Forum Moderators: open
That is to say, should one be checking to see if the sites are out of the sandbox regularly or only when they know there is a major Google update? :)
Thanks
Mc
I have read alot about the sandbox theory and I have come to two conclusions:
1. If the sandbox does exist and is intentional, then trying to fight it might actually do more harm than good. Better to stick to the old tried and true, be patient and let it come out naturally.
2. Because we are not hearing from webmasters how sites have come out naturally, at least not with any consistancy and even though we hear things like it lasts 6 months, yet webmasters are reporting many sites old than that still suffering....I personally agree with those that believe the sandbox effect is not intentional but rather indicative that Googles serp ranking system is broke. I believe that at first Google didn't realize it was really a problem and thus dismissed it. As time has gone on, Google began to see it was a very real problem, but unfortunately has not been able to fix it without degrading the quality of their serps.
After all, If this is all a ploy to increase adwords revenue, at some point you have to let it go because what is the point if your serps become inaccurate because your trying to stuff adwords done everyones neck. Eventually your going to lose searchers traffic and creditability. Basically for various reason, this will lead to a negative return because while it might boost revenue by forcing new sites to use adwords, as searcher traffic defects to the likes of yahoo and msn, people can not continue to be able to afford adwords if the ROR is not there.
Unless something happens soon, in another few months the percentage of sandbox sites clocking in at their 1 year anniversery is going to go through the roof. When this happens the inaccuracy of Googles serps will also hit a 1 year anniversy and sooner or later, it is going to be major news that Google serps are just plain inaccurate. Google competitors are going to pounce and then it will be game over.
I'm not a genius, but I do have some understand of business economics and marketing, so I tend to lean towards the "Google has a real problem" theory because I would hate to think that they are dumber than me and yet billions richer.
But on the other hand, given the talent G has on hand, why are the serps still so bad? Makes you wonder if this is intentional, and if so why?
We've given up on G and perhaps thats exactly their goal here. To make as many webmasters as possible give up and focus on Yahoo.
What we have decided to do is spend our time and effort on building quality sites, sites rich in unique and useful content, good graphic appeal, etc... The days of trying to figure out what the hell G is doing are over. We figure they'll sort it out when they sort it out, and in the interm we'll spend our time building kick ass sites and let it work itself out.
The site has around 320 pages of content and it grows by about 6 pages a day. It is php based and all told there are about 700 pages that can be spidered. I made some tweaks using mod_rewrite in August that significantly hurt the number of pages in Yahoo and Ask. They have been getting rid of old pages slowly and getting new ones in very slowly. Google recognized the change in URLs immediately - to their credit.
Right now Ask.com has exactly 18 good pages and Yahoo has 3 in their index compared to Google's 650. Last month I got more referals from each of ASK and Yahoo than Google.
Based on the statistics I've seen, I should get 5 times the traffic from Google (versus Ask) and 36 times the traffic based on pages spidered. Everything else being equal (which it never is) I should be getting 180 times more traffic from Google.
What we have decided to do is spend our time and effort on building quality sites, sites rich in unique and useful content, good graphic appeal, etc... The days of trying to figure out what the hell G is doing are over. We figure they'll sort it out when they sort it out, and in the interm we'll spend our time building kick ass sites and let it work itself out.
What pisses me off is that this is what I have done in the past and what I am doing right now, but Google fails completely to recognise it. Unlike those (including a few on this forum) who produce nothing but spammy directories and scraper sites I always offer something real for nothing on my websites. This may be technical information, free white papers, spreadsheets, etc. but they are of value to people.
I spend my time producing this stuff and Google spends its time hiding my sites from those who may be interested in it. Got to be something wrong there?
I have to agree, sit back and do nothing.
I know I'm a small fry in the grand scheme of things, but since google offers no explanation to the sandbox that clearly exists, I will focus more attention on MSN's new search, telling other people about it. I will also continue to do what I have always done: create content and build links to other places. The benefits of doing these things extend far beyond Google.
[kottke.org ]
They clearly are pushing adwords. What better way to motivate people than to give them a healthy taste of good rankings? Sort of like the classic schoolyard pusher... "this first one's free, but the next one'll cost ya..." After all, despite their motto "don't be evil" Google is a business and most businesses are there to make as much money as possible in whatever way possible. Forget about all the platitudes they receite about community responsibiity that they've lifted from the texts in that mandatory business ethics class. What’s more, for the past few years, Google has been something closer to exhibiting monopoly behavior than what one expects in a truely competative market, because it was so much better than the others, it could. We’ll see what happens to the sandbox when MSN gets it together and offers some competition such as Yahoo/Ink can’t seem able to do.
Have any of the sharp minds here ever done a study as to how the length and keywords most effected by the sandbox correlate to Adword revenues? Run a regression and I wouldn't be suprised to find some patterns (provided it were possible to collect an honest, representative sample about the sandbox effect from webmasters).
It seems to me that it would almost be corporate mismanagement not to take advantage of one’s privileged position to the greatest extent possible; then again that's what the Big Three automakers did in the 1970s and lost a lot of market share to Japanese automakers. Are current Google SEPS starting to handle more and more like a Ford Pinto?
In another matter, has anyone noticed that the sandbox begins at the moment that pages see the first green of the PagePank? I’ve had a couple sites début at PR5 and disappear from the SERPS.
I spend my time producing this stuff and Google spends its time hiding my sites from those who may be interested in it. Got to be something wrong there?
Well BeeDee, at least you know you have lots of company.
You know, I can think of lots of things to comment on about how completely ridiculous the sandbox effect is regardless of whether it is intentional or unintentional and how errant it is according to numerous business principles
I will just say this. I believe that anyone that pays attention to what is going on is in the future going to have witnessed what is probably going to end up being one of the greatest business blunders of history. When people are trying to dissect what lead to Googles implosion, it will simple be one word..." Sandbox".
First the Webmaster will just leave in frustration, for yahoo, msn and whoever comes along. Webmasters will put there optimization efforts where they can most benefit and so Googles serps will suffer. Joe Searcher will not find what he/she is looking for and adapt to trying elsewhere, Google's revenue will suffer as webmasters find they can get a cheaper deal or even a free one elsewhere, as the revenue suffer Google will not be able to satisfy it stockholders, Googles stock will drop to the point that exist shareholder demand new management, new management will be focused on cutting costs, this will lead to many of Google most talented going elsewhere, Google will then become unstable and the whole thing will implode...Game Over.
How was it Netscape got it butt kicked by Microsoft? It was simply because Internet Explorer was free. Don't think for a second that Microsoft doesn't have a plan already to win everyone over, Joe Searcher and Webmasters alike. I would even bet that Microsoft is looking at the sandbox problem and sitting back, lick it's chops. Microsoft never just puts out another run of the mill product.
