Forum Moderators: open
The recent G changes favor larger sites with DMOZ listing and links coming from larger sites with DMOZ listings.
Mom and Pop selling homemade candy on the internet may be looking for some other line of work soon as will thousands and thousands of small webbers.
This change in Google's algo no longers serves the internet as a whole - but gives a step up for the big to get bigger and the small to stay away. Granted, anyone can claw their way to the top, but the playing field is no longer level.
Most of the top G search results favor listings in DMOZ which frowns on any type of affiliate site. It's also a listing that can be very hard to get because of under-staffing at ODP. And in many many cases people just don't know it's important!
Most of the top G search results favor large sites with hundreds of pages rather that a dozen or two - even though small sites bring some of the best content to the web.
Most of the top G results have links from other sites that are also listed in DMOZ and are large as well.
This is a major change from G's previous policy and practices.
With Google's changes and Yahoo's need for a Gold Card the interent may be facing a new and interesting path.
-s-
-s-
You must work at Google.
How many people are you going to accuse of being in Google's employ?
Apparently their only hiring criteria is to disagree with you.
Maybe on your planet. On this planet most people link to sites they consider valuable, or those of friends. I link to a friend's local business site because I want to. Stop thinking about the junk side of seo and think about how the word "web" came into being.
Well, we know there is at least one here. Could there be 2,3,4?
I have to wonder when I see people saying charging money is good. lol
You are telling me you like giving money to Google, that it 'makes sense'. Now, I think that is darn nice of you to want to give Google your money. And it is right nice of some of you to say Google's new results are the best you’ve ever seen. Even though the results are pretty much universally agreed to be very poor now, (except on webmasterworld). Darn nice of you!
I saw one guy that said he gives Google 10k a month (he wasn't quite as happy as you about it though). I should start a fund for nice guys like you to donate to other nice guy causes since money is no object to you and you like giving it away.
Now I am not going to fight with you, that is exactly what you want. You want to shut this thread down by causing a fight. So go fight yourself and leave me alone.
Nobody has to pay for inclusion in Google. All a site needs for that is one link from a site already listed in Google, and Googlebot will find it. As for any site that can't find anyone on the Internet to link to them (including home pages of family, friends, etc.), I really gotta wonder if that site not being listed in Google is a major loss. I've never paid for a link to my amateur sites. However, even though they are in English, I know currently of a Russian, Finnish and Polish language site that has linked to mine unsolicited. I had to ask on Usenet what language that Finnish site was in after I spotted inbound traffic from my logs, because I couldn't figure it out. Want links? Try putting up content people will want to link to. All I know is this worked for me.
>The Internet started out free for almost everything except the connection.
And a computer. There are people out there who don't even have computers. In real life I have as friends a guy from Nigeria, and a couple from Zambia. (Both international students who go to the large college in the town I live in.) Having talked in depth with these people, for many on this planet having a computer is just a dream. I got that Zambian couple online at home whipping together computer hardware I glommed onto that was discarded as worthless by people here where I live in the US. I've learned to appreciate how lucky I was to be born in the US. [I apologize to WebmasterWorld readers for the off topic drift here. It was just that the assumption the only cost to being on the Internet was the connection was something that I needed to comment on.]
>Free searches, free email. That's what made it great. Search engines and email are the heart of the Internet. You charge for those and you take away free speech. I guess it 'makes sense' to charge poor people to deliver their email too as long as some corporation can control the majority of email and get away with it?
Seriously. WHERE do you live. I live in the US. I know poor people born in the US who live here who don't worry about the cost of delivery of e-mail. For folks without computers, this ain't an issue. As for "free speech" (more accurately freedom of the press), they don't have that on the Internet. Not only don't they have their own domains and web hosts, they look at me with glazed eyes when I talk about the Internet, since they don't even have computers.
>Now in Google's case it is either a 'search engine' or a 'money engine'. (well in Google's case they may have invented the Internet's very first 'money-filter engine' or whatever...)
>You know if you....ehemmm... I mean Google would just admit that they are now running a LookSmart or PFI model or whatever and quit pretending to still be a 'search engine' I think people would have no problem with that and would respect the truthfulness. Truth in advertising you know.
Except those people I know who have no clue what I am talking about if I mention Google. And those that do because I taught them about Google. I'm the "geek" sort of person. The guy people go to when they can't figure out to reinstall Windows when it crashes. And this includes some rather intelligent and affluent folks. To them a computer is just an appliance like a dishwasher. They just assume because I can get Windows up again for them, whatever search engine I use must be the best.
>Apparently their only hiring criteria is to disagree with you.
If so, I'll happily relocate if Google will pay all moving expenses. (I can dream, can't I?)
You can just search in site:www.domain.com for a word that is in the page's ODP description but not on the page itself, can't you? I just did this and got a "did not match any documents" page. Seems like the ODP description doesn't matter to the Google rankings.
Of course some folks here do that...
I agree. AFAIK, Google ignores ODP site descriptions.
rfgdxm1, you're a Yank eh? I always figured you were Canadian... ;-)
My mother always told me to use what I know and that only recipes are for sharing...
...again, sorry for starting this thread.
-s-
I provide a specialty service for a well-known industry, in a particular region. There happen to only be 3 of us listed in Google for this specialty / industry / locale. (BTW, almost all of the businesses in this industry are mom and pop businesses.)
It makes no difference if some surfers care about commercial websites or not. When they want my service (which will be once in a lifetime, hopefully), they want to find ME (and my local competitors), not a bunch of directories!
I listed my site in late Sept. 2003. By mid-October I was #1 on all relevant search terms, with the other two businesses being in the top 10 for those search terms.
I made it through Florida unscathed. Whew! Thought I had it dialed in! In Austin (late Jan 04?) my site dropped out of site on the two relevant 3 word phrases which included the INDUSTRY term! (in both of those my site is back up to about 150). The #2 competitor dropped off the charts on ALL relevant searches and has only recovered to about 238 on one of them. The #1 competitor is still in the top 10 on all relevant keyword searches.
Last weekend I dropped to #36 on the 2 keyword phrase that is based upon locale - specialty. Except for the #1 competitor, all the returns above me are directories and junk!
I think this case study is interesting. 3 local listings, and each getting treated differently by these "updates" in Google.
#1 competitor (still in top 10), PR3, about 3 pages, and not a lot of content .. basic info. DMOZ listed.
#2 competitor (dropped out of sight, but still in database), PR3, about 3 pages, and basic info .. DMOZ listed. (now purchasing AdWords).
#3, ME, PR4, 6 pages (and growing), lots of content and keyword rich, but no DMOZ listing. LOCALE/SPECIALTY, #36, LOCALE/INDUSTRY/SPECIALTY, #146.
I conclude: the INDUSTRY keyword killed me first (end of January), the SPECIALTY keyword got me last weekend; DMOZ listing has nothing to do with it; and the rest of the conclusions are that Google's algo is in chaos. When 98% of the SERPS above me are directories, there can be no claim of relevance; it seems clear to me that certain INDUSTRY keywords are being treated chaotically and outrageously. Surfers are looking for the actual service providers, not a bunch of directories they have to wade through.
Finally, let's look at Page Rank based upon inbound links. The entire concept is bogus! It automatically setup spamming, because no site will voluntarily take the time to link to a business site. And, with my non-commercial site (PR5), I had to spend weeks begging for links from other "relevant" sites. The only way I get "relevant" links for my commercial site is through directories, most of which I have to pay for!
Are you listening, Google? (Of course not) Link popularity is a bogey man of your own making, and it is irrelevant to the way a page should be ranked based upon content and usefulness. You created this situation, and now you are killing legit sites based upon trying to clean up the mess this concept caused! And, you are now favoring DIRECTORIES!
*sigh*
(how did i do for my first ever post?)
One last thing: my site is still #1 in returns for the other major search engines!
Then I'd suggest you figure out what your competitor above is doing right they still rank well in Google, while you don't. You mentioned competitor #2 had an ODP listing, yet also dropped off the radar on Google. Thus an ODP listing alone ain't the magic bullet here.
Or, you could not jump to conclusions that I don't know what I'm doing, since I am still #1 on the other search engines!
> You mentioned competitor #2 had an ODP listing, yet also dropped off the radar on Google. Thus an ODP listing alone ain't the magic bullet here.
I think I did make that point quite clearly!
*wow*
What works for other search engines doesn't necessarily work for Google. If you want to do well in Google, that means doing what it takes to do well in Google. When it comes to Google SEO, adapting to changes in the Google algo tends to be a much more effective strategy than simply saying Google is broken.
I disagree, google exists to provide relevant results for search terms. If you have a relevant informative site and the results for your topic are all irrelevant GARBAGE then the webmaster and the google user have the right to be mad since google isnt doing its JOB.
Google owes nothing to those who simply try to get to the top without good content, but OWES the rest of us the positions we deserve.
DO you JOB google.
Its getting rediculous.
Clearly you do not love Google ;) I have a few questions/comments for you:
1. Imagine there was no Google SE...Imagine that there was no SE out there on the web, Period. So, how would you get people to visit "Joey's Crematorium" site? Would you go to your local newspaper and ask for a freebie ad? You'd probably get laughed at. It's quite likely you'd have to pay to advertise in some sort of medium to lead people to Joey's site. Noone here said they "love" paying Google for Adword placement...it's called doing business. If done properly, you make more than you pay. This is called profit. Profit is good.
2. Next Scenario: Louise owns a pizza joint in New York City. Louise, like 100 other pizza joint owners, have created little sites describing where they're located, what kind of pizzas they make and the cost. So, we've got 100 pizza joints from the same geographic location who have built web sites. I see a problem here. All 100 want to be top ten in Google for the search "New York pizza joints". But guess what? Only 10 get to be on the first page.
So, how fair is it if Jimmy's pizza joint makes it on the first page and Louise is dead last on page 10? Clearly Google needs to prioritize sites. Sure, it may not SEEM fair to some, but it's a necessary evil. But you can bet your arse off that Louise is going to be griping and complaining about why her site is not listed #1 for that search. I mean, afterall, she built the site, how dare Google not list it where SHE feels it deserves to be?
I hardly doubt Google gives that much weight to a DMOZ listing. Case in point. I have a site in a very competative niche (a money phrase, if you will). I do not have a DMOZ listing, yet I appear #1 for my given main phrase in Google. And guess what, even though I am number one for that phrase I still pay for Adwords! Oh my God you must be thinking! Why would he waste his money like that? I pay for Adwords because it makes good business sense and I make a profit by advertising my site through them.
Google's algorythm consists of likely hundreds of variables. I'm sure all those Phd's can do a lot better than just plunking DMOZ listed sites at the top of all the SERP's...I mean, let's get real here.
Dave.
OK. It's a stretch, but let's try the stretch .. Suppose I already thoroughly examined the #1 competitor's site. Suppose, as hard as it may be to imagine, that I do realize that what works for other SE's doesn't necessarily work for Google. Suppose that the kind of research I posted about the whole case study shows that I've done my homework. I realize its a stretch, but let's just try it.
So, what have you contributed to my education, then? Evidently you have learned how to "adapt to the changes in the current Google algo". Care to share, or just want to keep taking potshots? (Hey, I didn't start this, and my question IS legitimate!)
Anyway, thanks for the laugh.
I have been patiently silently sitting out..
Sorry times up on this one.
RFG's site is extremely niche. It's hard to see how it could be harmed by any algo change.
As well as my commerce site, I have such a 'niche site' too - and it hasn't budged through all these massive, and mainly destructive upheavals either.
It's arguably unfiar to argue a point from the position of a niche site.
I note that on a keyword of mine, a comparison site has popped up at No 1, with my competitor selling the same product under 20 different headings. e.g. widget for this, widget for that, widget for (add any old manufacturer)
I agree with those who say 'It's not fair, but that's life.'
But it's not *good* either - and that's Googles problem :)
<edit: sorry, RFG, not RFX - it's a prescription drug used by some recreationally >
[edited by: SyntheticUpper at 11:55 pm (utc) on Mar. 21, 2004]
The Google algo isn't random. It ranks sites in a particular order based on criteria set by the programmers. This is what we call the algo. I'm not saying you haven't done your homework. However, your competitor at #1 is doing *something* right that you aren't. There IS some reason why they are #1. If you don't know that reason, then obviously you have missed something in your research. I'm not taking potshots. Merely pointing out reality.
I'm not arguing the point from how my sites are doing. I look at many different SERPs, most of which are such that I have no interest in my sites ranking for.
I can whomp PR6 sites with PR3 sites. Why , because I play the game.
So does this mean there is no value in PR6 page?
In two niche markets and one mainstraim market i work in the ODP listing to include my keywords does help. How do I know this? PR2 Flash site whomped home on the keywords i chase with a FLASH site. ATW backlinks were non existant as were Googles backlinks. While in my analysis there may have been other stones unturned the highlighting of the key words in googles description does lead to believe that they give an advantage.
As usual there is no single factor at play , but i remain convinced that the description was a factor.
PS im not talking about the ODP description, but about the Google directory listing which is based on the ODP.
-phish
