26 replies to this topic

[Jill]

As Michael said, he (Matt Cutts) didn't make an announcement. He made a comment at a conference in passing.

[ChuckFinley]

Hi @Michael Martinez

I wish we didn't have to guess...

Hi Jill,

I believe what Matt said is (I paraphrase) "We usually don't make announcements in advance but, we will be pursuing over optimization....."

[chrishirst]

Well lets face it, it's not as if knocking down pages/sites that have gone "over the top" is anything new, it's simply a lowering of the trip from it's usual high point to a few notches lower.

Sure, it will probably catch some unintentional "victims" who have followed the formula advice of "experts", but if they followed the "If it sounds too good to be true" principles ....

[Michael Martinez]

Well, Matt has pretty much sung the same tune for years: make good content, develop good relationships with the Web community, and don't do anything to deceive people (or search engines). In my book, fair warning has been given many times and fairly consistently.

Just because it took Google a couple of years to get around to cleaning out the blog networks doesn't mean they were acceptable to Google all along. I have used a blog network in the past but I always tried to put good content on it. As time went by I felt like the only honest citizen walking through a town of thieves. It got to the point where I no longer wanted to put content on the network. It just wasn't worth it for me.

The people who are weeping and gnashing their teeth these days always had the choice before them: to comply with Google's guidelines or to risk being caught in a major update. They took the risk and they got caught. I feel no sympathy for them.

[Jill]

Michael and Chris are absolutely 100% correct!

[ChuckFinley]

The Over-Optimization Penalty may have hit today --> Google Update April 2012? Over SEO Or? ---> http://www.seroundta...2012-15023.html

[ChuckFinley]

@Michael Martinez

There is no way to justify having been in the Blog Networks and there is no way that an experienced internet marketer doesn't know that.

What about a small business that doesn't know the first thing about SEO? They don't know whether the things an SEO tells them are too good to be true. Someone tells them this is the way that it works and they trust them. Then, instead of doing the hard work that it takes to create the marketing program that will attract links, the SEO decides he'll take the easy way out and puts the client in a blog network, pays the blog network and pockets the rest. When it all goes bad, the SEO is out of there and the small business is left holding the bag -- the business and its employees are victims.

All I'm saying is that Google makes Billions of dollars on its advertising products. It's not unreasonable to ask them to communicate with website owners before they penalize them and there's no way to explain not telling them why their website was penalized. And, they absolutely cannot justify their lack of willingness to reach an agreement with the website owner, in specifics, about to how fix it.

Google has a Social Responsiblity, and it's smart P/R for them to exercise it.

Google is putting 1,000's of small businesses out of business and their employees will lose their jobs. And, all of this during the worst financial catastrophe the country has ever experienced (next to the Great Depression) ....... Good work Google, thanks for adding to the unemployment lines -- NOT! That says a lot about who they are. Should we, give them our trust?

[Michael Martinez]

I think Google has made a pretty reasonable effort to communicate with the Webmastering public. Believe me, life under Google's microscope is very different and much more tolerable than it was in the late 1990s when the search engines wouldn't talk with marketers at all (except for the "consultants" who were outing people to the search engines for money).

Edited by Michael Martinez, 17 April 2012 - 07:12 PM.

[ChuckFinley]

They have enough money to do better. And, it probably will make them even more money in the long run.

I just don't see abusing people/taking advantage of people as a solid long-term business plan. It's been tried before and has never worked.

[Jill]

People need to do their due diligence when hiring an SEO. If the don't then they get what they deserve.

[chrishirst]

People need to do their due diligence when hiring an SEO. If the don't then they get what they deserve.

And right there is THE bottom line.

And we have discussed this kind of thing before Is Google Wrong to Make Changes that Affect Small Businesses

Edited by chrishirst, 18 April 2012 - 06:47 AM.

[torka]

Beyond that, any small business that would consider handing Google life-or-death power over their business needs to rethink the business marketing plan.

If Google dropped our website from the search results tomorrow, it would hurt, but no way would it be the death of our business. We wouldn't even have to lay anybody off. We only get maybe a quarter of our web traffic from the Big G. The rest comes from a combination of other search engines, referrals and direct traffic (because we've spent a lot of time building our brand). And we have a LOT of other sales and marketing channels besides online -- direct mail, telemarketing, print ads, retail store displays, resellers, etc.

Putting all your eggs in one basket -- especially a basket you don't control yourself -- is never a good idea in the long run. Even two or three baskets may not be diversified enough in today's markets.

My adjusted for inflation.

--Torka