Optimizing for Yahoo vs Google

[Decius]

Although the google news forum on WW has lots of info and questions on optimization, I don't see much of that here. Why is that? Is it assumed to be reasonably similar?

[WebGuerrilla]

That current focus with Y! is all about penalty removal and/or avoidance. It's hard to spend any time studying what works when all your time is devoted to understanding Y!'s excessively punative penalties and/or technical glitches.

[pleeker]

My opinion: As it's been for a while now, Yahoo continues to be very much about on-page factors (text, keyword usage, bold, etc.) and not nearly as much about off-page factors (inbound links, anchor text, etc.) as Google is.

[rfgdxm1]

>My opinion: As it's been for a while now, Yahoo continues to be very much about on-page factors (text, keyword usage, bold, etc.) and not nearly as much about off-page factors (inbound links, anchor text, etc.) as Google is.

Yep. I know how to SEO and do well with Yahoo/MSN trivially. *Including* off page factors. I can trivially play these search engines like a harp from hell. Google is a much different nut to crack.

[rfgdxm1]

>That current focus with Y! is all about penalty removal and/or avoidance. It's hard to spend any time studying what works when all your time is devoted to understanding Y!'s excessively punative penalties and/or technical glitches.

Really? I say no. Except for the technical glitches. Then again, this is a far worse problem with Google.

[CygnusX1]

I must say that I have an easier time with getting good listings with google then i do with Yahoo. I see much more spamming in yahoo then I do with google.

[2_much]

Quantity of inbound links, with matching anchor text. Heavier on-page criteria. Basically, Google 2 years ago.

[internetheaven]

I see much more spamming in yahoo then I do with google.

Really? I would have said the complete opposite. The actual results aren't much good in Yahoo but I'd say they have spam pretty much under control .... unfortunately their spam filters seem to destroy all the good quality listings too .... maybe they were "too good".

[jkappu]

Hello everybody

I have little differnet case, I manage some of my client site with SEO aspect and have some strange result in Yahoo and Google.

Some site do very well in Yahoo and not in Google and some do good in Google and not in Yahoo.

Regarding content, I too feel Yahoo takes onpage content rather or offpage and Google offpage to large extent.

Any comment?

Regards
JK Appu

[duckhunter]

I see much more spamming in yahoo then I do with google.

Really? I would have said the complete opposite.

Depends largely on the competition for the KW's. These two results are calculated separately. You cannot expect them to come up with the same answer every time.

[Vork]

If you guys could dwell a bit more on the nature of recent yahoo penalties that you're talking about - this would be immensely appreciated!
I have a site (quite competitive finance sphere) that's doing pretty well in google but can't be found in yahoo at all - serps look almost the same though - apart from my site's absence =(
It's not new, not spammy, well optimized in terms of onpage factors and has quite a bunch of relevant incoming links from relevant sites - in short, all that bunch that used to work for google before sandboxing massacre.

Maybe anyone has experience of sorting out similar cases?

Vork

[spaidermen]

Can you weight onpage factors vs. link popularity in Google and Yahoo!?

Would you say Yahoo 2/3 onpage 1/3 link and Google 2/3 link and 1/3 onpage?

Anyway, when it comes to onpage factors the two don't differ too much, do they? All the usual stuff like title tag, keywords at top the page and in filenames, and the like...

[pleeker]

Would you say Yahoo 2/3 onpage 1/3 link and Google 2/3 link and 1/3 onpage?

I don't know that you can come up with an accurate ratio like that. There are too many things involved, such as the competitiveness of the keywords you're after.

I've seen sites climb to the top of Yahoo rankings on relatively competitive terms based solely on on-page factors.

[CygnusX1]

Hi Everyone,

I feel compelled to give my opinion on how Yahoo works on any “mainstream” keyword phrase and many “middle ground” keyword phrases.

1.Yahoo will list between 1 and 5 pay per click listings on almost any search.

2.After pay per clicks, Yahoo will list a mix of the following:

A. Free websites, {this is websites that do not pay to be in Yahoo’s listings}

B. Site Match, {This is websites that pay $45.00 per page “each year” to be in the database, and then pay $0.15 cents to $0.30 cents to Yahoo for each person that clicks on their link}

C. Directory, {This is websites that pay $299.00 per year to be in the directory database.}

Not counting the pay per clicks, my question to all of you is this:

Even though there is suppose to be a mix of the three different ways a website can be listed in Yahoo’s listings {Free, Site Match, and the Directory}. Do you really think that the majority of the top 10 or maybe the top 30 is not going to be the websites that pay for Site Match and the Directory?

Give me a break. Yahoo is about making money; not making sure the playing field is level. Sure they will include a few free websites in the listings, but I bet the biggest part of the listings is websites that are paying to be there.

I have to say, if I were running Yahoo, I would most likely do the same. I just don’t like to hear people praise Yahoo and their search results.

No hate mail please!:)

Remember! No matter where you go, there you are.

[spaidermen]

Pleeker, I say let's talk about non competitive keywords, that are the vast majority of possible keywords combinations. (altough of minor interest for seo) That's the cornerstone. Than we might want to move on the "real estate" keyword scenario and the like.