Google "waiting period" after May 14 payday update?

[blackhtbill]

Could be. Newer sites in general don't have much trust I am sure with Google.

Right, but if there is something to this, I don't think this has to do with JUST new sites - I think it has to do with 'untrusted' sites and content.

What exactly defines a trusted and/or authority site from one that isn't in the Goolge SERP's? Who the hell knows aside from the Google Algo engineers... even they may not know (exactly) at this point.

The reason I say this is I am having trouble (as others in this thread have indicated) ranking content on older domains with decent PR and trust according to all the indicators. Can't get past page 3 - even for very 'easy' KW's that should be able to rank and have been backlinked with some solid PBN backlinks.

 

[conrulez]

NVM....My bad...I misread some stuff.

 

[tony_d]

On another (possibly relevant) note - about a week after this recent update, I started work (placed a dozen or so PBN links) on a site of mine that was ranking #39 for a keyword with 6,600 monthly searches. Within a few days of placing the links on my PBN sites, it had gone to #12, then 48hrs later went to #23 where it has remained. So - would it have stayed at 12 before the update? Would it have ranked higher? I don't know.

See below an update on this earlier post. I have no opinion on it yet - I'm simply sharing it to get the info out. It is interesting, however, that after removing the links, it went up. Other sites for me are ranking well with exactly the same links - so there's nothing contagious about them.
The real 'tell' will be whether this site now continues to rank, or if it crashes. Note that G has crawled those link sources (it does almost daily) so it 'knows' that the links are gone, and if we say that it took 5 days to rank, it should take only 5 days to de-rank. But it has not. So... wtf.

PS: I incorrectly quoted the searches as 6,600 in the post above. It's actually 8,800.

 

[tony_d]

Every site I have had stuck at page two I have moved with 301's.

Have you ruled out that time itself could have been the factor that ranked them beyond page 2, rather than the 301's, or is that subject to more testing?

 

[umerjutt00]

Try 301's from URL shorteners and aged domains. Buy five aged domains with PR, make a website on the aged domains with content related to your keywords, then 301 the websites to your money site. Blast the aged domains and URL shorteners with high pr blog comments, or better Sape.

Every site I have had stuck at page two I have moved with 301's.

For url shortners, is it like this:

High PR comments > bit.ly > Money site
or
we have to make tiered link shortners like this:
high pr comments > bit.ly > goo.gl > money site

??

 

[Bionaire]

See below an update on this earlier post. I have no opinion on it yet - I'm simply sharing it to get the info out. It is interesting, however, that after removing the links, it went up. Other sites for me are ranking well with exactly the same links - so there's nothing contagious about them.
The real 'tell' will be whether this site now continues to rank, or if it crashes. Note that G has crawled those link sources (it does almost daily) so it 'knows' that the links are gone, and if we say that it took 5 days to rank, it should take only 5 days to de-rank. But it has not. So... wtf.

PS: I incorrectly quoted the searches as 6,600 in the post above. It's actually 8,800.

Maybe there's a longer period for deranking so the results aren't being so sporadic and dynamic - maybe it's something to do with this delayed ranking as well although the deranking time frame exceeding ranking is something to note as you mentioned. I guess more testing needs to be done but in a personal opinion, it's down to making the search results update less frequently (based on domain/site metrics/links etc?) which would coincide and help them fight spam/ranking fast. Weird.

P.S - How strong is that domain? Maybe it's not deranking as fast because it's stronger and G is giving it more time to possibly regain the links or gain more to compensate. Meh.

 

[tony_d]

P.S - How strong is that domain? Maybe it's not deranking as fast because it's stronger and G is giving it more time to possibly regain the links or gain more to compensate. Meh.

It's PR0, DA16, PA19, TF6, and CF15. Not strong at all

 

[fc-dh]

Oke i have new info, i have 2 YouTube video's for though local searches, not in searches but in competition, strong high PR competitors, business directories and Google places

I threw 50K a day links to them in the past 3 week and both are shot into the top 5 today. I don't know if they will stick but still though i would ad this to the pile of info we have so far

 

[mickyfu]

For url shortners, is it like this:


High PR comments > bit.ly > Money site
or
we have to make tiered link shortners like this:
high pr comments > bit.ly > goo.gl > money site


??

I use both tiered and single and, and I use hundreds at a time.

Have you ruled out that time itself could have been the factor that ranked them beyond page 2, rather than the 301's, or is that subject to more testing?

I am talking about many of websites which have all been stuck and varied in times, way before the last update. If you search back, you will find people having problems stuck at page two about a year or more ago. As I mentioned, I have just made a churn and burn in gambling which came straight in at number 8, search terms are 8000 a month.

 

[thefixer]

a friend of mine is an seo expert..i remember mentioning him something like that a few days back..!!

 

[divok]

As I mentioned, I have just made a churn and burn in gambling which came straight in at number 8, search terms are 8000 a month.

its okay if you don't want to tell .
But what links did you build? Sape/ser/etc/etc . or a magic mixture . ?

 

[Bionaire]

I was thinking, if the ranking algo hasn't changed much and people are getting stuck near the top, I'm going to personally conclude that it's just a waiting period as the thread mentions or another algo pertaining to link building from that point on; still a natural flow of links, no links, how many links (& what time period) etc.

Nothing to be concerned about.

 

[catchme]

to me it looks like it is a waiting period for "valuing" the backlinks, not the website itself.

I made several good links pointed to one of my sites 2 weeks ago and I still don't see them in the webmaster tools.

Have you noticed such thing?

 

[catchme]

And all of the latest discovered links in webmaster tools for ALL of my websites are from the end of June.

 

[peterstern9]

See below an update on this earlier post. I have no opinion on it yet - I'm simply sharing it to get the info out. It is interesting, however, that after removing the links, it went up. Other sites for me are ranking well with exactly the same links - so there's nothing contagious about them.
The real 'tell' will be whether this site now continues to rank, or if it crashes. Note that G has crawled those link sources (it does almost daily) so it 'knows' that the links are gone, and if we say that it took 5 days to rank, it should take only 5 days to de-rank. But it has not. So... wtf.

PS: I incorrectly quoted the searches as 6,600 in the post above. It's actually 8,800.

This is actually very interesting thing.

2 months ago, I pushed one of my brand new sites with SAPE for 30 days, and after that, I just canceled the subscription (like OP did on July 6th). After all these SAPE links disappeared, I just stayed with a couple of Web 2.0s and some other weak backlinks. I almost forgot about that site, but then I realized that site jumped from position #22 to #9, and it kept growing to #7. Then after some time, I did not pay hosting, domain got expired, and after few days disappeared from SERPs.

Now I don't know what to say about it, but I forgot about it because I thought it got penalized (also it had some duplicated content on it). So, I can't make any conclusions, just presumptions, but I will leave them to you.

 

[peterstern9]

to me it looks like it is a waiting period for "valuing" the backlinks, not the website itself.

I made several good links pointed to one of my sites 2 weeks ago and I still don't see them in the webmaster tools.

Have you noticed such thing?

And all of the latest discovered links in webmaster tools for ALL of my websites are from the end of June.

This is normal, data about backlinks shown on WMT is approximately 10-14 days old. Expect backlinks to appear on WMT approximately 10-14 days after they got indexed by Google.
Even though links are not visible on WMT, Google knows about them.

 

[catchme]

This is normal, data about backlinks shown on WMT is approximately 10-14 days old. Expect backlinks to appear on WMT approximately 10-14 days after they got indexed by Google.
Even though links are not visible on WMT, Google knows about them.

Actually before this new update, WMT and Google needed only 1 week to see/show the links and take effect.

 

[IMCapitalist]

Not in my experience but thanks for warns.

 

[peterstern9]

Actually before this new update, WMT and Google needed only 1 week to see/show the links and take effect.

I have to disagree with you. Ever since I've been doing with GWT, it takes 10-14 days to show backlinks. One of my current sites shows 1038 links on GWT, and it's been more than 1 week since I have 2K+ indexed backlinks.

 

[ficfroc]

I have to disagree with you. Ever since I've been doing with GWT, it takes 10-14 days to show backlinks. One of my current sites shows 1038 links on GWT, and it's been more than 1 week since I have 2K+ indexed backlinks.

GWT won't show you all the data they've collected.