Google results

[Vicki]

A search I just did at Google.com produced different results that were not showing up anywhere at www.google-dance.com on any of the 9 centers.

Is there a particular one that shows 'current' placement??

Vicki

[ihelpyou]

Welcome to the forums Vicki! :hi:

No there is not. Not at this time. Google is going thru many changes and the www will not be settled for about a month or so. It's going to be even better once things are all thrown into the mix. New spam filters and the whole bit.

We all have to have patience because there are many changes going on. I just a search and clicked on the number 2 link at the bottom of the first results page. After doing that, I clicked on the number 1 link at the bottom of the second results page to go back to the first results page. The first results page was different in the very same search. I simply clicked to go back to the first page and it was very different from the initial query.

So you see, things are changing. New stuff is going to be flowing in and backlinks will be going in and out constantly for awhile.

[Vicki]

Thanks. That explains why I have been seeing different results lately also.

Interesting time.

Cheers,
Vicki

[MsSearch]

Just an FYI...my coworker and I (on the same IP) will do a search for the same keyword on Google (www) and get different results....

by IHelpYou
I just a search and clicked on the number 2 link at the bottom of the first results page. After doing that, I clicked on the number 1 link at the bottom of the second results page to go back to the first results page. The first results page was different in the very same search. I simply clicked to go back to the first page and it was very different from the initial query.


I've been seeing this too...

[dvduval]

Yes, Doug. I, too, am hopeful that results will be better than before. I truly believe the update we are seeing is still going to be injected with backlinks. I understand that once all 9 datacenters have the update, the next phase will involve addition of backlinks gradually.

In the meantime, I am trying to control my urge to rant, because I have websites that are ALWAYS at the top that are suddenly lower in the SERPS. That's not good for me. I can deal with this in the short run, but let's all hope in the long run that Google will inject more current backlinks.

[Dan0]

David:

I'm seeing a lot of lower rankings on the 'big ticket' keywords with my Inside Out Marketing site, but the number of search terms in my logs has gone up, as have total referrals from Google. Maybe that's due to the amount and variety of content on the site, I dunno.

No reason for anyone to panic, though. I am pretty confident that they're doing this to improve search quality, which always seems to work out in our favor. :D

[rockynate]

Yep, I had a minor heart attack when I went to one of my sites and saw a PageRank grey bar! Then I remembered that it was only indexed a month or two ago, so I'm probably experiencing some old PR data for the site.

I thought I was booted! :shocked:

[Dan0]

The word among the dance-obsessed folks over on that other forum is that this has something to do with backlinks being dropped, and sites falling out because their backlinks fell out of the database, 'cause it's an old database or something. Whatever... I just hope someone wakes me up when it's over.

[ihelpyou]

Yep. You all are correct. Not only will the backlinks return over time, but new spam filters will be continually phased in over time as well. Look for strangeness over the coming 2 months or so.

It's a good thing. :)

[Bighorn]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
Look for strangeness over the coming 2 months or so.

It's a good thing. :) How can that be a good thing? Today, speed is of great importance. Getting weird results for couple of months is very bad. I think Google got too big. That may eventually bring them down from the #1 spot among the search engines.

Their index is close to critical mass. It's almost impossible to do some major changes to the algo without messing the whole thing up for several weeks or months.

Either they put their act together (find the way to 24/7 index updates), or they'll lose some of their market soon.

How can Google search results be relevant if there's so much difference from one to another minute over period of several months?

[projectphp]

How can that be a good thing? Today, speed is of great importance. Getting weird results for couple of months is very bad. I think Google got too big. That may eventually bring them down from the #1 spot among the search engines.
What is everyone's obsession with Google going down?? My title of this post is my point, and I feel that it is a WEIRD world when Google is compared to a Utopian SE, and when it fails against that model, is assumed to lose market share to SE that are EVEN WORSE.

Ppl don't change SE cause the results are funky, they change if the results are BETTER elsewhere. And that STILL aint true IM(not so)HO.

[Bighorn]

It's not an obsession, it's observation and opinion.
You're question (point) "Who's better" is very good one, but then, Altavista was a queen long ago...

[Curt]

I can certainly understand people not liking this bouncing thing going on and seeing it as a bad thing. I have personally lost some major revenue as a result. So is the irratic behavior good? Not for me and probably not for many other people too. Should we worry? Perhaps. I'm hoping next month will be twice as good as this month to make up for the crazy bouncing and low traffic.

It's been a crazy month for GG results and it hasn't been a good thing so far. Hoping this change is worth it in the long run—it's all we can do for now.

[ihelpyou]

I'm with php. I don't see anything real bad about the current results. Oh sure, some sites have dropped out.... the newer sites that had just got in recently.... have many don't have backlinks showing, etc, etc.

But the overall serps are still okay to me. I have newer clients with new sites who were in the index last month and now they are completely GONE!! But they ain't stressing as they know the scoop.

In the end, these new filters are going to be very good, imo. New ways to fight spam is always a good thing.

[Curt]

New ways to fight spam is always a good thing.Not necessarily true especially when the filters are not well enough thought out and innocent sites get the boot. I'm hopeful it will work out to the best. However, the way the SERP's are working right now, it's hurting my business and that can't be a good thing. However, as I said, we don't know what will happen in the long run—right now it's worrisome.

[ihelpyou]

Yes, and I understand that.

But Google does not care about any individual web site nor should they. They simply care about the users of their search engine who do the searches. They look at this as long-term. They wish to improve for the long-term. Short-term is not something they care about, so they certainly don't care about a site's loss of "free" traffic from them in the short-term while they are trying to improve. :)

Yes, I know that is harsh, but it's reality.

[rockynate]

This is going to be VERY good for ethical SEO.

The only sites I have that have lost traffic are those that had their PageRank almost solely based on reciprocal links. Just two sites. The rest have all experienced an increase.

For example, my free popup blocker (http://www.searchspot.com/toolbar.html) page at SearchSpot entered the index just over a month ago at #8 for the term. The last few days it has been at #4 for the term, even though the Google toolbar is grey on the page!

Just that 4-position move has made an enormous difference. It's now "above the fold" for the search and being downloaded like crazy!

So far, and I know we've not yet seen the end of this, so far the changes have done nothing but confirm the assertions made at this forum about the "right" way to do SEO.

IMHO...

[ihelpyou]

Yes, the new filters will be targeting the spam primarily. It will take some time to sort out, but I'm more than willing to be patient. :)

[cline]

I'm seeing what rockynate is seeing about reciprocal links. Of the sites I deal with, the only ones substantially downgraded in the SERPs were those with an above-average reliance on reciprocal links.

Anybody else seeing this?

P.S., thinking about it some more, it is specifically the pages that have the reciprocal links that are in particular being downgraded in the SERPS.

[Rankenstein]

From the reverse viewpoint I've never gone in for reciprocals, and I haven't seen any real shifts in my ranks...which could tend to confirm this theory.

[Dan0]

If they want to downgrade the scoring for the pages that carry the reciprocal links, to lower the impact of those links, that could improve the quality of their results. It's certainly better than penalizing sites that swap links.

[Chile]

I sort of agree with you, DanO :)

Although I have seen a number of my designed sites take off as a result of mutual link exchanges, Most of the sites are pretty strong from the moment they go live.

I believedthe relevancy of reciprocal links were already reduced (I watched a couple of sites shift from PR 7 to 6) a couple months ago. Maybe I was mistaken?

[Dan0]

Link swaps should add traffic on their own. If they don't, it's pretty questionable - not just in terms of ethics, but whether it's worth the effort. Sites that sell Viagra swapping links with online casinos, which we see all the time, are just trying to fool the search engines into believing that they have an important resource.

[Chile]

I wonder, would Google go at this hamfisted?

Example:

I co-admin and design a computer game technical support site, a computer game clan and fansite hosting service, and I also design and/or own a couple of fansites myself which are hosted on the network. I also general manage another site that is game related but in a transitional stage.

None of the sites routinely handle the same topics. However, our admins have been known to post the same network press releases from time to time (especially if a hosted site is looking for staff).

If Google reduced the relevancy of the mutual links across the board, one or all of these sites could go down in PR. And, while that isn't really a huge deal (content matters more) it still acts like a penalty.

[rockynate]

I think it's important to look at what Google says PageRank is: the "importance" of a page. When two pages mutually agree to link to one another, that means they are sharing traffic, helping the visitor, etc.

It doesn't have anything to do with the concept of "importance".

Now, PR is calculated on the thought of, "this site is so important that we're linking to it without any other consideration." If you will link to another site without any reciprocation, it must be important.

I completely agree with the change.

[scottiecl]

By looking in your logs, you are likely to see that relevant inbound links actually send traffic. Not as much as Google alone, but they add up.

Non-relevant links add nothing to your traffic. Why have them?

To artificially inflate your link popularity.

If some of my relevant links no longer contribute to link popularity, it really doesn't matter since they send real traffic. I'd still have them if the entire link popularity algo was totally removed.

It doesn't matter what the search engines do; if you build a site that is best for visitors, IMO you will still get visitors even if they all shut down.

What bothers me is the sites that will now hide their outbound links so that they no longer "reciprocate". Pretty soon, we'll have a web full of non-spiderable links and no one will be getting any link popularity! :lol:

[Dan0]

Losing some of the search engine benefit of reciprocal links is not a penalty, it's just a change in their algorithm. It looks very much like reciprocal linking can't "hurt" anyone, but it just won't help as much.

You have to assume that they won't take this too far, though. Lots of sites that are listed in DMOZ.org also link to DMOZ.org for whatever reason.

There are lots of good reasons why good sites would link to each other. Lots of sites on SEO link to Search Engine Guide, 'cause it's the way better than Search Engine Watch. Search Engine Guide links to lots of sites on SEO. They're not penalizing anyone for that.

But to answer Chile's question, would they go at it "hamfisted?" If it improves the user's experience, they probably would. They sell quality search results, not rankings.

[Dan0]

Originally posted by scottiecl
What bothers me is the sites that will now hide their outbound links so that they no longer "reciprocate". Pretty soon, we'll have a web full of non-spiderable links and no one will be getting any link popularity! :lol:
According to people who can grok the technical stuff, this paper (
http://www.stanford.edu/~sdkamvar/papers/secondeigenvalue.pdf) explains why that could actually harm the folks who do it. Microdoc has gone over the thing backwards and forwards, and I think he interprets it that way as well.

Basically, closed loops and dead ends on the web map don't rank as well as those pages that link out as well as in.

Some folks hide links because of the whole "bad neighborhood" thing that was brought up at WMW and elsewhere. The implicit threat is that linking to someone Google doesn't like can harm your site's "reputation." They can censor me when they pry the keyboard from my cold, dead fingers. If they don't like that other site, they can ignore the link.

[scottiecl]

Originally posted by Dan0
Basically, closed loops and dead ends on the web map don't rank as well as those pages that link out as well as in. I learn something new every day. Very interesting!
Originally posted by Dan0
They can censor me when they pry the keyboard from my cold, dead fingers. If they don't like that other site, they can ignore the link. I now have this image of you, ancient and wrinkled, in your casket, still clutching your keyboard. A guy with a Google shirt on is using a screwdriver to try and pry it free...

[cline]

If simple reciprocal linking (A links to B, B links to A = no link at all) is a now a wash with Google, I wonder how they are handling more complicated arrangements, e.g., having a 3rd site in the mix (A links to B. B links to C. C links to A.) .

[xtendscott]

We can look at this in a complex manner or maybe it is just a simple devalueing of links in the algo. Maybe let the content decide the relevancy to the Searched Term and have links links be a tie-breaker.

I have sites that have pages that were not highest ranking for their site and now they are. But over all, more pages have gone up than down.

[Dan0]

It's all speculation right now. They're in the middle of a BIG update, and a lot of stuff (like backlinks) still must be brought up to date.

[Chile]

Well, content is key. But, what sort of content then? I'm a big fan of good information. But, if listings are simply based on content, how will good information be seperated from bad information?

I wonder..... ;)

[stevew]

Soon after joining this forum late last year, and hearing the good sense that was being talked, I carried out a "cull" of the reciprocal links on my and my clients' sites -- over half went.

Since that time, I've politely rejected virtually every link exchange request I've received, on the basis of irrelevance, poor content, etc.
I've usually given a little advice, too. This week, I got an assignment from a small site in the Seattle area (I'm UK). You know why? Because I just offered advice without trying to sell my services. Sometimes, just helping the world go round can pay off (but that shouldn't be why you do it!)

During the current Google upheaval, I've observed a slight strengthening of positions (I'm praying it stays that way!!!!!)

My view is that, if a site is good, and relevant, I'll "vote" for it.
If it's a competitor -- I don't mind.
If it's the other side of the world -- so what?
I know many on this forum won't agree, but to me, that's "ethical" reciprocal linking. (Now hurl abuse at me, folks!!!)

[Chile]

you hit the nail on the head, stevew :)

If a site is worth linking to for the reasons you mentioned, then link to it.

[scottiecl]

Excellent post Steve! :notworthy

Doing things the right way builds trust, giving out information "for free" can drive business. It's all about credibility.

People outside of our industry are IMO, still a little unsure about the Internet. Some don't see the value of web business, others won't give credit card information because they have been scared by media stories or had a bad experience.

The "good guys" stand out from the rest. When people feel safe taking your advice or buying from your site, they spread the word.

When it comes to linking...like you've said. Don't link to some joker because they asked you to and will put a link back on their page. Link to them because their site will be useful to your visitors.

:thumb:

[Dan0]

Originally posted by stevew
My view is that, if a site is good, and relevant, I'll "vote" for it.
If it's a competitor -- I don't mind.
If it's the other side of the world -- so what?
I know many on this forum won't agree, but to me, that's "ethical" reciprocal linking. (Now hurl abuse at me, folks!!!)
Right on! I'll 'vote' for that.

[Orther]

:hitting:
I have read through this post in its entirety and understand that I must be patient, but I am very concerned.

My site http://www.StickersExchange.com has been #3 for the keyword “Stickers” for over 6 months. This site generates at least 50% of my revenue.

This week has been devastating for my site. Each day my page drops one datacenter after another. It now show #3 at only 2 of the 9 datacenters.

The others show me at position #598. Backward links have been chopped in half. I see that none of the top 10 sites for that keyword have moved in position except mine.

Are there any words of encouragement, or am I just out of luck?

[mrguy]

I'm a huge fan of Google and have been for a while.

But with this latest update, I have to admit I'm left scratching my head.

Several times now I've had to look on other engines because Google was giving me stuff that was not even close.

I really hope this is not the shape of dances to come, if so I really have to wonder what the landscape will look like a year from now with Yahoo doing their own thing and MSN probably doing their own as well.

We could see a much more even distribution in the SE market sure which in reality would probably be a good thing anyway.

Here's to hoping they straighten it out!:cheers:

[ihelpyou]

Me thinks you are writing and reading like elsewhere. LOL

"the sky is falling, oh my"

The SERPS don't look too bad to me. Patience guys/gals. Go do something else and take another look in about 2 months.

[Dan0]

Originally posted by Orther
The others show me at position #598. Backward links have been chopped in half. I see that none of the top 10 sites for that keyword have moved in position except mine.

1. Do the others that were in the top ten have this kind of backlinks list?
http://www.stickersexchange.com/link-stickers.htm
What do any of those sites have to do with stickers? Nothing. Okay, maybe a couple of them are about stickers. If you swap links with anyone and everyone, don't expect Google to reward that forever.

2. Google is in the middle of a huge update. This is not a 'normal' dance, and it's going to take weeks for it to settle down. Everything may be just find in a few weeks, or your site may have found its new ranking.

3. Google has been applying penalties for hidden text. I noticed that a good number of your link partners show zero for their PageRank in the toolbar, and several of them had hidden text and/or hidden links.

4. You also have hidden text on your home page, including <h1> tags between the <head> and the <body>. You may have managed to get a penalty yourself, or if you're lucky, they just started ignoring that invisible heading.

No sympathy here...

[stevew]

The answer is ... DON'T WORRY.

It's tough in the short term, but take the big picture.
This forum is for ethical SEO's ... the kind who are frustrated by the spammers, and applaud Google's efforts to rectify the situation.

As I said earlier in this thread, overall, my rankings this month seem ok, with general progress balanced by a few listings for one website dropping from top 10 to 100-plus ... out of the blue.
Again, take the big picture : if you're not "pushing the envelope" then it'll all come right.

I'd say that some short term inconvenience is worth getting a load of spam merchants off the index, and hopefully filtered out as they try to break back in.

Remember : NO PAIN, NO GAIN.

[stevew]

Just read Dan0's post ...

Well, with that kind of cr*p going on with your site, maybe you *were* "pushing the envelope"

If that's the case, then no sympathy here either.

Best to pay attention to what you read here, and put it into action, before you get banned altogether, eh ?

[Dan0]

The good news is that they're expiring the hidden text penalties after something like 30 days, so moving that heading into a visible area on the page ought to have some benefit in the near term.

[Orther]

Thank you DanO, this is the advice I was looking for. I think I found the hidden text on my page and have removed it. I moved my H1 text into the body. When you have a chance, could you take one more look to see if that was what you were talking about?

We are going on link patrol in the morning. We are cleaning that mess up.

Thanks in advance,
Mike

[scottiecl]

Some more advice you will hear around here:

Don't count on SE's for your business. If you get 50% of your income from this site, you need to be getting traffic from other places. You can't rely on free SERP's and then complain when things change... things are always going to be changing.

Do some traditional advertising and PPC as well as word of mouth. If your site is THAT good, plenty of people will link to it anyway and traffic will come from many sources. Do things you can control, don't wait for the algos to change and then be upset about it.

If your business was based in the "real" world, you'd already be spending a lot on advertising! The rules aren't that much different for online businesses.

[Dan0]

It's likely that all you got hit with was a filter, so they started ignoring your heading tag. Now that it's visible, and inside the <body> area of the page, you're in much better shape.

[cline]

I just noticed today that a competitor whose site had been removed from Google due to invisible text has been returned to the index. When the site was pulled from the index, they quickly fixed the invisible text problem. It was back in the index within 30 days.

[mrguy]

Yup!

The invisible text filter ban expires after 30 days. So, if they take it down right away and get crawled again, bingo right back in the index the next month.

Not much of a penaly for spamming!

[Dan0]

It's been pretty effective, actually. You probably won't see 30 a mere days on the second offense, tho.

[cyberbird]

Hi Dan0

I'm intersted in your statement that sites that don't link to other websites don't rank as well as those that do.

I've often wondered about this and the only personal experience I have suggests it's not true. Are you 100% sure?

[Dan0]

I'm not 100% sure of anything. :p

The "2nd Eigenvalue" paper doesn't necessarily represent something that's been implemented at Google. However, if it has, then closed loops and dead ends would not rank as well.

If you can believe the toolbar PageRank, and assume that it actually means something, here's an example, using the sites in my signature.

I have the website for my book at PR4, this page doesn't link anywhere except Clickbank. I have my article archive site flopping between PR5 and PR6, with links out to dozens of sites, and it isn't nearly as strong in terms of incoming links.

[ihelpyou]

Because a site might have a few high quality links that link to high quality sites, I can see why Google or any other engine would give a boost for that. The site might be viewed as a 'hub' site that always lists real good resources to others. That type site should be given a boost if they are not already given one.

[Dan0]

I believe the term they used in that paper was "hoarding rank," to describe sites that don't link out. Even if Google doesn't reward sites that link out to high quality sites, their visitors will reward that, as will the rest of the community of related sites.

[mvpcapper]

Good Reading....

Thanks Guys....

Really Calms My Nerves...

:cheers: