Framed Sites - Working good?

[vmills]

A company bought a link on a directory-type site, which put the link-buyers site in a frameset and that framed page now shows up #1 for a competitive keyword phrase. The noframes tag is not used for quality content on this site and the snippet Google picked up is from the meta description tag. The keywords are in the title of the page and repeated in the meta description tag and that's it.

I thought the one principle I could count on in optimizing sites for Google is that content is king, but this page has no content (or very little).

Certain pages of the same directory site rank well for other related keyword searches, giving prominence to the companies who bought links.

The company I work for used to rank in the top 10 for these keywords but disappeared after Florida, along with all the other individual companies listed. Now it is only 3 directories and a few completely irrelevant pages that make up the top 10.

I'm considering buying advertising on the directory site, but am not sure how long this will last with Google. Is this a case of "content-specific page rank" (a term I've heard bandied about) trumping quality content? Think it'll stay this way?

[vmills]

Thought I'd give this question a little boost. Anybody have an idea why a framed site with no content would rank #1?

[steveb]

Anchor text.

Google has a big problem now with framed and redirect sites.

[nakulgoyal]

Well, that case study could really help working in this research to see what works and what not. I always beleive content is KING and till date I see it work even POST Florida! Can vmills PM me the URL?

[Spine]

Glad I'm not the only one seeing the redirect-spam 'cancer'.

I've seen a framed site or two with good positions, but they do have lots of links also.

[bluelook]

Someday all redirect site will be penalysed, and Iīm afraid that day Googleīs wonīt separate real redirect sites, from the ones that just wanīt to make a buck.
I have an old site (.net domain), that used to have a 301 on it (to the .com domain).
That page is bookmarked and itīs an homepage for thousands of people. I had to remove the 301, because the main ISP of my country has a transparent proxy that doesnīt like that a lot... sometime ago it just cached a blank page, and that page was served for almost a week. I had to remove the 301 and put an oldfashioned meta tag refreshed to resolve the problem.
So I guess this may be a problem in the future... the redirected site may seem like a scam to trick the search engine. I have to really think what to do...

[vmills]

The page I'm talking about isn't a redirect. The page itself shows 3 backlinks in Google, and none outside the domain. Its PR is 5, though the site's home page is a 7. Other pages on the site have lots of links, and at least one of those pages links to the page in question.

So maybe it is links that are responsible for the page's high position, and that's why directory sites have pushed commercial sites out of the rankings for many searches (although I think more is going on here).

I'm not smart enough to figure out Google's algorithm, so what I've tried to do is follow general principles to optimize a site. I thought the primary one was to include quality content on each page, and pre-Florida this seemed to work well. Now I think links might trump content, and if that's true, it really does change a lot in terms of priorities for improving a site's position.

[bluelook]

Iīve seen PR6 sites just with one visible backlink... from a PR6 site.
But PR isnīt everything :)

[Kirby]

This thread is covering two different issues. Framesets and garbage google results.

[bluelook]

Or... why sites using frameset tricks (garbage results) appear on top of the listings :)?
In this case they are related, so the topic is covering both issues.

[Dayo_UK]

I use frames in some sites (Part of spreading the risk with different site designs etc)

Little content, but I suppose you get high keyword density.

[soapystar]

yes, i have seen a site return from a years wilderness..a site who had only obtained his position by spamming,,,..the return was brought about by placing a new site with the same topic as the old within a frame on the old sites index page..this brought the old site back to top ten..get that?...r-e-m-o-v-i-n-g content brought a rise up the serps....yes content is king if you have no inbound links..if you have inbound links then content kills you...:-(

[bluelook]

Yes, I have new sites, with few content that rank very well, and other sites, with more content, that donīt rank so well.
Inbound links and optimized pages are still very important...
Most of the time I donīt have time to do that, only to build content, but Iīll start to spend more time with that. Until now Iīm more worried with visitors opinion, that with SE ranks...

[vmills]

soapystar, your example looks very similar to the high ranking page I'm seeing, and it's what concerns me. I've always avoided frames like the plague, and wonder if I should rethink that.

[a_chameleon]

Google has a big problem now with framed and redirect sites

Actually, steveb - if you look at my baffled posts in other concurrent threads, you'll find me puzzling as to how a site I created 6 years ago (as an 'infant' site-builder <G> ) and abandoned in short order (the manf. quitt making the product) not only appeared suddenly in Google, but rose to a No. 1 position literally overnight.

It uses the earliest, old-style framesets and outranks far better website that have -

a) Better PR
b) Higher keyphrase density
c) Mucu more relevant content.

Not only that am I puzzled over, but in G's SERP's for other key phrases in my field, G has ranked at >7 a page that in only linked to from a "side frame", a menu frame that is not optimized in any fashion, to wit contains *no keywords, no metas, nothing but links to the sites other pages.

:)

*I've changed my "homepage" to this URL for easy reference and my "Interests" to the 3-word phrase it's No. 1 in my profile, should anyone want to take a gander..

[steveb]

Just so my sentence doesn't end up being too cryptic... the problem Google is having with framed and redirect sites is that they are ranking well.

[Spam_Buster]

I have seen it and it starts like this:

<HEAD>
title
</HEAD>

<FRAMESET ROWS="100%,*" FRAMEBORDER="NO" BORDER="0" FRAMESPACING="0">
<frame name="topFrame" scrolling="YES" noresize src="****xxx.asp" frameborder="NO" >
<noframes>

<body>
<table width="100%">
<tr valign="middle">
<td>

<div align="center">

keuword 1, keyword 2, keyword 3
more keywords

</div>

</td>
</tr>
</table>
</BODY>

</noframes>
<frame src="UntitledFrame-11.htm"></FRAMESET>
</HTML>

and they are #1 on every keyword

[soapystar]

i luv the insecure form where you are asked for your credit card details...:-)

[Kirby]

>Just so my sentence doesn't end up being too cryptic... the problem Google is having with framed and redirect sites is that they are ranking well. <

Its not cryptic, just an overgeneralization. Big difference between a properly used framed site and redirects.

[steveb]

"Big difference between a properly used framed site and redirects."

Big difference between apples and oranges. What the heck does that have to do with anything? LOL.

[Kirby]

Perhaps I misunderstood your point then, steve about Google's problem with framed sites ranking well.

[steveb]

Google is ranking some sites highly that are just framing another site. Obviously thier are plenty of legit uses of frames.