Yahoo penalty

[kivanc]

I exchanged link with somebody months ago. Yahoo give penalty to him due to lots of links. he delete all of links from his directory and he asked me to remove his link from my directory. Why he want this?
when anybody take a penalty is he/she want to delete his/her link?
Do I have to follow up sites which have my links or just my reciprocal links when I take a penalty.

[helenp]

>>>>>>>>Yahoo give penalty to him due to lots of links. he delete all of links from his directory and he asked me to remove his link from my directory>>>>>>>>

How can he know it was because of the links?

[soapystar]

maybe Yahoo emailed him and suggested he checks his backlinks on Yahoo and Google. It wouldnt be the first time. A cryptic comment like that is bound to leave webmasters scrambling in the dark to understand its meaning which could be anyone of a large number.

[billygg]

like soapystar pointed out in a couple other forums, i think the linking issue is per site. i know the company i work for, we have many outbound links on many of our sites, and i did lose placement on many sites, but those sites with links are coming back slowly, i dont think linking is a problem, unless of course u are seriously creating link farms or very poor content. my point of view tho, but im not seeing any linking issues here

[kivanc]

>>>>>>How can he know it was because of the links?>>>

I asked him but he has not replied my message. But If he do not take an email why did he want me to do this?Is he stupid?

Meanwhile its PR on google is still 5

[kivanc]

He replied at the and:

<snip>Sorry, email quotes are not allowed</snip>

[edited by: WebGuerrilla at 7:34 pm (utc) on April 17, 2004]
[edit reason] TOS #9 [/edit]

[cabos]

Massive domain name interlinking?

What a Joke of a reason for penalizing a site.

Yahoo itself should be penalized for that. Yahoo based on its own guidelines should also be penalized for massive duplicate content.

Not only does Yahoo run numerous search engines that serve up duplicate content, they have massive interlinking of their domain with other domains.

Now Yahoo says, you have too many interlinks. Well, many popular sites will have massive, legitimate interlinks not because they are link farms but because they are providing services to clients who in turn link back.

The real reason for most sites being excluded has nothing to do with the fact that you have too many interlinks, you repeated a couple of phrases too many times on your site, or you have duplicate content.

The real reason is that Yahoo has created an algo to screen for certain sites that most likely compete with Yahoo's ecommerce offerings.

In turn they waste people's time by saying, you have violated these guidelines, go figure out which one and spend your days fixing what you guess to be the problem...when in reality your site falls within a predetermined class that is being excluded.

Talk about generating good will :)

[cabos]

The most authoratative site in my industry now has a Yahoo penalty.

It isnt my site. They have been around longer than any other site and have more content than any one else.

My guess is they are penalized because of too many cross - links. The reason for many cross links is all clients on their site receive a link if they have their own site.

While Im in the same boat, it confirms the position that Yahoo is out of control with their spam algo. This site clearly is the most authoritative site in the industry.

What the hell is Yahoo doing?

[cabbagehead]

Could someone please define for me the "Massive domain interlinking"? I mean, if I link back and forth between my www domain and a subdomain, does that constitute domain interlinking? Or are they simply referring to reciprical linking? Surely they're not suggesting that non-link-farm reciprical linking is the problem (?).

[carneddau]

What cabos said is also what I believe about Yahoo. The guidelines and the generic cryptic response you get from them if you believe you have a penalty is just a smoke screen for them having dumped you for competing with them.

They're in a tricky position competing with their own search engine. You can't really expect the results to be anything other than a set of sites that either a.) don't compete with Yahoo commercial offerings or b.) have the money and power to have Yahoo in court if they were dropped.

IMHO

[cabbagehead]

Yeah - the competition thing does smell a little fishy ... but keep in mind also that the net result of this 'filtering' is that their biggest competitors are now at the top of the list for some of their key search terms.

Case in point:
[search.yahoo.com...]

A brand like Expedia, Cheap Tickets, or Priceline is way more competition to them than a mom/pop like me.

Seriously though - there's an interesting phenomenon - the top 7 listings for "discount travel" are the 7 biggest brands that I can think of ... not just the most optimzed. When's the last time you saw that happen. Just something to chew on...not sure what to make of that at the moment.

[makemetop]

Interestingly, all the top sites for that search appear also appear to be in Trusted Feeds ;)

Check the tracking codes!

[cabbagehead]

Ha! You're right. Hmm ... not sure what the implications are just yet ... but that sure is interestng.

[Edge]

This makes sense to me... I have one key page which I use to sell my personnal consulting services. From this page I have numerous other related linked to it. I have a significant site with alot of related and semi-related content (I am an engineer and I sell engineering consulting services. All pages on my site are engineering related but, not all are subject specific). Since I am a consultant and wish to sell my services, I have included a link to my consulting page on vertually all pages. This does not seem to be a problem with Google. I have began to reduce the number on links to my consulting page. I think I am going to only include the link on the main launch pages.

Thanks Yahoo for the warning!

[sid560]

I agree with this comment: The guidelines and the generic cryptic response you get from them if you believe you have a penalty is just a smoke screen for them having dumped you for competing with them.

That is only conclusion I could come too after spending numerous hours and days trying to figure out what, if anything, caused my site to disappear from Yahoo. I am in real estate and I believe Yahoo does not want the competition. I have it from an insider, that may be the case.

[mbennie]

Interesting choice of keyphrase...'discount travel'.

Seems Expedia comes up #1 for this phrase even though the term only exists in the meta keywords tag.

None of the top 4 results have the phrase in on page text. Expedia also shows a whopping Y! pagerank of 1.

Also appears that cloaking is OK if you're a big gun. Run Expedia.com through the sim-spider and see what you get.

All in all, I would say Y! is shoving the little guy around and/or dropping him entirely so that the big PFI players get max exposure and Y! gets their $.30/click.

I thought the FTC said that you can't give preferential treatment to PFI sites.

[Edge]

An individual said to me yesterday "the only relavant results you get from Yahoo are from the people whom pay to be advertisers"

[IITian]

An individual said to me yesterday "the only relavant results you get from Yahoo are from the people whom pay to be advertisers"

In a strange way, this statement shows that Yahoo could be serving the most "relevant" result on the net.

In real life when one goes out, and the date has taken effort to dress nicely and even bring a flower, that shows that he is interested. Same goes with advertisers. If they have paid Yahoo to make one click their links, it shows they are interested in them and are confident of the conversion rate to be able to pay Yahoo's rates. Conversion rate won't be high unless the product is relevant.

Moreover, free economy dictates that some advertisers who miscalculate will suffer losses and will drop out of the program. Only the most relevant (and efficient) providers will remain.