Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  • Jump to page:
    #1
  1. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    373
    Rep Power
    361

    Thoughts on CTR being a ranking factor?


    Through logic, I assume CTR and Dwell time would be a ranking factor - if Google could pull it off. Up to now, I've mostly seen people say "it is" or "it isn't" with little to back their opinions up, especially in the "it is" side of thinking.

    I was just wondering, from experience ranking your client's sites - or maybe your own experiments, if anyone has any knowledge they'd like to share? Or even better, evidence.

    I've seen the experiment from Rand at Moz, where he tweeted to tell people to click on his result which increased CTR, his ranking did end up increasing drastically; but with such an experiment you'd think it would've maybe got linked back too etc, so I'm not too sure how reliable this is.

    I know this can become quite a heated debate, but I'd just like to see some form of evidence as I'm still on the fence
    Last edited by matt1966; Dec 29th, 2017 at 12:21 AM.
    - Helpful SEO guide

    Yorkshire tea will probably answer your question...
  2. #2
  3. Digital Marketing
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    7,383
    Rep Power
    5077
    Great question. Some will say no because Google says so (lol). Some will say yes because it just makes sense. I say probably, because Google measures and assigns scores for it. They obviously can use it, to think they don't is a stretch.

    It really doesn't matter to a true online marketing professional though does it? You want a successful web presence that converts right? Work to improve CTR and engagement signals and you'll be golden either way.

    Comments on this post

    • matt1966 agrees
  4. #3
  5. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    373
    Rep Power
    361
    It really doesn't matter to a true online marketing professional though does it? You want a successful web presence that converts right? Work to improve CTR and engagement signals and you'll be golden either way.
    Totally agree
  6. #4
  7. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    337
    Rep Power
    709
    Let me see if I've got this right...

    A. You don't believe all the Google people who have said consistently for years that G does not use CTR or other "engagement" signals in its ranking algo. (One reason given is that they do not improve SERP results.)

    B. You believe Fishkin's "experiment" which said that sometimes he saw a boost in page rankings that lasted a day or two.

    A few questions about your ensuing CTR SEO implementation program...

    1. How do you propose to implement this CTR tactic? Are you going to hire a bunch of Uni students to click a thousand SERP links per day?

    2. How will you know if the paid "clickers" have actually clicked their daily quota of links?

    3. Will you tell your clients you are going to spend their money on SEO tactics that G says doesn't work?

    4. Are you going to tell your clients that implementing this SEO tactic may incur a manual ranking penalty
    on their site for trying to "game" G's search results?

    5. Do you offer any guarantee to your clients to undo any G penalty that may ensue from this tactic?

    Originally Posted by KernelPanic
    It really doesn't matter to a true online marketing professional though does it? You want a successful web presence that converts right? Work to improve CTR and engagement signals and you'll be golden either way.
    IMHO, it actually does matter to an online marketing professional.

    If your client's page is not on the first page of search results, please explain to us how CTR or any other of the non-measurable engagement signals you believe exist can have any impact on conversion rates?
    Last edited by JohnAimit; Dec 31st, 2017 at 04:57 AM.
  8. #5
  9. Entrepreneur
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New Delhi India
    Posts
    3,368
    Rep Power
    1104
    If your client's page is not on the first page of search results, please explain to us how CTR or any other of the non-measurable engagement signals you believe exist can have any impact on conversion rates?
    I have seen in my previous experiences when I was working with two of my client those have similar keywords with different domain their main keywords were Umbrella company and IT Contractor. Both keywords are being ranked 23 & 1st for IT Contractor (1st site)and 21 and 3rd for UK Contractor (2nd site) with different landing pages and snippets. We realized that we were getting more conversion with the keywords those were not top performance keywords in SERPs of both sites. So better snippet works even you are not on the first page.

    If you noticed that Matt stated above he also doesn't 100 % believe on MOZ experiment but asking to share some practical evidence on it. John, I know you are retired from SEO, so if you have any evidence on it from your old experience then please share us.
    You do your business I do mine because you are you and I am I If we meet it is nice.
  10. #6
  11. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    373
    Rep Power
    361
    Originally Posted by JohnAimit
    Let me see if I've got this right...

    A. You don't believe all the Google people who have said consistently for years that G does not use CTR or other "engagement" signals in its ranking algo. (One reason given is that they do not improve SERP results.)

    B. You believe Fishkin's "experiment" which said that sometimes he saw a boost in page rankings that lasted a day or two.

    A few questions about your ensuing CTR SEO implementation program...

    1. How do you propose to implement this CTR tactic? Are you going to hire a bunch of Uni students to click a thousand SERP links per day?

    2. How will you know if the paid "clickers" have actually clicked their daily quota of links?

    3. Will you tell your clients you are going to spend their money on SEO tactics that G says doesn't work?

    4. Are you going to tell your clients that implementing this SEO tactic may incur a manual ranking penalty
    on their site for trying to "game" G's search results?

    5. Do you offer any guarantee to your clients to undo any G penalty that may ensue from this tactic?


    IMHO, it actually does matter to an online marketing professional.

    If your client's page is not on the first page of search results, please explain to us how CTR or any other of the non-measurable engagement signals you believe exist can have any impact on conversion rates?
    I'm on the fence, so I don't know - that's why I asked for any evidence or experience from different SEOs. As you say, it's very hard, even impossible to test therefore my only option is to ask for other peoples opinions.

    The experiment conducted by Fishkin doesn't seem air tight at all, I do fully agree with that.

    I do think however, many SEOs do concentrate on their keywords far too much. I've learnt this, I've gone from a good title to a more enticing title and my CTR has increased by over 100%, so whether or not CTR is a ranking factor or not, this has taught me something.

    Thanks for your input as always, I do admire your thought process and the knowledge you bring the the table, John.
  12. #7
  13. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    337
    Rep Power
    709
    Hi Prof Stan,
    I hope I'm interpreting your comment correctly.

    My comments are not about which search queries were being targeted it is about any search query result. It does not matter whether the search query contained 2, 4, 6, or 8 words. If a site page does not rank on the first page of search results for some query, there is no opportunity for any CTR conversion activity to take place.

    There are a couple of problems for folk to consider when trying to encouraging click-throughs from a search query results.

    1. Google controls what is displayed as the pages title and description depending on the search query words

    2. Google no longer gives the detail needed in its Analytics reports to assess what happened.

    All you need to prove this are a few Google searches.

    Here are the page descriptions for four Google searches and the actual content meta tag of the page in the SERPs. Search Queries were:

    • seo chat forums ctr ranking factor problem
    • seo chat forums ctr nonsense
    • seo chat forums ctr 20 bucks
    • seo chat forums ctr dwell time nonsense

    The SEO Chat forum page that ranked in the SERPs for all of these: Is CTR a ranking factor?

    Here is how Google chose to define the same page's description to each search query:

    1. Search Query: seo chat forums ctr ranking factor problem
    Description: "Now consider this, if CTR is a ranking signal, then if I buy 500k visitors to one of my sites then I should see my rankings go sky high, well they will not. Google and Bing ... IMHO, the biggest problem is that neither CTR nor dwell time help G's algo decide what pages answer the search query. All they will do is"

    2. Search Query: seo chat forums ctr nonsense
    Description: "Here's a respected SEO practitioner claiming that CTR is an important ranking factor. CTR and ... Now consider this, if CTR is a ranking signal, then if I buy 500k visitors to one of my sites then I should see my rankings go sky high, well they will not. .... Give us some facts or stop spreading SEO nonsense!"

    3. Search Query: seo chat forums ctr 20 bucks
    Description: "Notice I said "indicators of what may be right or wrong with the site". That's all I mean, indicators. A high CTR is good, so it's easy to assume that if your CTR is high your SERP rankings would reflect that. It doesn't and anyone with 20 bucks can verify this right now. Go buy 20 bucks of traffic from planet traffic, ..."

    4. Search Query: seo chat forums ctr dwell time nonsense
    Description: "CTR by itself can easily be manipulated – you can drive up clicks with misleading titles and META descriptions that have little relevance to your landing page. That kind of manipulation will naturally lead to low dwell time, though. If you artificially drive up CTR and then your site doesn't fulfil the promise of ..."

    5. Actual Page Description
    Meta Description: "Hi everyone. Just going to voice my two cents here... Hi KernalPanic With all due respect, that article you posted is over 5 years old. I think things "

    Are these quick examples enough evidence to support my statements? Anyone can run their own Google search queries to confirm this.

    So, how are people going to control CTR conversions when G controls each page's description and sometimes the page title that is displayed.

    SEO Chat's Analytics reports will be most unlikely to confirm that anyone used the four search queries in these examples let alone what page they landed on.

    It seems to me what we have here is a situation where the proponents of CTR as a ranking factor have no controlled experiment as a basis for their theory, can't offer any practical method for implementing it as an SEO tactic, they can only exert a small amount of control over what G displays in the SERPs and they can't measure what results may have occurred as a result of any activities they undertook.
  14. #8
  15. Entrepreneur
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New Delhi India
    Posts
    3,368
    Rep Power
    1104
    John, I never said CTR can influence directly organic listing I was saying why the same search query getting more conversions even the site was not on the first page because those have better snippets. I also know all queries could be controlled for expected snippets but if we work for some of our main transactional time then what is harm on that? And for better search visibility we can work on our different attribute of the site that includes alt, content, title, descriptions etc....
  16. #9
  17. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    337
    Rep Power
    709
    Hi Matt1966,
    You pose big complex questions...

    Try this video that partly revolves around Rand Fishkin's CTR activities and theory:


    The panel includes Andrey Lipattsev (Google), Aamon Johns, Eric Enge and Rand Fishkin.

    RankBrain is important to the discussion
    . It was introduced by G in Oct 2015.

    It was only five months later, when the above video was made and it seems all, including G's Andrey Lipattsev were still struggling with the best words to describe what it does in the search function.

    I suspect a reason for Rand's transient SERP fluctuations may have been a consequence of RankBrain rather than any CTR activity in the ranking algo. When Lipattsev says G does not use CTR as a ranking factor, I suggest folk look for alternative reasons.

    Limitation in the methodology of Rand's bit of fooling around include

    • what search queries were used
    • what G temporary algo tests may have been in progress
    • how competitive were the search queries
    • where the audiences were located
    • exactly when the clicks were generated
    • what aspects of RankBrain may have kicked-in
    • etc.

    In the video, (I think it's Aamon Johns) says the answer he usually gives to SEO questions is, "it depends". This is a problem for most of the "engagement" signals.

    Is 100% bounce rate the signal for a "good" search result or a "bad" one... The answer depends on the search query. If it is for info like a phone no., address, directions, hours of business, a price and many more, a 100% bounce rate may be the sign of a "good" page that provided the answer first time.

    Then there are all the false measurements reported by Analytics. Eg. Time on page. Analytics reports the time on page as the interval between two clicks on the same site's pages. Every site visit where only one page is viewed is reported as "0" time on page. It could be a 10 second or a 15 minute visit and it would still be reported as "0" time on page.

    There is also the inability to measure signals like dwell time and pogo-sticking. You won't find either of these in Analytics.

    You've also got people making apparently false assumptions about how frequently user search patterns occur. Rand Fishkin's engagement signal theories seemed to be based on most searchers returning to the SERP results. Pogo-sticking and dwell time would be reliant on this. Then he had a SE user survey conducted which was written up here:

    Mar 2017: The State of Searcher Behavior Revealed Through 23 Remarkable Statistics
    Author: Rand Fishkin, MOZ.


    "#20: What percent of queries on Google result in the searcher changing their search terms without clicking any results?"

    "I've long wondered how often this pattern occurs, and what percent of search queries lead not to an answer, but to another search altogether. The answer is shockingly big: a full 18% of searches lead to a change in the search query!"

    "#22: What percent of Google queries result in pogo-sticking (i.e. the searcher clicks a result, then bounces back to the search results page and chooses a different result)?"

    "Jumpshot's October data saw 8% of searches that followed this pattern of search..."

    I don't know if this survey caused Rand to rethink some of his engagement signal theories but here is a recent video he made:


    It includes:

    "4. What about raw bounce rate or time on site?"

    "But so long as pogo-sticking type of activity, people bouncing back to the search results and choosing a different result because you didn't actually answer their query, so long as that remains fine, you're not in trouble here. So raw bounce rate, raw time on site, I wouldn't worry too much about that."

    An older Fishkin article is:

    11 Aug 2017: Google (Almost Certainly) Has an Organic Quality Score (Or Something a Lot Like It) that SEOs Need to Optimize For - Whiteboard Friday

    It includes: "While there's no hard proof it exists, the organic quality score is a concept that's been pondered by many SEOs over the years."

    I.e. Fishkin can't cite any G references but he's happy to use the unquantifiable, vague and unchallengable "many SEOs" to make his theory sound more accurate/widely accepted.

    I stopped subscribing to Fishkin's articles long ago because I found too many were based on unquantifiable, vague and unchallengable generalisations. Listen carefully to his tone, comments and statements in the "Google Q&A+ #March (2016)" linked above. He does not use this tactic in the presence of his peers and an informed Google spokesperson.

    Fishkin's role is to promote his company's SEO tools and services. He needs to publish articles every week. Sometimes the more interesting info is in the article comments. Eg:

    "Aida_Granada
    I think that a high bounce rate can mean that your page might be too good. The user can find too quick the answers to their questions and close off the page. That does not mean that your content is not good, but rather that the is no more juice to it or you´re not prompting the user to click surf around for other similar topics."

    "Rand Fishkin Yeah - Aida makes a good point. Some pages answer a query very quickly and that's a good thing. There's no single, hard and fast rule for this, which is what makes it such a challenging problem. Usability testing the SERP and your ranking page can help, so too can looking at metrics like CTR, bounce rate, pages-per-visit, etc. But this comes down to a lot of suggestive data that you'll need to apply intuition and thoughtful analysis on."

    "Andrew Martin
    Like @David Watkins notes above, dwell time and bounce rate figures really only make sense when you're also looking at the page they refer to, and examining its purpose and its call-to-action. That high bounce rate could just mean that the user clicked on that big button and went off to your youtube channel or to your external blog - just as you asked, or it could mean they landed on the page and WOAH! that's not what they wanted at all. Similarly with time - a long dwell might mean that users, like i did on this page, stuck around and watched the video. If you can't determine the cause of dwell and bounce not being what you expected, then throw in some UX testing to see if the answer to the behaviour is spotted in click/scrollmaps or user journey videos."

    Comment not answered by Fishkin.

    So, if we look at the sequential history of Rand's articles, it seems he may be backing away from his previous theoretical position on "engagement" in ranking signals.

    Matt1966, You need to be very careful about the age of SEO articles. (That's why I always date my references on SEO Chat.) We are constantly learning new facts from Google spokespeople and from things like SE user surveys.

    A final list of references where various G spokespeople have stated that G does NOT use various "engagement" signals in its ranking algo:

    Jun 2014: Matt Cutts video. From SMX Advanced. (Ref. the 32min 25sec point)
    Mar 2016: Andrey Lipattsev video. Listed above.
    Mar 2016: Paul Haahr & Gary Illyes video. Q&A session from SMX West 2016. (Ref. the 15min 58sec point)
    Sep 2017: John Mueller. "Google: We Don't Use Click Data Directly For Search Rankings"
    Oct 2017: Gary Illyes. "‘Ask Me Anything’ with Google’s Gary Illyes at SMX East"

    Hope this helps...

    Originally Posted by matt1966
    The experiment conducted by Fishkin doesn't seem air tight at all, I do fully agree with that.

    I do think however, many SEOs do concentrate on their keywords far too much. I've learnt this, I've gone from a good title to a more enticing title and my CTR has increased by over 100%, so whether or not CTR is a ranking factor or not, this has taught me something.
    I completely agree that it is important to do all you can to improve CTR conversions rates. That is a real skill but it has nothing to do with Google's ranking of a page.

    Now you are in a realm where you need to consider the words searchers may use as they near the end of their purchasing process. It is about including those individual words on a ranked web page.

    SEs do NOT rank exact match search queries, they rank individual pages based on their combined ranking point score for the individual words in a search query. Most websites lose SE referrals because they don't have a page that qualifies for searche queries.

    SEOs who target frequently used exact match keywords are likely killing a site's relevant generic referrals. The reply I gave above to Prof Stan shows how basing search queries around words I knew occurred on a page can impact on how a page displays in SERPs. Note the different SERP descriptions when I chose to include the search words: "problems" and "nonsense".

    If your SEO client is selling something, consider these types of words that may be used by someone near the end point of their purchasing process, "price", "quote", "sales", "online", "reviews", "testimonials", "near me", "free delivery", "discounts", "coupons", "specials", "directions", relevant location words.

    An awful lot of generic SE traffic is lost because words like this aren't used on otherwise relevant answer pages.
    Last edited by JohnAimit; Jan 1st, 2018 at 06:03 AM.
  18. #10
  19. Entrepreneur
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New Delhi India
    Posts
    3,368
    Rep Power
    1104
    Note the different SERP descriptions when I chose to include the search words: "problems" and "nonsense".
    John, let me clear this as you are saying once we create a page then we would work on semantical terms and also we would need to figure out what would be transactional/or relevant search queries (long terms queries) that could relevant to our website theme and we would need to write the content around those terms, then Google will give advantage to our site for those terms and no matter what we target right?
  20. #11
  21. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    337
    Rep Power
    709
    Hi Prof Stan,
    I think we are misunderstanding each other.

    I'm saying that G ranks a web page based on the combined ranking point score for the individual words used in a search query.

    Any page could qualify for scores of different search queries and how highly it ranks is determined by G's ranking algo.

    If your web page targets a very wide range of search words then it has the potential to score many more ranking points than one that does not even include words that may indicate a readiness to buy.

    Have you noticed that G will often report in its SERPs a "strike-through" against certain search words in a SERP result? I'd take that as an SEO opportunity to knock off the pages that don't include a specific word. You probably don't need many ranking points for a "strike-through" word to supplant a page that does not include the word.

    How G displays your page in the SERPs is a totally different issue to gaining a top 10 ranking position.
    Last edited by JohnAimit; Jan 1st, 2018 at 06:27 AM.
  22. #12
  23. Entrepreneur
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New Delhi India
    Posts
    3,368
    Rep Power
    1104
    My bad sometimes it happens to me once I argue with you
  24. #13
  25. No Profile Picture
    Moderator
    SEO Chat Good Citizen (1000 - 1499 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,485
    Rep Power
    2594
    I have often refrained from getting into the CTR debate. With that said.

    Does Google use CTR, the answer is "YES" it does, but not how most folks think. ( the below picture is linked to the article it is taken from )



    Let me also add, if you take time to read the Google Quality Guidelines PDF, it also hints it is used to rate the quality of a site.

    So in my opinion, Google does use it, but not in the sense that it's a primary ranking factor, but a secondary factor. It is used to adjust the primary factors as noted in the article.
    So if it is used to adjust primary ranking signals for final effect, then it's used !

    If you take this in stride, and apply it properly then you can take advantage of CTR and it's benefits.

    Google uses it to improve it's ranking algo's, I use it to increase my clients bottom line.

    How do you folks use it ?!?!

    Comments on this post

    • KernelPanic agrees
  26. #14
  27. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    337
    Rep Power
    709
    Hi KOS,
    Good post and references!

    I'd first like to make a point to readers about web page "quality".

    It seems to me that too many folk interpret page "quality" to mean long content pages written by Nobel laureates should rank top of a search results. Not necessarily so!

    G's own quality raters' guidelines talk about "helpfulness" not "quality". That means a page that is no more than a long list of product/service in a search category can be considered "high quality" by these guidelines. The same for a query like, "phone number (company name). An About Us page will be rated by the guidelines as the "most helpful" but with very little "quality" content.

    Here are some direct quotes from the Google Search Quality Guidelines:

    "Good search engines give results that are helpful for users in their specific language and locale."
    "Because different types of websites and webpages can have very different purposes, our expectations and standards for different types of pages are also different."

    If folk watch the Paul Haahr videos listed above, he talks about how their human quality raters do not always agree on the best results.

    To me the latest killers of the "engagement" signals (like CTR) as important ranking signals are the recent videos posted by two of the folk who largely started the "engagement" signal myths back around 2012.

    29 Dec 2017 Video: How to Rank in 2018: The SEO Checklist - Whiteboard Friday
    Author: Rand Fishkin, Moz


    Particularly note this section of his video:
    "III. Investigate the SERP to find what Google believes to be relevant to the keywords's searches"

    I suggest this is where RankBrain and related search queries may give "intent" clues. For certain search types, the related search queries seem to change frequently and generate a change in the listed top 10. This may be why folk fell into the trap of presuming that SERP CTR may have been a ranking factor.

    Nowhere does Fishkin talk about "engagement" signals as being part of the G. ranking algorithm.

    Nov 2017: How to do SEO Right in 2018 with Rank Brain by Dr. Pete Meyers

    When these two original and perhaps major proponents of "engagement" signals as factors in G's ranking algo walk away from their old hypotheses, there is really not much left but the dying echoes of self promoting SEOs who use myths to build a reputation to those who want simplistic answers to complex questions.

    I am not denigrating Fishkin and Dr Pete for proposing their hypotheses all those years ago. The problem is all the folk who don't keep up to date with changed opinions and SEO knowledge.
    Last edited by JohnAimit; Jan 13th, 2018 at 05:46 AM.
  28. #15
  29. Digital Marketing
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    7,383
    Rep Power
    5077
    Originally Posted by KnowOneSpecial
    I have often refrained from getting into the CTR debate. With that said.

    Does Google use CTR, the answer is "YES" it does, but not how most folks think. ( the below picture is linked to the article it is taken from )



    Let me also add, if you take time to read the Google Quality Guidelines PDF, it also hints it is used to rate the quality of a site.

    So in my opinion, Google does use it, but not in the sense that it's a primary ranking factor, but a secondary factor. It is used to adjust the primary factors as noted in the article.
    So if it is used to adjust primary ranking signals for final effect, then it's used !

    If you take this in stride, and apply it properly then you can take advantage of CTR and it's benefits.

    Google uses it to improve it's ranking algo's, I use it to increase my clients bottom line.

    How do you folks use it ?!?!
    Excellent post! That should put the matter to rest once and for all. Yes, CTR is a ranking signal.

    Comments on this post

    • Prof.stan agrees : Tx KP that makes sense to me
Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  • Jump to page:

Similar Threads

  1. Is AMP a ranking factor?
    By PInder325 in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Aug 3rd, 2017, 10:35 AM
  2. Is CTR a ranking factor?
    By Julian_SEO in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: Jul 20th, 2017, 07:17 AM
  3. Keywords in the URL - still a ranking factor? Thoughts..
    By Saxter in forum New User SEO Questions and Answers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Jun 19th, 2017, 08:11 AM
  4. What is the ranking factor in Y
    By wd21 in forum BING/Yahoo Search Optimization
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Sep 24th, 2007, 01:40 AM
  5. Ranking Factor Weights
    By CollegeGuy in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Jun 4th, 2005, 02:33 AM

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo