Forum Moderators: open
I refreshed ...deleted the temp files...still different results.
I don't see how this is possible.
I'm seeing separate results on G and Y. Pacific N'west if it matters.
You think getting decent placement in G's SERP's is free? I'd love to know your secret! It costs us a lot of time and expense.
I get 10k a day (touch wood) from Google for free, and I am rated just 30,000 on alexa. If you design sites with users in mind traffic will come for free.
>>Spica said: It sounds like you are not in the new Yahoo index. See:
[webmasterworld.com...]
I believe I am in the index because if I search for www.widgets.com I am presented with my site and if I search on widgets I am presented with back links to my site, yet if I search on any of my key phrases I'm no where to be found in the Yahoo SERPS. This smacks like the problem I had with Google during the Florida update. Sounds like a filter to me.
I'm not unhappy with what kw 1 kw2 shows me at google, but I am just a lil' bit happier with what I see at yahoo.
They took steves advise:
<<<PFI has failed. Totally, and everywhere. Talking about some theoretical nevernever land may turn you on, but the facts speak for themselves and loudly.>>>
and switch back to Google also to make sure that everybody around here will still get free traffic like always.
<<<<anyway put widgets in Yahoo and widgets in Google see for your self the result.>>>
As long as Yahoo shows the same results as Google everything is fine.
I get 10k a day (touch wood) from Google for free
Since you're that good, can I hire you at your normal rate?
;-)
I get 10k a day (touch wood) from Google for free, and I am rated just 30,000 on alexa. If you design sites with users in mind traffic will come for free.
Our numbers and Alexa rankings are very similar. And, like you, I don't spend a dime for traffic (nor do I go beyond the "provide digestible spider food" basics in terms of SEO). Editorial content is what gets inbound links, search listings, and traffic.
Earlier in this thread, someone mentioned the idea of using separate algorithms (selected by users with a checkbox) to deliver information- or commerce-oriented search results. I've been arguing the same thing for quite a while. It wouldn't just keep commercial results from cluttering information SERPs; it would also keep information results from cluttering commercial SERPs. :-) But I disagree that government sites should be handled separately from everything else. Many government sites are packed with information that isn't about governing per se: e.g., information about tourism, medicine, agriculture, weather, mapping, or space. (Just because NASA is a government agency doesn't mean its pages about Mars should be indexed separately from Mars pages at universities, scientific journals, platetariums, or astronomical societies. To a searcher, a site's TLD is far less important than what's on its pages.)
I would have expected a better YST than this. Too google-ish.
Our numbers and Alexa rankings are very similar. And, like you, I don't spend a dime for traffic (nor do I go beyond the "provide digestible spider food" basics in terms of SEO). Editorial content is what gets inbound links, search listings, and traffic.
You seem to be of the same frame of mind as myself. I stick to the normal SEO practice of creating a lot of original content and gaining links. Of course I use advertising but the meat of the site is based on information for the user. Which is what Google does essentially. I think this is much more beneficial for the user than just commercial content, because it will be 100% about the money.
"made-for-you" customized serp.
Sounds too complicated for the average joe surfer, they just want results fast. Plus I think it's a much better idea to have a main search and then just customized serps as a side show. Like Google do with news, froogle, pictures etc
If I do a search for a specific location, specific state, specific type of product on G, I receive many many entries that aren't relevant to what I'm seeking.
When I did the same search on the new Y!, I received relevant entries. I've never PFI, but design content rich sites with relevant keywords. Matter of fact, the new Y! results were similar to pre-Florida G!
Since Florida/Austin/Brandy, G has gone down the tubes for providing relevant results for specific locations. Now G is definitely the search for techies, and not the casual JohnQ public.
Way to go, Y! Keep up the good work!
On a side note, Yahoo is now my homepage on my browser and the Yahoo toolbar has been installed.
MsDetta - Agreed! When you search on the new yahoo for location specific searches
I am from the UK so this may explain why I am noticing different searches on Yahoo.com to US webmasters. I guess you guys search with different terms. But UK wise it doesn't seem to be working well.
After the weekend, from the UK at least, I am seeing the same old doorway pages Ink/MSN was showing. To be honest it is a bit of a mess.
I agree totally, I am speaking from an unbiased viewpoint here. They are just plain bad the results in the UK.
Obviously the US must be different because comments such as ,
It is so good to have sensible serps again. Bye bye Google.
are laughable otherwise. Lets be honest and objective here folks.
(Well at least I will be represented in MSN, I think)
I would wait and see on that one...the new Yahoo/Ink database may also be used for MSN.
All other (older) sites were included and ranking in top 10 so dont see a need to pay the $39 - any comments on this?
If I read correctly from what Tim has said paying has nothing to do with the results pages from a search preformed on Yahoo. I think the only way to get into the search is to wait for a submit my site page.
Also notice that Yahoo isnt being biased to Real Estate Agents as Google has been lately which is great news!
Google's "bias" toward real estate agents is an attempt to weed out the spammy, templated, keyword-bloated web sites that permeate the R.E. industry. God bless them for trying, but they've thrown out the baby with the bath water.
Yahoo, on the other hand, has set quality control back a couple years because these SERPs reward exactly the kind of crap web sites that Google is aiming to remove from high positions.
It's not just about relevancy. Quality has to account for something. Someone call Yahoo and tell them.....
Yahoo with its vast resources and expertise could surely have really shaken Google from its throne and put a shine to its diminishing public image.
Sure, people are still using Yahoo, such as the yahoo groups, shops, and emails but are these people using Yahoo search? That's what I want to know.
But, I guess Yahoo is so afraid of Google that it pleads no contest even before the fight started.
What it did here, it hunkers down and consolidate and squeezing every penny from webmasters that it can intise using its registered users as a leverage.
But before you shell out your dollar, figure it out first if it is really worth investing to an old dinosour who couldn't see the future but just the coffer box in front of it.
Just look at Y Directory if not for Google PR nobody would have paid for inclusion for the sake of traffic. IMO, Google should penalize/devalue the Directory because it's not the traffic people are paying for but an attempt to influence Google ranking.
Some webmasters are just happy to see that their site is in the top10 of the Y search and quick to call this a better serp (as long as their site is at the top). Good for you if this gives you an egotistical satisfaction. I'm ranking in the Top10 too and also on some hardly used directories as well.
Bottomline is, it's the users who will decide the fate of this so called search engine not how good your ranking is.
Unless of course if you like to sit all day looking at the Y search with a wide grin because you are the #1.
I say more power to you.
Cheers
Yahoo, on the other hand, has set quality control back a couple years because these SERPs reward exactly the kind of crap web sites that Google is aiming to remove from high positions.
Exactly what I see in many areas. Spammers may be happy I suppose. Just wish people would post honestly about the Yahoo serps, rather than I am ranking well, aren't Yahoo great.
All I see is keyword bloated pages, which would never get past Google quality control.
Bottomline is, it's the users who will decide the fate of this so called search engine not how good your ranking is.
I agree totally Netwizard, all these people saying the results are great are just biased. It's a real shame because I would like an honest evaluation of Yahoo search. I too would love competition against Google, but it has to be of the same quality of Google. You must be mad if you think what Yahoo has rolled out is.
Trust me, I like Google, they do provide us with the visitors and usually rank number 1 - 5 with our 20 top competing keywords...but survey's have shown before, and my stats show me, that Yahoo is more the "purchasing" or "buying" type of visitor, Google historically has been known as the "research" or "investigative" engine.
I wish them the best in the year of battles, in the end, I hope to:
1. Have MSN and Yahoo compete head-to-head with Google, hopefully eliminating the last few year's search engine monopoly.
2. A fair playing field for all webmasters and search engines alike.
Ding, ding, let the 2004 engine wars start...
