Google Serp changes

Hey Just wanting to get a discussion going here, and what peoples experience is on what seems to be a large change in Google serps. And any "solutions" that people have seen work.

Thanks,
-Flat4

Can anyone say links?

Primarily links affect SERP positioning... true. This is a test... What else besides links (we are obsessed with links) can affect your SERPs... both positive and negative effects?

Edit: There must be a broader based approach other than just links, links, links.....

True we are but we should be as they are the major factoring. Of course content can be very beneficial but then without links you aren't going nowhere with it. It basically boils down into one of those two categories.

But I take it we are still looking for other things....

So... the only thing that affects SERPs are links?

No I didn't say that. Would you like me to make a list of everylast thing that effects serp?

If content drives links and SERPs positioning is the direct result of those links... it can be argued that content has to be there, but it is still 100% links that determine SERP placement. True?

No. But without them you can't make it ;)
Hold on I am starting a make-shift post on some of the factors. Feel free to submit yours too ;)

You say "No" to the fact that it is 100% links that drive SERPs. If true, what are the direct contributors, in a cause and effect relationship, other than links that drive SERPs?

Hows this for starters? BTW none are in any kind of order. It is kind of a quick-throw-together. I didn't get everything obviously.

Title tag: Uniqueness, quality of. The smaller the title tag the more importance placed on each keyword.

Meta Keywords Tag: I don't believe Google places any value on this tag any longer however it may tell Google whether your spammy? Do you stuff this tag with a bunch of keywords? Try placing one or two of your main keywords in and leave it at that. Again no SE value should be assumed here.

Quality content: Quality content and unique content tend to rank best IMO.

Phrase Based Indexing: This factor has the ability to entirely prevent certain types of manipulations of web pages. Search engines that use a ranking algorithm that relies on the number of links that point to a given document in order to rank that document can be "bombed" by artificially creating a large number of pages with a given anchor text which then point to a desired page.
As a result, when a search query using the anchor text is entered, the desired page is typically returned, even if in fact this page has little or nothing to do with the anchor text.
This is semi-recent stuff. I wrote about it but Gypsy has a better article on it here: http://www.huomah.com/search-engines/algorithm-matters/phrase-based-bomb-buster.html
(I posted his url because I took the info about it from there)

Keywords-phrases appearing in body: For you simpletons who totaly missed that last factor here is the traditional. related keywords placed on your site. I believe being as natural as possible is best. Keyword density is not necessary just relevance. Google is/has factoring out sites who are ranking for totally unrelated phrases just because of anchor text to the site. This is called google-bombing. So in this case it is not just links that are effecting the site. Whether your site is related or not also plays a big role.

Age of site: Most of us agree that older sites get a certain amount of value. This value is not significant enough to prevent new sites from outranking an older site however it does help the older site. Newer sites tend not rank fast and if they do those rankings tend to fluctuate until the actual deserved ranking is achieved which can be less than desired.

Keywords in domain and page: Keyword domains have higher value than un-related domains. For instance webhosting.com is certainly going to rank better than fredssite.com or even fredshost.com because it contains a key-phrase without any added nonesense. It is targeted and short. Keep your domains short and targeted and try not to add anymore words than needed. Having a page with your keyword is second best but doesn't hold half as much value as the domain.

The value of a page based on its depth: How valuable is a page? How valuable is a page to you as the webmaster? If a page is more than 2-3 clicks deep it is arguable whether you have much importance placed on that page.

Content updates: Do you update your site often? I mean add new content, not remove or edit old content. If so googlebot may come running faster? I own a few forums and my forums get crawled night and day while they have less value(as far as links go) then my home page. My home page gets crawled less frequently only because it is not updated often. This is a personal site of mine BTW.

Primary subject of site: Does your primary target effect what you can rank for? If your site is about shoes and you create a page on acoustic guitars will this page rank based on the sites authority and value or because it is unrelated will it not rank? I believe if the site was related to guitars assuming all other valuings were identical it would definitely rank higher.

The relevance of a backlink: If some of your backlinks are unrelated there value will be dis-credited. I also believe if the majority of your sites backlinks are low quality/un-related they will be discredited even more.

The location of a link: The location of a backlinks also has a role in how much value is passed. A link on the home page will likely pass more value than a sub-page however I would take a relevant, quality link position on a sub-page near content any day. Links pages have also been discredited.

A HTML sitemap can't hurt: The use of a html sitemap can help Google get to all your pages and keep them from getting more than 3 clicks deep. I believe xml sitemaps create an artificial indexing when their isn't enough value in the page without the xml sitemap to get indexed. This also means you won't be ranking for anything. So stick with natural and wait till you got enough value to get indexed. If you don't you may never know that page is nearly valueless in Googles eyes.

Dead pages: If related content/pages can help one page rank for a term can those pages dieing also make that one page lose value? I believe so.

Lol...lol..lol..lol..
Ok Thanks I get it, not wondering about general optimization things (And I know SEO_AM will rip me on this comment )
But.......
I will be a little more specific. Maybe you guys haven't noticed this, but I am starting to see a large trend in our sites. We have sites that consistently have been ranking great (top 10) for months, now within a week with nothing being done to them they have been "kicked" down to 80+ on most of their terms. It just seem that something has drastically changed, but I am not 100% convinced yet and there is a lot of talk about this change from other web masters and "industry leaders", but I rarely believe most until I whiteness it myself. I have been analyzing a broad group of sites as to rule out other issues that might be causing the ranking, and so far there isn't an apparent single factor or anything to that sort causing this drop across such a group. Since I think that I might possibly be witnessing what others are saying I really want to ask some of the people on this form (Trust a lot of opinions on hear ..for the most part).

So seeing if anyone else has noticed this on their own sites, and wanted to here their thoughts etc as to why.

Very nice little article, vision.
Good resource for a quick run through.

Ya even I am seeing the changes. We can have a good discussion on the existing changes that are happening with Google.

I think adding to the points you have mentioned, these recent threads have been with the same theme.

1. Local Google Results
2. Mountain view visits
3. Is this a good practice
4.Is this duplcate content a problem
5. Curing supplemental results
6. omitted results
7. No cache link in site search results

These are some of the threads that have come to my mind which would help overcoming the existing changes in Google.

Any other ideas greatly appreciated.

Cheers,
Ravi.

Well, I am not sure I understand this whole mess

My main site which has held a #1 or #2 position for it's keywords for over 1 year dropped to the second page, and of course lost traffic. This site has tons of backlinks.

A new site of mine has very few backlinks, but I have submitted to alot of directories (as I also did with my main site), now this site has moved to the #7 position.

I can't figure this out, just doesn't seem to make sense to me?

Joe

Perhaps Google doesn't want it to make sense to those who are seeking to achieve higher rankings. I also think they like to create havoc with the SERPs every once in a while to keep people guessing even if links and the quality of links are one of the higher weighted factors in determining SERPs.

I manage a lot of sites. Today most of them have experienced wide swing in SERPs for 90% of their terms and most of those changes are downward. However the web site that is most established is actually experiencing a 5% increase in Google referrals for the last three days.

What does all of this mean? Your guess is a good as mine. Will I change what I'm doing? Why should I? I follow Google guidelines, I create good content, I seek high quality related links and I wait for my site to age and my links to age while I age. After all, doesn't Google really want everyone using Adwords and the search engine optimization business to disappear?

I hope to live long enough or find a way to completely automate Adwords because I don't want to be running Adword campaigns for the rest of my life! Besides the folks with lower labor costs will run everyone out of that business in about five years.