Page 1 of 5 123 ... Last
  • Jump to page:
    #1
  1. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    256
    Rep Power
    17

    A solution for florida update.


    Ok Guys
    I decided to share it with you.

    The Florida update is not about inpage criteria that is why you all making changes to your pages but see no results.

    google is fighting link exchange and PR manipulating so what is the best way to do that?

    Very simple, google by now knows how to distinguish between good links and bad ones (link exchange, message boards, guest books, FFA sites, network sites) so if you will have a site that links to some site but get many more good inbound links. You are on top. That’s why we see all these big corp. site on first pages and even more educational sites since they hardly link out but have allot of inbound links. google does not count links only according to its PR but according to a relevant content or no relevancy at all. As long as the site is not on penalty on its own. Marissa from google mentioned that “go back and look at who you linked to and who’s linking to you. If any of these people are using spam techniques, they're the reason your site no longer appears on Google.”

    This was not a mistake, the first part “look at who you linked to” means if you are linking to a site that has penalty which is an old criteria to suffer from a penalty and now means that if you link to a site that is linking to you. Second part is “who’s linking to you” you are not banned cause a spam site links to you but your are banned cause not enough good site are linking to you (good is a site that you did not trade links with that offer relevant contact to its visitors not necessarily good content to your visitor and does not use spam)

    I think that all link exchange programs will die soon since we will not benefit from trading links anymore but we will have to work again as before on content so other webmasters will want our link on their pages.

    Some of you will say ok lets do the trick site A-B B-C C-A it might work but google probably found or will find a way to find such spammy trick. Maybe that’s why we see a lot of spam sites on serps who uses this old method.

    Closing my post, PR was about how important is your page on the web, if you had a whole bunch of links you were on top. Then we SEO came and manipulated it by exchanging links, so google came up with an idea to find those link exchanger and give those links no influence on serps all together with its old capability of tracking old bad links.

    I’m going for bed now. And I’m sorry for all you guys who deoptimized their pages
    I wish I could come up with this idea sooner but I had to verify that.
    Last edited by asher02; Dec 18th, 2003 at 05:34 PM.
  2. #2
  3. Modsky
    SEO Chat Skiller (1500 - 1999 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    1,793
    Rep Power
    18
    Asher,
    Do you have any tangible proof of this, or are you just tossing it out wildly? First off I completely disagree with you, this is not why sites were taken down in Florida, nor was it only sites that have participated in link exchange that have lost rankings.

    In fact I hve client sites that have never participated in link exchange at all that are effected, also I have sites that are still doing well that have extensive link exchange, care to prove your point? I'm happy to hear the logic, but if your basing your comment on some snippet of a backwards comment made by a Google underling tryng to dodge a bullet then your theory will sink very fast

    Looking forward to your response

    Cheers
  4. #3
  5. No Profile Picture
    EGOL
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    9,689
    Rep Power
    2482
    seo guy,

    You watch lots of top sites in many different categories. What is your best idea of what has happened?

    "In fact I hve client sites that have never participated in link exchange at all that are effected, also I have sites that are still doing well that have extensive link exchange"

    This is interesting, do you have any ideas on why these sites came through this way?

    ----------------------------
    Here's what I think...

    Based upon the limited number of sites that I know closely it seems that affiliate sites and sites with low link diversity got hammered on some of their most important keywords. Giant sites with rich, deep content got off easier.

    A lot of folks will disagree with me, but I belive that what happened was intentional by google and that it was largely motivated by adwords income and partnership agreements with large retail sites. I have no proof of this - just what I think based upon the profit potential and how things look from the SERPs that I follow.

    Some of my sites took a beating but when I look at the SERPs, I think that they are better for the typical person who uses the search engines.

    ----------------------------
    In closing....

    I enjoyed reading asher's ideas and hope that others follow his lead by posting their best understanding of what has happened.
    Last edited by EGOL; Dec 18th, 2003 at 10:36 PM.
  6. #4
  7. Modsky
    SEO Chat Skiller (1500 - 1999 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    1,793
    Rep Power
    18
    #1. I dont think it is adwords motivated - Reason, there would be far to many legal implications (Whether enforcable or not, it is attention Google doesnt want, and there are far easier ways to Generate revenue in the open) Also, I dont think they are gaining any more adwords revenue from the miriads of DMOZ and Yahoo Directory listings that top the serps in literally thousands of semi competitive categories. Where is the adwords income in the directory and or DMOZ?

    #2. I do not think they have a keyword specific filter, I have stated it before but will restate it. the reason it appears this way is because the "Money" keywords are the ones that are most often tracked, most ofter reported and would be most complained about in loss situations. This being said the Scroogle data shows some degree of non-uniformity. This non-uniformity compared against a large enough sample size of non-money keywords I believe would yield similar results. Also for every "apple" that appears not effected and is used to argue for the money kw theory, there is an equvilant "money" keyword that is not effected, they just arent mentioned because they dont support the arguement
    Also because I prefer to think like a search engine, it would make more sense to apply a universal algorithm with the intent of improving overall serp relevance. (This is in fact what they have done IMO)

    so I guess I answered your question in short above. But let me explain further.

    I think that in an attempt to improve overall SERP quality Google has applied a rather drastic parabolic weighting factor that instead of dimished returns on over optimization actually lowers your Rank score if you go overboard in any of 100 possible weighting criteria.

    This algo has not produced the results that Google wanted, they have openly addressed this, it isnt a sorry but more of a we know about it and we'll look into it. Either way I think they ****ed up, and will soon imlement a much tamer version of the algo in order to produce much more justifyable results
    Webmasters who spend their energies upholding the spirit of the basic principles [Of Google] will provide a much better user experience and subsequently enjoy better ranking than those who spend their time looking for loopholes they can exploit. Google.com

    Real Estate
  8. #5
  9. Modsky
    SEO Chat Skiller (1500 - 1999 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    1,793
    Rep Power
    18
    Sorry Egol
    I just realised I didnt answer your "why do you think some did better than others" question.

    My honest answer.....I don't know.
    Many members are aware of the extensive tests I have been running against probably 150 domains of ranging PR from 0 to 8 and old established domains, and new ones alike.

    The thing that really has my goat is the fact that I can take 2 sites with VERY similar characteristics and IMO the KW are nearly the same with regards to CPC, Amount of sites competing in Google etc, and guess what. I do the exact thing to both with regards to application, 1 come back to the first page, the other is still invisible.

    More frusterating things are like http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...seo+consulting 121,000 competing Im #1 (I didnt try for this one)
    Yet http://www.google.com/search?num=100...seo+consultant has only 67,000 pages and Im nowhere (I did try for this one) GO FIGURE
  10. #6
  11. Jarrod Hunt
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    378
    Rep Power
    0
    Asher02,

    There is much more to this update then just offpage criteria. I have many sites that disprove your theory. I'm not saying that they are not part of the filter but that they are definitly not the only part.

    I put that on my momma :-D
  12. #7
  13. web designer
    SEO Chat Super Hero (2500 - 2999 posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    designing a web site in columbus ohio
    Posts
    2,997
    Rep Power
    50

    Post


    guys:

    what i can say...

    based on a true story:
    lets say i do seo in boston for sites a, b and c.
    so my seo site links to sites a, b, and c as client refences.
    sites a, b, and c also link to my site as the seo company of choice.
    and sites a, b, and c have some text...not much...that may say 'seo by'... or 'search engine optimization by'... or whatever.

    some other facts:
    as a result of this.....pre-florida.....when you did a search for 'boston seo' or 'boston search engine optimization' my seo site would come up say top 10.
    also....and interestingly so....sites a, b, and c would show up in the serp results for this same search....but farther down....maybe like no. 65 or whatever....and its important to remember...sites a, b, and c are not at all optimized for 'seo' keywords.

    post-florida:
    my seo site is gone.....of the planet....nowhere to be found.
    but......and this is the interesting part to me......sites a, b, and c are also missing-in-action for a the boston seo search that i referenced above.

    conclusion no. 1:
    the first and obvious point that comes to mind is that sites a, b, c were booted from the serps for off-page factors only. there is no way you can claim over-optimization for these sites regarding the seo keywords. this is not to say that over-optimization is not getting hit by the filter....i am just saying that you can have a perfectly good 'content' site and still get slammed. the only possible error in this conclusion is that these sites are optimized for 'any' keywords.....and this is enough to make a general list of 'overoptimized' sites that will get the boot. [that may be a long shot conclusion.....but i am trying to cover all the possibilities]

    conclusion no. 2:
    the other important fact in my specific scenario is that my seo site and sites a, b, and c all reside on the same server [same ip]. perhaps google is identifying links patterns within the same ip as 'linking schemes' and subsequently filtering these sites out of the mix.....even though in my case these are all very independent sites that have legitimate business ties that make the links a natural occurance. the identical ip being the off-page 'foul' in this scenario.

    question:
    anyone who has a booted site.....do you know of any other major commercial keywords that your site [pre-florida] would rank for....not top ten......but maybe top 100....more of an indirect keyword phrase. are you still showing up for this phrase now? if not then it might be surmised that your are being hit for off-page fouls like linking conditions...not overoptimization for any particular keywords. for example....lets say you are optimized for 'seattle martial art training' and lets say this keyphrase has been identified as a commercially hot google keyphrase hit by the new filter. lets say pre-florida your site was no. 3 in the serps very consistently for this keyphrase. furthermore....lets say that you also know that your site would show up for 'seattle art supplies'...another commercial hot keyphrase in google....you werent optimized for this phrase whatsoever....so you would show up say at 80 to 100 in the serps. after all......you might have only mentioned 'supplies' once or twice on your entire site. so now...post-florida.....your site is totally gone for 'seattle martial art training'....ok no big surprise. however....just for grins you check your ranking for 'seattle art supplies' and to your surprise...have vanished from the serps there too....not even in the top 5000. this evidence is based on real experiences. what i infer is that there is off-page 'fouls' at work here....not over-optimization. either link text keyword loading or linking strategy fouls.

    linking strategy issues:
    i am investigating two linking strategy scenarios that i feel may be prospects for google penalties.
    1. overlinking within the same ip [server]....a possible signal to google that someone is creating a bunch of pseudo-sites just to build pagerank.
    2. excessive reciprocal linking....too high of a percentage of your total links being those where you link back to a site that links to you. [link partner schemes]

    all comments are welcome.
    Last edited by relaxzoolander; Dec 19th, 2003 at 01:04 AM.
  14. #8
  15. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    77
    Rep Power
    17
    Sorry I've been off the board for awhile but I was busy getting ready for xmas - and for the google change - that turned out to be Florida.

    I would really appreciate any feedback to these comments of mine - they are not based on anything other than some basic business skills, 25 years of data processing and the odd six pack.

    Google has a pretty good handle on the state of the web, they know what's there - thanks to google bot and the mediapartners version

    Prior to xmas most folks are searching the web not for "what does this widget do", but for "where can I buy this widget".

    I also track all visitors coming to any of our 50+ sites and if they're from an SE grab the search term they used, very useful if you have cites that are cyclic (ie thanksgiving ideas)

    Also google now is very keen to look at non .com sites, i.e. .co.uk

    He also likes old sites - dunno why, but also seems to love fresh pages - meta pragma time stamps might help.

    Anyway - just a few thoughts

    Happy Holidays to everyone

    Cheers

    Richard
  16. #9
  17. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Weingarten
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    17
    2. excessive reciprocal linking....too high of a percentage of your total links being those where you link back to a site that links to you. [link partner schemes]

    Yep this is the right point, and perhabs exchanging Links with spammy sites.

    Because of all my Sites are still listed the same, without one i have used it for testings. It was an adult-site and i have used an automatic Linkexchange. It was listed on number 2 for the Term "Livecam". After Florida its down to ???

    I think this is the solution. Too much Links with the same Keyword and sometimes linking to spammy sites and gets Links back.

    I think at the moment PR is very important and to have big-Sites with lot of content. Then spread the PR with good insite Links over the page and you will see good Listings.

    For me it works real good.

    Cheers
    Firestarter
  18. #10
  19. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    69
    Rep Power
    16
    relaxzoolander,

    linking strategy issues:
    i am investigating two linking strategy scenarios that i feel may be prospects for google penalties.
    1. overlinking within the same ip [server]....a possible signal to google that someone is creating a bunch of pseudo-sites just to build pagerank.
    2. excessive reciprocal linking....too high of a percentage of your total links being those where you link back to a site that links to you. [link partner schemes]
    Regarding point number 1, I have about 340 websites from the same IP and all have a link "Powered by My company name" I am #1 for 3 of my secondary keyword phrases and #48 for my primary keyword from #16 but I am not completely gone! I have only 1 site for reciprocal linking (both the sites are PR5). Maybe that helps.

    Usher02
    Please let us know where you got your "facts"? My Main site has about 7 links to so called link exchange programs and awards nonsense in my footer which apears on ALL my pages " (I did remove them about a week ago to see what happens) It is still gone for my main kw's but rank #2 and #4 respectively for more detailed searches. Therefore I have very little joy with your socalled facts.

    Comments on this post

    • Chatmaster agrees : Good point
    Last edited by rojo; Dec 19th, 2003 at 02:40 AM.
  20. #11
  21. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    256
    Rep Power
    17
    Seo guy,

    I have about 10 site that were very well placed in major keywords before the florida update.
    All sites are commercial and offer totally different products or services. I do not use mirrors or duplicate content but focusing on providing a search engine one clean optimized site for each business of mine.

    After the Florida update some were gone and some were still there up in the top #1 as they were before.

    So I started investigating why some went down and the others stayed, I knew the answer immediately but needed to verify that.

    Before I will explain further I have to mention that all the site uses exactly the same seo techniques and methods (kw density, link text, anchor text, and blab bla bla) on in page criteria and they were all doing great before the Florida update. (they are all from the same father, hopefully my 2 kids are as well ļ) So I am sure it has nothing to do with in page criteria, which made it easier for me to understand.

    The only difference between my sites was that the sites that went down had link exchange programs and the outbound links were equal or almost equal to the inbound links. On the other hand the sites that stayed at the top who made me a great Christmas had very few outbound links comparing to the inbound links. The magic number that worked for me was around 10% which means I had 10 outbound links for each 100 inbound links. This pattern was consist in all sites that went down or stayed up.

    I did not want to believe that at first since I realized how many hours of hard work in getting links has evaporated and that from now on the only legal way to get links is by offering good content to other sites and webmaster which is not an easy as trading links.
    I also thought it is not possible because this way site that sell links will be even more legitimate but then I realized that google can reverse the idea and put a penalty on site that offer more outbound links then inbound links or can put a new magic number on how many outbound links it might consider as legitimate.

    It seems as f google would like us to go the the old days when you were not focusing on getting links but put all your effort on creating good content site that other site would find interesting, interesting enough to post a free link¡K..

    P.S The only way to prove my point is that each one of you will start to seek for free outbound links try hard (very hard) to rech the 10% ratio I mentioned before and after your site will climb up again to the top I will be able to say "Rest my case"
    After it will work I would really appreciate a free link from each one of you
    i
    Last edited by asher02; Dec 19th, 2003 at 02:35 AM.
  22. #12
  23. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    77
    Rep Power
    17
    asher02
    are you doing affiliate marketing on those sites and if you are di you directlink or redirect to them ?
  24. #13
  25. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    256
    Rep Power
    17
    Hell no...

    I wear a white hat there is no connection between these site at all I offer different products or services. all are my products or services.

    I know this a shock for most of us since the old days of easy #1 are gone....
  26. #14
  27. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    51
    Rep Power
    16
    Even though I believe that there are many factors that are being taken into consideration for the demotion of sites IMO the weighting for off page links/optimizatoin cannot be that great for the following reason:

    Off page activity is/can be completely out of the webmasters control and are open to foul play.

    You have site A, I have site B. You are my competitor.

    I could just produced thousands of spammy links on forums, chats, guest books and you as site A get penalized!

    How could this be fair!

    The new G algo must take into consideration factors that are in the SEO's control so if we are "naughty" in G's opinion we get punished!

    For every answer I come out with to a test I have completed, I get another 4 questions from the results!

    This is doing my head in!

    Happy holidays everyone - hopefully in the new G will settle down. (swap hopefully with "I'm praying that" more like!)

    SuperMac
  28. #15
  29. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    69
    Rep Power
    16
    Thanks Usher will do a bit of experementing and see what joy I get out of your explanation. But I still say, you must be doing something else right as well if G liked your sites that much.
Page 1 of 5 123 ... Last
  • Jump to page:

Similar Threads

  1. Solution forum for Florida update
    By e-climb in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Nov 29th, 2003, 04:01 AM
  2. An excellent article on making sense of the florida update
    By jman in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: Nov 26th, 2003, 07:16 PM
  3. last backlink update?
    By piel in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Sep 21st, 2003, 05:54 AM
  4. 7 /10 datacenters have update backlinks
    By SomatiC in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: Aug 14th, 2003, 10:59 AM

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo