Forum Moderators: open
This week I find those sandboxed keywords appear in the serps and most of them have very nice positions. I have noticed many webmasters have found their sandboxed keywords come back or appear in the serps. I'm just wondering if your sites have the same situation as mine, or still in the sandbox.
Your input is appreciated, thanks.
If your site starts to show up after only 2 months that could mean that it is not a sandbox-effect after all but just a change in algos that is happening.
I do agree that the sandbox for some new sites is starting to be removed. Certain terms are starting to show up for me for a 2.5 month old site.
I have three sites under the 'sandbox' effect. One just managed to get out of it for most of the key phrases. The other two despite decent links and un-competitive phrases, languish somewhere near result 100.
By the way the -asdfgh search does not prove the sandbox effect. It may not only be turning off the sandbox filter, but could also be turning off a host of other filters. I have also noticed it removing most directories from SERPs. So that by itself does not prove anything.
Howvere the site of mine which emerged after the sandbox effect received one deep crawl before escaping from it.
a good page of mine of on page 2 but page 5 in the current state of play ;-(
eg, a company called "Violet Magnum Widgets".
You would expect a website with the domain name violetmagnumwidgets which is registered to a company called Violet Magnum Widgets with the name on every page and a few good links to at least rank somewhere for their company name.
It's rediculous, you search for the company name and a completely unrelated site that's about peanuts will come up simply because it has those three words scattered throughout the content (& perhaps 500 links).
Let's say we do a website for a small business called "Joe Bloggs Plumbing, City, State". With Google's current settings, we would need a rediculous number of links for this to even rank for their business name and city/state. A small business like this only get's a website so they've at least got an internet presence and so their customers can find them. I can't justify the need for 500 links for a small business like this.
Imagine if you searched for Google and google.com ranked at the lower end of the scale. At the end of the day, a search engine isn't doing a good job if the company you are searching for can't be found.
I believe website's that have been on the internet for several years should carry a little more weight than those that have just sprung up but surely a new website shouldn't carry such a hefty penalty.
For example, we just did a website for a small company that was actually established in 1958. Just because they haven't had a website for 5 years doesn't mean they aren't a genuine and reputable business that should at least appear when searching for them. As a matter of interest, this particular company is #1 on every search engine but barely rank top ten for their obscure business name.
Looking forward to Google fixing this in the next major algo tweak.
;-(
I thought it was just my poor SEO that put me on page 9 for a 2.5M page search term
With the sandbox filter removed I'm half way up page 2.
Nice :-)
Thanks for that info
Now I am very happy google has lifted this sort of weird filter, All these sites I am talking about are New sites launched before 3 to 4 months,
If I put in "keywords1 keywords2 -fsafsf -adgfd -dsagdg -fsdfdfd -fsfaf -fsaf -gfjhd -dgsdgg" then every site I've noticed that Google has buried recently comes back at #1. That's both newish sandboxed sites and much older buried travel-related sites. (I don't necessarily think that they should all be at #1!)
The #1 spots correspond with these sites' rankings on other SEs. So what's this actually doing? How/why's it work....?
Customer received first order on May 9th.
Site is partially indexed in google and froogle.
Traffic is from specific product terms.
Upfront I told the client it would take 60 to 90 days to get listed. The client is more than happy :)
I just hope the site stays out of the sandbox.
One weird note: We have been calling our development area the sandbox since we started developing the product. Must be a common term for programmers.
M i n n a p p l e
[edited by: minnapple at 2:36 am (utc) on May 13, 2004]
I have the same experience with the sandboxed keywords that I mentioned in the #1 post. Now they're doing well. Seems yours will be fine if you have the luck. Who knows if G will change his mind or not.
Seems to hav paid off once out of the sandbox lock down.
As of right now, is your out of box results still showing?
We've seen some sites hop back in and bury themselves.
Can anyone explain why this "KEYWORD1 KEYWORD2 -asdf -afgfd -asfgd -asfsgs (and so on up to the 10 word limit)" works? I mean, what's the point - what does it show? It seems that people are thinking like - if your page, that has disappeared off radar for several months, ranks well if you do this strange search, then it will soon be back in the real world?
Sure as hell hope so. We have a site just like that, too.
Don't suppose GG cares to fathom a guess?
What bothers me is finding out what other factors keep your links in the sandbox (if any).
It is also obvious that the amount of time your new links stay in the sandbox is different for different websites. Does it depend on PR of pages linking to (or actual mathematical PR transfered to you by this link), your sites's PR, relative "reputablity" of your site in Google's eyes (or is this issue long overdue in light of new algo tweaks?)
Also if it was designed to discourage big affiliate spammers from buying PR and anchor text for their cr*ppy sites - it just didn't work because all big affiliate spammers are already here at this forum:)
