castlebooks
Joined: Apr 23, 2004
# Posts: 5
|
Posted: 05/04/2004 11:54 am
I went through 8 of my sites and looked at everything -- DMOZ (yes and no), New or Old domain, hidden text (yes and no), number of pages (10 - 50), page rank (3 - 6), top 5 results and first page results and the only common thread is filtered results --
keyword keyword
results are different to
keyword keyword -kjjkkjkj
none of the sites rank on the first page with filtered results except one which is a bona fide authority on the subject and 6 years old.
|
 |
Mr Creosote
Joined: Sep 10, 2002
# Posts: 95
|
Posted: 05/11/2004 07:20 am
When people talk about established sites are they talking established in the SERPs or just established online (being around a long time)?
For example;
I have a potential client in need of SEO, whose site is PageRank 5 but nowhere in the SERPs. The site has been around for over a year (Established).
Do you think it will be penalised as the new sites have been experiencing?
Established sites mean in the top 30 for a search term or just been around for a while?
|
|
jtatcu
Joined: May 06, 2004
# Posts: 11
|
Posted: 05/11/2004 02:31 pm
from my knowledge, google wants to make certain that the site is reputable and is continuing to update its content. even sites that are in a 'sand box' still get visit by the googlebot checking the server logs to see if new content is there. so if your site is already past that stage, its probably time to start refreshing your content daily and see if that will work
|
|
scottfla
Joined: Feb 26, 2004
# Posts: 354
|
Posted: 05/11/2004 03:28 pm
jtatcu: I've been looking at this and IMO it's just time. 2-3 mos no matter what you do. I just had one get out and when it did, it really did. One of the JWGuides had the perfect solution, it just gives you time to build content and perfect your presentation.
Mr Creosote: This just refers to brand new sites. If your pages were indexed by Google before Feb. this shouldn't be a factor.
|
|
88sahara
Joined: Feb 17, 2000
# Posts: 617
|
Posted: 05/11/2004 08:28 pm
Did you all find that the homepage got in before the others? or did all of your pages come in at the same time?
|
|
silentbob
Joined: Mar 14, 2004
# Posts: 6
|
Posted: 05/12/2004 02:45 am
I've been in the 'sandbox'.
My main site went from PR0 to PR5 in february and starting ranking really well. A few days later it plummeted (I guess into the 'sandbox'). On saturday it came out of the sandbox and my site now ranks #1 for about 60% of the main keyphrases in our industry.
I dont think its fully out of the sandbox though as it still doesnt rank as high as it does with the 8 parameters (-adsf -asdf etc.. - which is supposed to show the results with out the sandbox filter). For the main search term in our industry we went to #8, but today have dropped back to about 50ish. With the parameters we are #2.
Part of the theory suggests that it may be the links rather than the site which are 'sandboxed'. So a link only counts once its a set amount of time old. This could account for my partial exit from the sandbox.
|
|
scottfla
Joined: Feb 26, 2004
# Posts: 354
|
Posted: 05/12/2004 04:13 am
"Did you all find that the homepage got in before the others? or did all of your pages come in at the same time?"
My experience was that supporting pages would come up for obscure terms right away. Then after the 3 mos. within one weekend all pages started popping up.
As silentbob said, I could see PR and back links growing during the process, but absolutely no SERP's.
|
|
jtatcu
Joined: May 06, 2004
# Posts: 11
|
Posted: 05/12/2004 07:49 am
thank you very much, silent bob... i never thought of it as the linnks being in the sandbox as oppossed to the url.... this way google prevents link buying and farming, even though there might be legit incoming links from dmoz and the like. it still could possibly be that during the sandbox time, your PR and serps might be affacted if they arent being updated. let me know.
|
|
jtatcu
Joined: May 06, 2004
# Posts: 11
|
Posted: 05/12/2004 07:53 am
thank you very much, silent bob... i never thought of it as the linnks being in the sandbox as oppossed to the url.... this way google prevents link buying and farming, even though there might be legit incoming links from dmoz and the like. it still could possibly be that during the sandbox time, your PR and serps might be affacted if they arent being updated. let me know.
|
|
Rezac
Joined: Jan 25, 2004
# Posts: 817
|
Posted: 05/13/2004 03:23 pm
OK has anyone had keyterms not drop off, but like move from page one to , say page seven. Taken that page, tweaked it, and regained position? Anyone had that happen?
|
|
shehateme
Joined: Apr 21, 2004
# Posts: 153
|
Posted: 05/15/2004 11:03 am
Today one of my site showed up for my main term at #55. This may not seem like a big deal until you understand that more than 15 million results show for this ultra competitive term. Here is what I am starting to think. Google instead of actually penalizing new sites, is actually some how determining the age of the links to your site or the age of the site linking to you before they give the links much weight. The reason I think this is because the site was up for a few months before I actually started promoting it. I think what G may be trying to stop people from buying a bunch of domains and crosslinking, Google Bombing, etc... Therefore my GUESS is that the newer the links or site that links to you the longer it will take your site to show.
|
|
hexed
Joined: Apr 21, 2004
# Posts: 8
|
Posted: 05/18/2004 01:49 am
Here's the rundown:
1. The freshbot will allow pages with un-competitive search terms to rise to the top very quickly for 2 weeks or so. This is mainly implemented for news articles, etc. When CNN releases a new news article, people can find it at the top of the SERPs very easily.
2. After 2 weeks, the site's ranking is dampened with a factor of around 0.05.
3. Each rolling SERP update increases the factor by about 1%-2%.
4. Each major 3 week Google update increases the factor by around 15%.
After about 6 months, you have passed through the passage of rites and your site will be ranked properly.
Also: Lets not confuse the sandbox with the dampening system.
Hexed
|
|
shehateme
Joined: Apr 21, 2004
# Posts: 153
|
Posted: 05/18/2004 03:32 pm
Hexed,
That sounds like a reasonable theory that definitely makes sense. How sure are you about it?
|
|
88sahara
Joined: Feb 17, 2000
# Posts: 617
|
Posted: 05/18/2004 03:40 pm
she...I like your theory best, I am not familiar with dampening, and factors, but I am seeing some of what you are saying on many of my newer sites.
|
|
vahine
Joined: Dec 11, 2003
# Posts: 13
|
Posted: 05/18/2004 08:34 pm
Hi,
I read all the post and I have been seeing that all my new sites are taking months to be truly ranked in Google but I have found that Yahoo ranking my new sites alot faster than google. Also, yahoo has spidered my entire site much quicker than google since they have started using their own robot. Also with my new sites google takes much longer to update their cache then yahoo.
Has anybody had the same experience? and or reasons why.
Vahine
|
|
