The Google SEO Shuffle

New Google SEO Filter Hypothisis ----------->

If site meta title = exact domain name

and

95% all inbound anchor text = exact title

then filter & shuffle.....

 

Do you see a lot of "meta title = exact domain name"?

 

I'm seeing alot of websites that are being effected that should NOT be as hard to find when searching for the exact name of the website....

hence - their over seo filter....

title, domain name, and url + heavy pop and achor match....

 

But... that is exactly what Yahoo and MSN love...

 

Yep - case closed ----

I've got my proof.....

This site http://www.new-affiliates.com/ has been #1 for "new affiliates" for 2 years straight!

Never moved - Not Once.......!


Today --------- It's Gone!

still number one on MSN and Yahoo!

 

Isn't that a little hasty considering how many different factors are part of Google's algo?

 

Not for me.....

That was the end....

 

As a SEO I agree with clasione. And I am sure that any big increase of backlinks will cause a penalization. Happened to my site when I started gathering backlinks like crazy and they increased in over 200%

 

Are you saying that the reason this site has dissappeared was a jump in backlinks? If so, where can a person find this kind of information about other sites?

 

Just read over the good forums... WMW had a huge discussion about this and many, many people posted their example of sites that got penalized after a big amount of new backlinks.

 

How exactly does that prove it?

 

How exactly does what prove what?

 

I'm a believer that too many links too fast is an issue. I was just wondering if this is what you and/or Clasione is attributing to that sites demise.

I once read somewhere that, "There are usually unseen reasons why a site might rank well." I'm sure that cuts both ways.

 

You might want to read a bit higher up in the thread. I'd start at the beginning.

 

I don't thing it's the amount of backlinks by itself - but more of an attempt to fight back against all of the sites that have such a heavy target on one topic....

I can't believe how precise this turned out though...

It's truelly amazing!

 

You're kidding... right?

 

Not at all......

seeing it across the board...

seobook, was effected, seo-guy, and mine.....

all three held #1's for long periods of time ----- all three - filtered

all three match the exact senario......

Unless ofcourse, you can enlighten me with your hypothisis....

 

SEOGUY.COM: Title = SEO Services, Search Engine Optimization Company. SEO Consultant Expert SEO Company

SEOBOOK.COM: Title = SEO Book.com - SEO eBook, Search Engine Optimization Tips, & Search Engine Marketing News Blog

IMO, these site's meta title doesn't fit your model.

 

It can't possibly be because "too many links too fast". That's crap. If that's the case, then any press releases and big name companies offering a new product will get killed when a product is launched because of the new in bound links from all the news sources, blogs, etc.

So if its not links too fast, then what is it? Perhaps variations of anchor text? Let's see how things tend to work when something new or big gets launched.

Typically, a new product is revealed under an NDA that the press needs to sign. In the computer hardware industry, this is fairly common. Editors are given new product to test and review. They then write their reviews or previews and get things all ready for "NDA Day". This is typically when the NDA is lifted and the press can post their preview/review on the product.

Don't you think that by linking to new product pages or pages that never existed before until that day would be penalized by using this "too many links to fast" mindset?

So why aren't these pages that get linked to by the press getting killed in the SERPS? Why aren't press release pages "sandboxed"? It's simple. Each site linking to these product sites are varying anchor text. Some may use "click here" while others use the products name, perhaps others are even using "more info" etc. When sites vary the anchor text, it doesn't raise a flag to google. It looks more like that product that is being launched is an authority page on the subject.

I hope the above makes a little bit of sense. I'd encourage you all to re-think your linking campaigns to include varying forms of anchor text to ensure that Google doesn't think someone is stuffing his page full of in bound links using "shady methods". I can tell you from experience that I've never been sandboxed for my pages and have always varied my anchor text (especially using the co-op).

 

Recently SEO Guy ranked #1 in Google. SEO Book blog also ranked in the top 10 - 20 sites since June of last year.

Yahoo! and MSN - SEO Guy is #1 for "SEO" on both sites.


SEO Book was #4 and #6.

After the recent Google update both SEO Guy and SEO Book no longer rank in Google for their official site names.

New-affiliates just tips the scale even more