Sandbox theory/new algo criteria?

Hi

whilst exploring other SEO forums i came across a very interesting thread at SEOchat - (i hope you don't mind me posting a thread from another forum shawn -if you do please delete)

http://forums.seochat.com/showthread.php?p=117527&mode=linear#post117527

to summarise what is being said the original poster is calling this effect "the march filter" and many others in the thread are agreeing is that this effect is such that many sites which went live around march/april and had a PR assigned in the june update (and also possibly didn't start a link campagin till around may) are having a hard time reaching anything like satisfactory results via the usual optimization methods. The sandbox theory is usually said to last about 3 months maximum - however it seems that many sites SEO'd professionally are still having trouble ranking almost 7 months on. - even though sites with PR assigned before this time - or that went live after this period (i think) seem to be doing better.

my site went live during this period, had PR assigned in June and my link campaign did not kick in to a month or so later - and i am still not seeing any great results - mostly i prescribe this to the fact i am not an experienced SEO, but also i wonder if it may have something to do with this supposed filter/algo change aswell.

i would value what people here make of this - and whether anyone else has a site that matches these criteria, and whether they have managed to rank well or are still languishing.

any thoughts?

 

Fluke, I certainly believe there is some "filtering" or "sandboxing" going on - I have the same problem with a new Florida villa page which was designed during July. Initially it was in the top 20 of Google now it's sat in the lofty heights of 108 - initially I thought I had over optimised (yes, it you can do this too!) but looking more closely I think its because of the sudden increase in backlinks to the page. (I think!)

It makes me wonder though if there is some filter on vacation / real estate related websites - this is just a thought, no evidence to suggest this.

Darren

 

Could be related to the 32-bit document-id limitation... although it seems unlikely to me - speculation based on speculation...

 

apparently when the florida update occured it was generally held that real estate and vacation rental sites were one of the worst affected - (of course this is according to most things i have read - which doesn't neccisarily make it true!) - i wasn't around the SEO world when the florida update occurred so i can only go on what i read. Its quite possible there may be some lingering effect from that.

 

Funny thing this sandbox. I've never seen it. (and yes, I own a real estate website).

 

My site (www.photographycorner.com) fits exactly into this "filter" - site launched late March, linking campaigns started Juneish, PR6 gotten in the June update. Allinanchor for keywords= top5, actual rankings, in the 90-140 range...

 

"I'm drowning here and you're describing the water!"

Our coaching site fits this too. I just analysed the coaching sector's search results- we have links from just about everywhere you can get links 'on topic' other than dmoz. allinanchor: 6, serps 250+

 

As i said i am not a professional SEO and so do not want to blame what may be my shortcomings on a Google filter - nevertheless my site does fit these criteria - whilst i am at 250+ for most of my main keywords in google i have top spot on yahoo and MSN for the same terms. my highest ranking by far is with my least competitive keyword - which is simply the name of the complex which contains the condominium which is the focus of my site (i will not mention it as this thread will push me further down the serps! - suffice to say it's the last two words of my sig) i would have thought to be easy to get on the first page - yet i am still on the third -
I have around 125 Backlinks (+ a further 100 or so from this forum- which probably doesn't count for much as it used too and also a further 50 or so from my site).the links are shared between my two main keywords.

is this the norm? - is my site being held back?- the fact is a really don't know - with my lack of SEO experience i have nothing with which to make a comparision against - on one hand it would be nice if it was some kind of filter and i could say - well it isn't so much my "fault" - on the other if it was my SEO then i would know that as my knowledege improves - so would my rankings!

if it is a filter i don't know what google is doing surely there can't be anything to gain by holding back new sites.

 

Well, it prevents people from buying & selling links... if it takes ____ amount of time for the weight of links to kick in, people are a lot less likely to buy them...

 

fluke are your links mainly from other sites in your serps or sites completely unrelated to your serps?

 

all from travel sites/directories - alot florida related

 

www.top-real-estate-agents.org .... domain registered on 26-Mar-2004 ... site went live next day. First PR was with the June update. Going after about 60 semi-competitive search phrases and in the top 10 on several and top 20 on just about all of them.

 

hmm- i don't know what the criteria are for certain but it may be that google sees you as an authority site (as it is a directory).

 

Or it may be that you barely escaped the filter as I have seen a couple sites that broke from the sandbox that were started in March 2004 but none thereafter.

My other question would be:

Did you ever notice a "sandbox" like effect on your site?