Ranking Experiment

Thanks, Shawn. To be clear, the advertising is what I'm after and it is much appreciated. I consider the link structure to be a nice side benefit too.

I've been persistent because it seems that a few small changes that would benefit the advertising side of things 10% and the link side of things 100% seems to be worth considering.

I think the language and categorization would be awesome.

P.S. Persistence also came from the thought that if all of the benefit that we get from advertising is completely wiped out by 10X due to engine penalizations, then the net gain from the network could easily be negative if left untreated.

 

For advertising - I consider AdSense ads TO BE semi-static. Why?

Because the top bidder, as long as they are top, will still appear on the same page time after time because of a themed site that matches the ad.

Also, How many times have you seen an ad in a spot, not had a chance to react to it, but tried to find it later? If it's 100% rotated, you'lll never find it.

 

If people want static links surely its a case of going out and finding link partners themselves rather than joining an advertising network and asking to change the system

 

Thanks, it was worth a shot. Not sure if you caught an edit I did above though:

"...if all of the benefit that we get from advertising is completely wiped out by 10X due to engine penalizations, then the net gain from the network could easily be negative if left untreated."

This is my biggest concern for the network, and why I push to keep it ahead of the curve.

For building links, my fingers are bleeding from typing requests. I was hoping to enhance that portion of my marketing with this site. I can only hope to contribute something to perfect it.

 

Joe, have you checked out arelis or other reciprocal linking programs. You can set it to run whilst your browsing/working. Then preview all sites and send out personalised emails, much easier than doing it by hand.

 

i disagree ... i think aggressive linking regardless of age is getting the hurt now.

if you think about it ... the ime limit is overly simplistic

 

But that's not sandboxed, that's penalized. There's a difference. Sandboxing is for new sites/domains.

 

That's the main concern on this end of the argument:

Say you used to get 100 referrals from engines per day for a keyword, and you now get 20 a day from the advertising side of the coop.

With any new SERP penalties due to ad churning, you still get 20 referrals from advertisng, but say your engine referrals drop to 10 a day due to penalties burying your site.

A net loss of 90 referrals per day.


If the experiment shows the site to drop significantly in the SERPs, this is exactly what is in store for everyone concerned.

 

But shouldn't we already know the results? We're already using the network. What we need to know is what weight Shawn is pointing at the page and given a set number of weeks how that weight effects SERPS.

 

Yes, we should know the results.

And from stories related from plenty of members, including senior members of this forum, IMO there's tons of evidence to suggest serious penalties for link churning - penalties totaling more detriment from G than the ads are helping.

e.g. - From a 1,700+ post Blademaster (mopacfan) for just one example:

"My site was heavily penalized by G on 3 Feb. The only reason I could find was the coop. My rankings on msn and Y did not change. I removed the coop and I changed the file names to include the keywords and my rankings are now about 50% back where they were before the penalty."


That's why you repeatedly see these type of posts. We're not just bickering and complaining, we're trying to help.

 

joe- why not just keep posting in the threads dedicated to this discussion. This thread is for a test out of curiousity not in order to change things. If all you are concerned about is "link churning" there is an alternative network out there which you have indicated you know about.

So why is every thread having to do with the Coop now going to be changed into a "Lets try to convince Shawn to change the idea behind the Coop Network"

I appreciate your concern but this test isn't to decide whether or not to make links static. It was a fun little test to see what happens in Google when you point a lot of weight.

Now all the fun has been taken out of it.

 

Thanks - good point. I'm done. Just get wrapped up in it ya know?

 

Bah, it's still fun. It's just not fun when you have to wait to see the results.

 

I was very interested in this thread...like 10 pages ago. Its good to gleen from both the evidence and the comments resulting from such tests.

But thank you yfs1 AND joewood for axing that 'same old discussion, same old data' act. I'm all ears when theres something new to rehash - I read the other VARIOUS threads of the same flavor that continue to pop up.

I look forward to maybe seeing some actual posts about any REAL effect THIS study is having either positively OR negatively and the comments that ensue.

 

And just an FYI, I've began to track the test in my KW Tracker and made some custom charts regarding the ranking.

 

<-- non productive wish for coop to evolve removed -->

sorry guys.

 

Pardon my return to digression for a brief moment, but if you're going to quote those, you might also quote the success stories for the sake of balance.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled program, already in progress...

yfs1?