No More Sandbox - Now it's called The MARCH FILTER

I think there are a lot of people confused about what the sandbox means and for every SEO expert there is a different meaning. Therefore I've decided to re-name what many are now referring to as 'the sandbox'. The new name - The March Filter.

In March of 2004, many different websites that had been recently launched or began engaging in SEO noticed that their efforts were under-appreciated by Google.

Even many longtime SEO experts in the field noticed that new sites they reviewed and worked on were not gaining the positions in the rankings that normally accompanied the type of effort that was going into them. Sites with many more and much better quality backlinks were going unappreciated and seemed to randomly toss in the lower portions of the SERPs - results 50-500.

The March Filter also seems to be prolonged by what many are calling the lack of a 'full update' by Google, meaning that while backlinks update and SERPs shift around, the PageRank has not been updated in the toolbar and no large algoritihim components, shifts, etc akin to the 'Florida' update have been implemented.

Some perceive this as having relation with Google's public offering, which is possible. Others see a sinister motive that forces sites to use adwords more aggressively.

Personally, my belief is that Google, as always, is attempting to combat non-relevant results in the SERPs and that a big update is on its way. In the meantime, in order Google is trying to prevent the rise in search engine marketing and promotion of sites that use Google's known fondness for multiple C-class IP block sites linking to them. In order to shut down this type of hard-to-detect link spamming, Google has put what I call the 'March Filter' on sites.

I haven't heard from anyone who has successfully taken a new site or new sites to the top for competitive keyword phrases since March. If anyone can easily disprove this, I would appreciate it. Otherwise, lets quit calling it sandbox and start calling it by its rightful name - The March Filter.

What will happen in the future?
If the theory holds, sites that follow the very stringent guidelines for ethics - more stringent than those Google lists, will probably see their work pay off when the update occurs. This means avoiding the supposedly 'undetectable' use of varying links across separate class C IP address sites as well as link-building as naturally and organically as possible. Just as over-optimization penalties existed for on-page optimization, they will exist in the future for site external link components.

Putting a date on this new update is not a good idea, although many believe between October 1 and 5 are likely. I personally lean towards a 'whenever they build a spam filter for the algorithim that they're happy with' approach. Although common sense would say there is internal pressure to have this done in time for this year's X-mas shopping season (the Friday after Thanksgiving).

What should webmasters do?
Internal content is probably a very good way to start, followed by very relevant links that will pass you traffic, not search engine rankings. Forget PR (mostly) and forget sitewide links (unless they are all relevant pages that will bring you traffic).

Just pretend you will never get visitors from Google (this isn't true, but thinking this way will get you off to a good start) and get links from sites who will send you the most qualified readers/browsers/buyers. Make Google's goals match your own and you can be assured of staying penalty free and receiving a reward in the SERPs when the new update is released.

I completely agree with this. The sandbox was purported to last only 3-4 months, but most sites have been experiencing this filter for much longer. I also don't think this is a filter on new links. This is for new sites.

My pages doesn't even show in the top 1000 for the most obscure keywords. Other sites that link to me show up as #1 for this exact search- all due to MY link text! These pages are all PR0. I'm listed in DMOZ and the Google directory, as well. My site was first indexed by G on June 5th.

I have a hunch that these sites will come out of the March Filter when the toolpbar PR updates. These are 2 things G has been holding off from for a while. Or that might be the farthest thing from the truth.

Vetteman -

Thanks for your input. I would also guess that the PR update and the March Filter are related, but I wonder if you have any evidence. My guess is based purely on speculation and the fact that GG often links updates and changes.

In the past, I would have not agreed with the concept of PR and filters being directly related, but now....well....I'm starting to think it may be true. Just a gut feeling. I know that the prevailing thought is that Google is really updating PR internally, and we just aren't seeing it on the toolbar...but I'm not so sure about that anymore. One of my sites, if compared to the top 10, SHOULD outrank most of them by every standard measurement - EXCEPT it shows PR0 due to no update. Gut feeling is....PR updates will change things. But oh how wrong I might be.

I don't know what their reasons are what stupid games they play but their results suck these days. Maybe that should be their #1 priority.

Thanks for sharing these ideas, randfish. My gut agrees with some of it... maybe lots of it... but I don't know for sure. All I know for sure is that new sites don't get the respect that they used to and linkage to any site doesn't work like it used to. lol

I am not too bothered by this because I belive that good quality, original, unique content will be rewarded in the end - no matter how google values links or if they even count them in the future. So, I am focusing mainly on authorship and am even taking a university course right now to broaden my background in an area where I am writing. And with the slowness in the ranking of new sites the amount of time that I spend checking the SERPs is minimal.

DD - PR is updated internally or results in PageRank order on the GG directory wouldn't fluctuate, which they have the last two updates (late Aug & last weekend). I wonder what the stats are when a bunch of SEO forum posters say 'my gut instinct tells me' compared to what actually happens. It's probably like predicting the election - wrong as often as right.

mind if I cross post this on webdeveloperscentral.com?

Randfish- Unfortunately, I have no evidence, just my own speculation.

I feel this March filter and the lack of PR update coincides with Googleguy being a no show lately at Webmaster World.

Another likely scenario is that Google may still be in the "Quiet Period" after its IPO. This is the period starting when an issuer hires an underwriter and ending 25 days after the security begins trading, during which the issuer cannot comment publicly on the offering due to SEC rules.

Well, Google started trading on August 19th. The quiet period should be over either today or tomorrow! Google might not update PR during the Quiet Period just to play it safe- or maybe not rock the boat until all the legal stuff is over. The SEC is not exactly lenient in any way, either.

This is just some of my thoughts feel free to add to to this.

i agree with the post as well... i have a few sites with relatively low competition for a few of my keywords and my site is nowhere to be found despite links and such.

yeah - anyone who wants to can re-post it, just be sure to mention me - it's an article at randz.net from today. http://www.randz.net/detail.php?POSTID=118 - I'll probably re-write it with lots more specific and example data after the Monday Night Game. For now, go Packers!

Yep, i hear ya...but i still wonder. The directory has never been a good indicator of anything. The "fluctuated results" could be results from who knows when. I'm not sure I've ever seen the directory be up to date. Anyway, I could certainly be way off-base, or maybe I just have indigestion...but my gut is speaking to me.

Google has got to abondon it's link popularity altogether.... Too many link brokers and text link buyers/traders....

Just have to figure out another way.... That's why for now - while they are figuring things out, they have been giving a boost to older more established sites while they sort out there options....

[QUOTE=clasione]Google has got to abondon it's link popularity altogether.... Too many link brokers and text link buyers/traders....

Your absolutely correct, coz of these very strict rules placed by GG itz not only cheaters who suffers but even people who play fair. So google must come up with some new ways of tackling the bad guys.

When it comes to PR update and back link updates, i guess there has been back link update somewhere around last week, coz there is a slight drop in my back links :-(

One thing i realized is that Google no longer is charity SE (free for all) Now google means business, and since that is there new strategy all the SEO's must have a third eye towards future or in other words SEO's always have to be at least 1 step ahead of google thinking. SEO's must be very future minded rather than been "myopic"

Never - Giveup