SEO Class in Chicago, IL
Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Sand Box Theory And Pagerank Updates
Posted 19 September 2004 - 03:20 PM
Coul any of you show me some site with rankings for competitive phrases that were made sense the last update......I am finding it hard to outrank ppl with new sites and I think that is what has ppl upset. I would love to see some examples of say a two month old site ranking well for something competitive. My thoughts are that google is indexing new sites but not giving them the rankings that they deserve.
Posted 19 September 2004 - 03:38 PM
To think that anyone could just come in with a new site and rank highly on competive phrases is just dumb. If they could, then Google would most definitely BE BROKEN!
Perhaps that's the problem. Perhaps Google was broken and people could actually come in with a new site and in a month place it at the top for competitive phrases. That's just wrong if they could. That would definitely be a glitch in the search engine for allowing that.
I'm glad to see that they've put a stop to such foolishness.
Posted 19 September 2004 - 09:51 PM
look at it this way say site #1 has 2k backlinks and they are mostly related to the topic. IF you site has 2.5k backlings that are mostly related to your topic...we all know that you should rank fairly well....prob. in the top ten. Assuming your onpage factors are taken care of. Many top sites have far less rrelevantbacklinks so its not foolish for any GOOD SEO to have collected hundreds if not thousands of rrelevantlinks in 1 to 3 months....so why is it foolish to think you should rank highly....the answer is.....you will....you just have to wait for a PR update...maybe even 2.....Thats because PR updates are key to new sites getting good rankings on competitive terms. IMO
(ps...unless google wants you to buy adwords....why would they care if your site jumps up to top ten rankings in a few months...they wouldn't at all because if you get tons of relevant links/votes you deserve to be there just as much as the next guy. So I figure they are not ranking new sites on purpose because they want you to spend money.....or the index is full and they are taking forever to actually spider all the urls they have....the ones linking to you....and your own pages...so that it takes months for your links to give credit because they have to kick stuff out to make room to fully spider the pages where your links are)
pss i don't think the ps is supposed to be that long lol.
Posted 19 September 2004 - 10:04 PM
Don't you see that it's all done on purpose for exactly that reason?
Any site that comes in, and in 3 months suddenly has thousand of backlinks has most likely subverted Google's PR mechanism.
So now Google has found a way to make them not count. It's brilliant, and it's about time.
Really true great sites that *should* rank highly for competitive terms simply don't crop up over night. If they do, then Google knows they did something fishy to get there. It's great to see Google finally making people do real work to make real sites that EARN their PageRank. At least that's what I hope they're doing.
I'm sure all those who had their link networks are crying the loudest about this because their link farms aren't working any more.
Posted 19 September 2004 - 11:03 PM
Why should they care ghergich? I am reminded of one of my all-time favourite quotes:
Caring about PageRank updates is a waste of time. Care about things that matter. Like actually making a site better.
You only have limitted time to spend each day. Worrying about PageRank, worrying aboput backlinks and worrying about Google being full doesn't help anyone.
What does help a site is to make it better, in all senses of the word. Build more pages of content. Improve conversion rates. try a new design. these are all things that matter.
Google"sandboxing" sites is seriously in the endure category. If it is true, then all it means is that a business model built on free traffic (which is crazy to start with) just needs to account for three months of reduced revenue. If you need free traffic, and can't survive three months without it, try tweaking your business plan and creatively thinking of additional sources of traffic.
Worrying and caring simply don't come into it IMHO.
Posted 19 September 2004 - 11:33 PM
If the top site has say 700 relevant backlinks..and I go out and get 700 relevant backlinks for DIFFERENT SITES, which is the only way to do this...I should rank well. You see it should be a demodemocracyhad to convince 700 ppl of rrelevantquality to vote for my site. This system checks itself. All Google has to do is not sitewide links, only count relevantl inks from unique IP's and then....we have a little internet democracy going on that gives the power to the people...as it sits, they are pupurposely not ranking sites just to make money, all this does is make it harder for MOM and POP because they cant afford huge bucks in adword.
I think its such a cop out when ppl on this forum tell you to just make your site better and don't worry about PR. Thats a given who isn't going to make their site better with time...but if ppl are not going to get relevant links/votes they will never make it no matter how cool their site is..you know, I know it, and it does them a disservice to tell ppl that because its simply not helpful info. That would be like a politician who has great ideals not campaigning for votes...what kind of crappy advice is that..." Just keep working on your philosophy, never mind campaigning, in the end ppl will come around" right you try that..and ill go door to door and run Tv commercials. We will see who wins the election, even if you have a better plan, nobody will here it. This forum needs to start pounding in to the new peoples head to get links and optimize your onpage content, so far I see a poor job of this by the mods...who know this is what they need to do. Sorry I'm just tired of that lame response.
Posted 19 September 2004 - 11:47 PM
First off, you're still not seeming to understand the difference between PR and getting links. Nobody here ever says you shouldn't get relevant links. Never, ever. We say not to pay attention to the PageRank toolbar. There is a difference, and I really don't quite understand why you don't understand this!
Yes, we tell people not to worry about PR because it IS USELESS.
Getting links isn't useless, it's useful, and WE ALWAYS TELL PEOPLE TO DO IT, don't we. I don't know how to make that any clearer as it's been posted a million times.
I'm getting a bit peeved here because you are putting words into our mouths that we don't say, and I hate the fact that someone reading this forum might actually believe that any of the mods here say that you don't need to get links. Nobody says it.
Okay with that out of the way...
I absolutely DO see that this is what it's about, and I think it's an ingenious plan, as I already stated in the other thread.
What do you mean that this is what Google is not supposed to be about? How do you know what Google is supposed to be about? Google is about whatever they want to be about, and if that is making you buy ads to show up, then so be it. It's their engine, for goodness sakes!
So basically, you're pissed because you can't figure out their new algorithm? And/or you don't want to buy ads.
Do you really think they would tell you their algorithm? You may think you know it, and perhaps you did for awhile and it all worked for you. Well now it doesn't work, so find a new game. It's as simple as that.
What we teach people here every single day (and night) is you don't actually have to worry about those algorithms and if/when they change if you actually follow the long-term advice we give.
Anyone who didn't think that Google would catch up with the link farmers buying 10,000 links at a time is just not thinking at all.
If you do everything we tell people here, on the other hand, you will build up your links over time the way you're supposed to, and you won't have problems with the rankings, for the most part.
It's so selfish to think of Google as something to manipulate for your own needs and then to be mad at them when they catch you. It simply makes my head spin to even think that anyone who's link farming stopped working, is actually mad at Google for that! That really and truly takes some nerve.
Take their free listings, and free resources and build your business model on it then get mad when it falls apart.
Posted 19 September 2004 - 11:55 PM
In case you haven't heard here prior, it's not the number of links but the quality of links that count...
700 (anything) links is just a number - not a relativity factor. And why did your 700 links have to be different? This I did not completely understand? (wondering if 377 were the same links and the others were different I would stand differently against that competitor?) Maybe more relevant? Maybe less?
But why the huge stress over PR as the primary focus? I use it (PR) as a pointer, not as a primary focal point for improvement.
Just me -
Posted 19 September 2004 - 11:59 PM
For *truly* competitive keyword phrases, it has always taken longer than 1-3 months for new sites to rank highly in Google. That is not something new at all. As for thinking that PR updates are *key* to anything is silly. The PR of a site is what it is, regardless of what the toolbar does or does not show.
Google is most definitely indexing and ranking new sites. I have had 2 brand spanking new sites fully indexed (aprox. 1700 pages) since July 1, 2004....ranking well for lesser competitive terms and creeping in for the most competitive (of course, 2.5 months isn't long enough to expect to be in the top 10 for the highly competitive terms). Others have had new sites indexed as well.
*G has never ever shown *all* backlinks.
Just because they don't show something publicly does not mean they don't count it.
*PageRank is not being updated publicly for reasons unknown.
Again, just because they don't show something publicly does not mean they don't count it.
*Google IS indexing NEW sites and NEW pages.
There are only 10 top 10 positions for any keyword phrase
Posted 20 September 2004 - 12:09 AM
...as it sits, they are pupurposely not ranking sites just to make money, all this does is make it harder for MOM and POP because they cant afford huge bucks in adword.
Well then, how silly is Google? Gosh. I always thought they were smart.
Here they are, letting the big boys with big ad budgets get ALL the top rankings, and trying to make MOM and POP eek out .50 a click. I mean, really, when did they get so dumb?
If I were running the engine (and I was evil and only in it for the money ), I'd be sure to let mom and pop (who aren't going to pay me anyway) have the top spots on the first page. THEN I'd get those big guys paying me for AdWords.
The worse my free listings were, the more people would click on ad and the more money I'd make.
And here's Google, trying to squash the little bugs while letting those huge budgets off the hook... they aren't evil, just really stupid.
Posted 20 September 2004 - 12:12 AM
Can you quote even 1 person here that ever ever told you or anyone else NOT to work on building links? I am betting you cannot....It seems you so bent on laying blame for your ranking woes that you do not *hear* what people are really saying.
My guess is that you were told stop looking at the green bar, stop checking your backlinks, as these functions are "broken". They give useless info that causes nothing more than wasted time and energy for webmasters who should instead, focus on working on content, improving their site, and link building.
That is by no means bad advice....It's probably the best advice you will ever hear!
I wonder how your site is doing in the other search engines?
Posted 20 September 2004 - 12:14 AM
Do some searching, sure you will see that PR does come into play...of course its complicated...you can have a high pr from unrelated sites and it wont help much...but I promise you if you have relevant links and gain a higher PR than some other sites you are going to rank as well or better than them. To tell people to turn off their toolbar is a cop out and thats not putting words in your mouth you say that all the time. IF we want to have a great forum take the time to educate users on getting the right kind of PR so that they rank well.
Speaking of putting words in my mouth...."So basically, you're pissed because you can't figure out their new algorithm And/or you don't want to buy ads." Seems like your doing a good job of that.
Do you really think they would tell you their algorithm?
Umm agian...refer to the above.
So what is it that you teach people that is different from anything I have said (since i am pissed i cant figure out the new algo)...not seeing it.
Feel free to explain.
At least we can agree that google is not ranking sites on so they can make money as is there right.
(however, this will bite them when another SE comes along and lets the users choose the rankings)
Posted 20 September 2004 - 12:17 AM
"You only have limitted time to spend each day. Worrying about PageRank, worrying aboput backlinks and worrying about Google being full doesn't help anyone."
Posted 20 September 2004 - 12:22 AM
There is a distinction, which you apparently are missing.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users