Printer Friendly Version
Email this thread to a friend
|
Featured Web Site Template |
|
Reflects user activity within the last 5 minutes
|
|
| Member |
Message |
underthecovers
Joined: Nov 13, 2002
# Posts: 209
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 06:00 am
>>Interesting conspiracy theory....google didn't dump anyone who has had >>active AdWords campaigns running?
Well that theory doesnt work
I have an active ad campaign and my site went from page 1 to who knows where
I will admit though I discussed stopping the adwords campaign as the ROI just wasn't there any more.
perhaps google has my house bugged and thats why they dropped me
If their worth $15 Billion they probably have everyones house bugged.
|
 |
DANXtendlife
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 58
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 06:20 am
OK everyone, let's drop the conspiracy theories.
Like Candy, I run some Adwords, and I got hit hard too.
And, for this conspiracy to hold true (that it's all about the short term benjamins), Google would have certainly programmed their algo's to make sure that sites serving Adsense were not adversely affected (afterall, Adsense allows them to monetize pure search results..not just Advertiser dollars like Adwords).
But, as I said previously, I am a heavy user of Adsense and I got hit here too.
The only thing that makes sense is Google tried to tweak or overhaul their algo in an attempt to make it better -- but ended up screwing up monumentally.
Everyone in the world can screw up, even great companies. In business, as in life, there are consequences for your actions, of course: during this time frame Google will certainly lose a bunch of heretofore users of their search technology who give other engines a try.
Because you can't change what has already occurred, the only thing that matters to Google now is how fast they fix the problem. I'm sure the problem is complicated. They have to make absolutely sure there is a problem to begin with (that is, the current search results are worse than they were before this major change).
All of us can see it, of course. But we are only a very tiny subset of the search result landscape. If we set aside our own biases, we don't truly know if everything everywhere is as bad as we think it is. We are merely comparing and contrasting what we see and sharing it with each other to see if the poor results jive. And then we are extrapolating those poor results to Google's search results en masse.
This is not a bad method...and really the only way we can approach an understanding of what is going on. But this doesn't mean our conclusions are necessarily accurate for Google's new search results as a whole.
Only Google will be able to determine that.
I personally believe they messed up and that results are probably bad across a broad spectrum.
If they truly are, I think Google will fix the results.
In the meantime, Google's reputation (which is everything in business) will take a blow, as will all of our respective search result incomes.
So, if it's true misery loves company, we all have each other to commiserate with at least.
Try to not let it spoil your upcoming Holiday cheer -- even if you have to buy a smaller Turkey this year. LOL.
Good luck to all of us,
Dan
|
|
ferret77
Joined: May 31, 2002
# Posts: 354
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 06:25 am
i have seen that also
|
|
excell
Staff
Joined: Mar 19, 2001
# Posts: 14504
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 06:33 am
Well, I have had a quick look at what is happening and while there are various factors at play... and I am sure others can see them to... it's looking to me that is something as simple as a de-emphasis on alt tag (linked) and more emphasis on on-page content (regardless of if it is spam in googles terms i.e. hidden field/doorway/duplicate info or whatever)...
I could be off track, but that is what I see.. a large tweak here and not a big enough tweak there.
|
|
bizresearch
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
# Posts: 3
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 06:43 am
I'm not saying this is a conspiracy theory, or that Google dropped anyone who had AdWords. Adwords have become harder to manage without a doubt. We've never been booted out from our Adword campaigns, because we've always had high click-thru rates. We have discovered AdWords caused sales to go up, but at such a higher cost that it was hard for our small business clients to justify the expense. I hear those complaints all the time from our clients. It is exactly why ecommerce companies often need to balance this expense with organic listings. It's simply to manage the cost.
At SES San Jose, we presented our findings for one client. The most profitable listings came from Google, over comparison shopping search engines where we paid CPC rates or inventory rates. Google called us for a testimonial, but once they found out they were organic listings and not Google Adwords, they did not call back. Now, it could have been related to something else, we have absolutely no proof. It is just something to observe.
I'm simply considering the concept that Google considers it a loss of revenue for organic listings and considers a way to get companies who have organic listings, have come to rely on them, to switch to AdWords when they realize Google listings have become a little less secure. It is a business issue for the client as well, as they need to ensure constant visibility for many of their leading terms, especially at this time of year. For Google, they will without a doubt see immediate increase in revenue for those companies that jumped to AdWords yesterday. I expect things to return to normal at Google, but when things fluctuate like this, I think advertisers will be likely to opt for Adwords during the fluctuation. When organic listings are restored, then Adwords are turned off for those terms in most cases.
As a company, you always have to look at ways to increase revenue and perhaps profitability. Of course Google needs relevant organic listings. I don't know that I find less relevant listings, just more content sites instead of commercial sites for some of our keyword phrases. And, I have not done enough research to qualify this across the board. It's just some quick observations we've made with our client terms over one day.
Up to now, we have noticed competitor sites with multiple sites, doorways, link farms, do increasingly well at Google. We have refused to reduce ourselves to that tactic, however, they do seem to work well for Google listings. If Google decides to re-work this algorithm because of this known problem, YAY! If there are tweaks along the way that cause wild fluctuations we can handle that. I've been doing this for nearly seven years and have seen a lot along the way. We've handled adjustments before without a doubt, but it is very time consuming.
The observation that Google was advertising yesterday at the same time retailers lost listings for 'ecommerce marketing' with the creative "Instant Online Ads go live in minutes. Pay only for clicks to your site", is simply interesting to note. I've watched this keyword phrase before and have not noticed them advertising before. I don't watch it every day, but again just a simple observation.
I suppose I have become disenchanted with Google because of amount of time it is taking to manage listings in Google. I much prefer Inktomi. Imagine optimizing an ecommerce site, which might take several hours per keyword phrase depending on the software the site is on, how the site is designed, content, corporate policies, competition for the term, etc. But if you simply subscribe that to Inktomi for $25/page per year (unless you're doing trusted feed) it is far more reasonable to begin monitoring results, creative, marketing and make sure ROI is occuring. It is very frustrating to have to request links from other sites, or create apparent link schemes, in order to get listings in Google which I completely disagree with.
I wish Google would get rid of its ranking algorithm that gives such preference to multiple sites, and links. If a major ecommerce company sells a well known brand, or product line, why should it have to go out and request 300 links from another site? Far better to pay a flat subscription rate, and stay within the rules. The amount of time wasted requesting links and monitoring wildly fluctuating results is far from being profitable for us.
[ Message was edited by: bizresearch 11/22/2003 06:59 am ]
|
|
joe524
Joined: Nov 21, 2003
# Posts: 6
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 07:21 am
You know, there is a term called "web-usability" and that is based on actual sales return of a website on a per visitor basis. If a small business builds their website around that concept, it probably won't have any visitors with present algo circumstances.
For instance, some of the leading companies in my industry started basically putting an order page (not much informative content, just service product names) as their main page allowing visitors to choose product, fill-in the blanks and go directly to secure payment page. Nine out of ten no longer show up, only one big one that has a lot of affiliates and plenty of dynamically generated pages although they show up in a broader search phrase that is not the inmediate one that user's think of, but there are over 12m listings on that search term. The ones I compete are 4M (singular version) and 8M (plural version) listings.
The #1 and #2 + 3 more additional listings within the first two pages in the singular and plural version of my main phrase is the same company with lots of mirrored cheesy websites.
Yet, on my particular case, I do offer content as well as descriptive links to more product information that may apply to the user's circumstances and finally on the third step - the order payment process. It worked very well for SERPS as well as actual sales.
Once again, in my industry is our main phrase a researcher's topic or a commercial business?
Does Amazon.com, Yahoo store, etc. put any valuable content about their company, a brief guide to their services, how to buy online, etc in their MAIN page - No, it you want that, you are going to have to click your life away looking for those links. They do not want to OVERLOAD you with information that may further confuse you and have you decide to go somewhere else.
The majority of people in this world want to BUY, they very small minority want to be SOLD.
Who do you go after based on the numbers?
The post 11/15 SERPS were achieving that ambivilent purpose
of serving those different options to both types of visitors although the cheesy website previously mentioned also figured in that equation, but I am sure they did not convert many visitors into sales. They only had traffic.
So looking at it from the user's viewpoint, are they better served now? - No Way!
Again, this applies only in my industry - It may or it may not hit home for all of you.
Until better times,
JG
|
|
2create
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 42
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 08:13 am
Well, I won't give up...yet. I still believe that if you have a good theme site with good content and relevent inbound links with no tricks, and you have generally performed well with Google in the past, things will be back eventually. It may not be tomorrow, and yes Google will take some heat, but I do have some faith that things will be restored.
I'm sure Google knows they screwed up so emailing them hundreds of times will do no good. Although I must admit this is REALLY bad timing with the new SE contract renewals/revamps coming up in January.
|
|
polarlight
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 6
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 08:26 am
Just some interesting observations to think about - say we have optimized a main index page for 'blue widget' and 'blue widgets' - like so many others in this forum, we've been knocked out for these 2-word keyword phrases. But if I search for 'blue widget widgets', I see the same results I would have seen before this latest database update. I tried this same test for a variety of domains that I've helped to optimize (including our own sites, of course) and got fairly consistent results - most of the 2-word keyword phrases were toast, but various 3-word keyword phrases created results like the 'good old days'...
Another note: Any 2-word keyword phrases that were well-positioned on any internal pages of our sites are still ranked just fine.
No conclusions here - just some observations about the current SERPs - does anyone else see the same thing at their sites?
I just hope this is all a bad dream and Google corrects their algorithm before next weekend. Otherwise, well - I don't want to think about the 'otherwise' right now... 
|
|
001
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
# Posts: 64
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 09:21 am
Hey All,
I posted earlier in this thread regarding my backlinks results...here's what's happening to me if this might help anyone get a bead with what's going on:
My backlinks results are fluctuating between '2' results and '9' results several times a day. This has been happening for about the last 5 days. Does this mean anything to anyone other that some floor sweeper at Google spilled his Pepsi right on the Algorithm machine??!!
Lee 
|
|
joe524
Joined: Nov 21, 2003
# Posts: 6
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 12:43 pm
Below is my conclusion based on my observation of our main keywords:
1. Sites targeting two-words keyword phrase got wiped out from SERPS. Interestingly enough they are still there for more specific related three-words phrases in the same order manner they were for the two-word phrase post 11-15
2. Domain name same as two-word phrase also dropped
3. Anchor link text same as two-word phrase also dropped
4. Internal pages and not index page make up top 10 SERPS (only one index of a cheesy website followed by their mirror site and another index of a big company w/ hundreds of internal links and cross-links of parent company partially using one word as anchor text)
5. News stories are in
6. Sites including downloadable .pdf format (maybe G figured is offering something free to visitors
G is basically converting Global Yellow Pages into a hybrid of an encyclopedia, newspaper and Yellow Pages. Again, this applies to e-commerce website's related keywords.
Anyone else relates to this?
JG
|
|
joe524
Joined: Nov 21, 2003
# Posts: 6
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 01:33 pm
G is basically converting Global Yellow Pages into a hybrid of an encyclopedia, newspaper and Yellow Pages. Again, this applies to e-commerce website's related keywords.
Based on my previous statement, College students will have a field-day now researching their essays. And those looking to buy online will have to dig pretty deep in order to:
find what they are looking for and get the best deal (if Big Mamma company does not offer it).
Any possibility that this achieves ultimate purpose of having surfers go deeper into SERPS and maybe click more Adwords? G can now offer more exposure to PPC client's rather than just first page as many visitors won't get past 1st pg. More exposure = more PPC.
This is straight from left-field, but if it were to hit home, would it not catch-up to G in a very near future affecting their credibility as #1 SE?
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that this is no tech glitch or algo test, final results may be slightly tweaked, but probably close to what we are seeing.
Please don't shoot the theorical messenger!
JG
|
|
davaddavad
Joined: Aug 02, 2001
# Posts: 928
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 02:06 pm
they did this last year around the same time. Their results become much more relevant after the christmas season. I would just call this their kill off all the relevant sites for 2 word keyphrases november algo. jmho
but this is all about 4th quarter earnings on the brink of an ipo losing our support wont catch up with the masses that quick, however although i am not getting my normal traffic from google my directory link from dmoz has been bringing in traffic and msn is now my main source so the people that are trying to find me still are just not thru "the darling search engine" but thru all the other engines. Besides once yahoo drops google their market share will be cut in half so if you want the big bucks now is the time to try an get adwords to bring in all the bucks plus it will inflate the prices for the keywords as you need to be in the top 3 or your just as lost as you are now. hth dave
|
|
DANXtendlife
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 58
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 02:07 pm
JG,
Not to bust on you...I'm frustrated like almost everyone here, but the postulated short term dollar PPC (Adword) gain makes little sense.
Ruining their credibility for the possibility of short term gain is pure lunacy, if not downright suicide.
I'm not saying Google doesn't have a problem, because even if the current SERP's were an accident -- meaning an algo gone terribly awry, there's is a price to pay.
Google is not knocking back content pages deeper just for the sake of having people to view more Adwords, and, therefore, make more clicks on these.
Google's one and only product is relevant search results. That's it. Without them, they are nothing.
If anyone should doubt this, let's just imagine a hypothetical scenerio: let's say all pure search results are eliminated. All gone. Nothing left. Just Adwords. So, now, anytime anyone types in a keyterm, they are served up nothing but relevent Ads.
Do you think people would still use Google?
Of course not. They would be dead within a week, and probably would never recover from such a blow.
The theory that they could intentionally be shoving back relevant results to people have to hunt more is akin to destroying their one and only product, and value.
In any event, search results I'm looking at seem to be going from bad to worse.
Google needs and will be punished for this, even if it was an "honest" mistake by trying to improve itself with a new algo. The fact of the matter is people who are using a search engine want good results, honest mistakes be d****d. They will punish Google by looking elsewhere.
Should these kinds of crappy results remain for too long, and Google may suffer irreparable harm to their reputation.
Remember back in the early 90's when AOL screwed up BIG time?
For those who don't, it went something like this: AOL used to charge by the minute when you went online. Eventually, they switched to an unlimited time model...which of course was excellent. But they did not correctly anticipate the tremendous surge in demand this would cause.
This, in turn, created a massive problem where almost 9 out of 10 times you tried to get online, you got a busy signal.
People started calling AOL "America On Hold" instead of America Online.
The stock price plunged.
But AOL fixed the problem as fast as they could. It still caused a lot of damage for many months, and their reputation suffered. But by acting quickly and addressing the problem, the company did manage to recover from that difficult time...along with its stock price which went on to multiple many times that over the years.
So, Google screwed up. And, from the looks of it, they screwed up big.
It's times like these that will show what the company is truly made.
-Dan
|
|
cabbagehead
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 532
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 04:03 pm
Excel, I don't think this is a simple de-emphasis of alt tags. I have 10 sites that were just on the verge of hitting the first page for their keyphrase and some already on the first page for the secondary phrase. Now - they're gone. completely....at least from those two phrases. I can still find them for a few of the lesser competitive phrases. I've run a few automated searches and they're nowhere in the top 600 and that's for moderately competitive phrases!
The only way that this seems uniformly explainable is some sort of roll back or a substantial penalty of some sort. There very well could be an algo change going on too, but my guess is that there's a rollback in the mix as well.
|
|
Pongo
Joined: May 27, 2002
# Posts: 665
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 04:27 pm
Whats a rollback?
|
|
unreviewed
Joined: Dec 07, 2000
# Posts: 6776
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 04:32 pm
I very much agree with your points Dan. Absolute power corrupts, however, the idea of some sort of "GoogleGate" AdWord conspiracy, at the expense of reputation, is not even something that Oliver Stone would touch.
The best advice going around right now, is to do nothing and wait it out. Thankfully come January, Google's hold on the market will be greatly reduced as Yahoo goes their own way. Inktomi is the engine that will dominate next year after MSN drops off Looksmart in the Internet dustbin.
In my industry, all 2 word phrases have been eliminated. I'm gone, and my competitors are gone.
What is left?
Directory listings and link pages that "do have" the web sites the searcher is looking for. I'm still getting traffic, but the "searcher" must first,
1. Query Google.
2. Choose from a SERP of directory and link pages.
3. Then, once the searcher arrives a page of links, choose one.
4. Then, continue the above process to perform comparison shopping.
|
|
excell
Staff
Joined: Mar 19, 2001
# Posts: 14504
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 04:53 pm
hmm.. I think you are right cabbagehead... ! sorry
I am seeing lots of interesting things the more I look, don't think I'll try to jump to any conclusions again any time real soon
|
|
excell
Staff
Joined: Mar 19, 2001
# Posts: 14504
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 04:58 pm
Google is inserting a comma inbetween text in the snippet where it thinks the punctuation is incorrect??? Goodness, I've never seen that before!
|
|
joe524
Joined: Nov 21, 2003
# Posts: 6
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 09:06 pm
From all of the intelligence I have gathered from different sources and been able to compute with a 2kb human mind, here is what I firmly believe is going on:
Those of us affected that had their site "dropped" in competitive terms were ranked in the first 20 SERPS for those same highly competitive kw phrases post 11-15
Why? - We didn't Spam, but we overly optimized even though it was within SEO ethics. In a less offensive way, it was an educated and clean manipulation of SERPS.
The game rules have changed and so have some of the players and I think they are here to stay. If I am right, future SEO will be merely web design and copywriting with Google, not the other SE's, yet.
This beast does not want to be tamed. Plain and simple.
Whether Google remains #1 SE remains to be seen. This has been a very bold and aggresive move. It may either push them thru the stratosphere or come back to haunt them and send some creative programmers to Siberia. Only time will tell with their ongoing competition and changes in the SE world. But until then, we must adapt or look for a new line of business in the brick-and-mortar world......
I hope I'm wrong.
JG
|
|
Bry
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
# Posts: 207
|
Posted: 11/22/2003 10:01 pm
Google is inserting a comma inbetween text in the snippet where it thinks the punctuation is incorrect??? Goodness, I've never seen that before!
Excell, where did you see that?
|
|
You are not permitted to post messages in this forum or topic, because of one or more of the following reasons:
- You have not yet logged in, or registered properly as a member
- You are a member, but no longer have posting rights.
- This is a private forum, for which you do not have permissions.
If you are a recent member, it's possible that you simply have not yet confirmed your account. Please
check your email for a message entitled 'JimWorld Forums: Confirm Your Account' and follow the instructions
contained within.
If you cannot find this message, click here to Re-Send it.
|
If you are still experiencing problem, please read the
Login Assistance
Article for some advice on what may be causing your login not to work properly.
|
Switch to Advanced Editor and ...
Create a New Topic
or Reply to this Thread
|
|
