUT UP YOU TWO SALLIES!
Larry - Oh %&#$ I told you Sergey we should not have made him a silent partner.
Shadowy Figure - Your going to get all the money you ever dreamed of. Just liked we talked about. The only problem you will ever have is if you open your mouth and let anyone know that I am your partner.
Sergey - Hey pal (In a squeaky voice) Its all Good! We'll keep every thing on the downlow... the hush, hush..Just take it easy.
Shadowy Figure - My plans to take over the world may have been thwarted by the last Department of Justice...But once I have control over how information is disseminated, I'll finally take over everything.
Suddenly Shadowy Figure turns and sees me looking!
Shadowy Figure: What have we got here! Looks like a SEO morsel that wondered into the wrong dream! Sergey give me my hotsauce!
Me: AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Fade Out!
And yes I have tweaked my meds since.
All stories I have seen so far give me the strong impression they have an angle to them.
LOL. Of course they do. Not the point. The point is that this update is generating press like no other, and little of it is favorable.
BTW, nice #2 results for your obvious keywords. Should be able to sell a lot of product to those of us 'free result freeloaders' now re-budgeting for PPC campaigns.
Of course they do. Not the point.
What! Of course it's the point.
Dave
I don't assume that people will see past the media angles and discount the small, yet growing reports of impending doom at the 'plex, and that is my point.
Come on Dave, not again. You KNOW already that plenty of large content sites have been zapped as well. In your enthusiasm to defend Google (God knows why) you seem to be forgetting things.
>> If you are all so correct (I still say you are not) then it will not be long before users start using another SE. <<
An evolutionary process my friend. If you study social dynamics, you will quickly learn that, ironically, Google's route to success is also going to prove to be their route to failure. Scratch the surface in the right places and you will see that the wheels are already in motion. It's actually a very interesting facet of all this.
Our sites to have sooo much content 100's of pages, more added weekly and all our sites zapped from travel oblivion.
Each page unique and written by us, yet gone just the same in favour of directory sites or U.S sites that have no content or reason to be there except for perhaps a one/two word pick up from their content that by coincidence looks as if it relates to my search.
Generally regarding the press stories always come from friends,informants etc to start the ball rolling, it then gets picked up from Reuters or whereever and then......
[edited by: Dave_Hawley at 8:59 am (utc) on Dec. 5, 2003]
You KNOW already that plenty of large content sites have been zapped as well.
No I don't. Tell me one large content site that has had all pages "zapped"?
In your enthusiasm to defend Google (God knows why)
I thought I has already explained this to you? I'm am NOT defending (or attacking) anyone or anything. My ONLY statement has always been that "I still find Google the best SE". That's it period. Surely that is not so hard to understand?
Here we go again, Google is on "route to failure". Then why is anyone bothering to try and get back to good ranking in a SE that is on a "route to failure"?
...and while I have you attention, why do you not have your site in your profile?
Please answer the 4 questions this time.
You ask questions you know I am not allowed to answer, as it's against the charter. Regardless though, there are so many... just face it.
>> I'm am NOT defending... <<
Come on. Every thread I look in you are there, trying to tell everyone Google is fine.
>> why do you not have your site in your profile? <<
Tell me one good reason why I should draw a target on my head for Google to aim at.
Look at the BBC report again. The keyword example has been mentioned, so let's say it again. Shelving. Do you really think the new results for this are better?
Try the same search on Google.co.uk with the UK sites only filter on. You would think that with fewer sites the relevancy would improve. Wrong! It gets worse - a lot worse (IMHO).
But then, who am I to judge?
2)We still see a a hope to get back in Google as we have a gut feel that Google cant kick out the most loyal searchers for a small financial interest.
PS - I can challenge that I am white hat.
3)Now if Google dont turn up, we have an exit option.. (I mean those people who are extensively Google based) BUT that would take a long time, and in due course... we might die!
So still have hopes with google.
Regards
