anyone saw major changes on G today?
- Thread starter genotip
- Start date
cashmaster
Junior Member
- Dec 25, 2010
- 146
- 17
i am not basically sure whether its google dance. i have clients with sites jumping from over 100 pages to the 13th page in the google search, and some even having the first rank for a two word keyword .
- Mar 10, 2010
- 42,695
- 107,109
All of my sites that I checked have gone up in the rankings.
Only white hat backlinking btw.
Only white hat backlinking btw.
Maggie Adams
Senior Member
- Mar 9, 2009
- 1,152
- 263
Yup in the last day or two... pretty nasty! I'm still going thru all of them. However, in the 100 or so sites I have, I'd say most have gone from page one ranking #1 or 2 to page 5 and 6. Pretty consistent. Doesn't seem to be a problem with duplicate content, I have 9 that are completly the same just the name of the town changed! Two went down the others are still up at #1. Nor does it seem to be html vs blog.
Because they were rather uncontested keywords, and urls matching - I didnt put too much in the way of backlinking to them. They just did fine right off the bat for over two years.
Looks like I'm going to be spending a lot of time building links, seems to be the factor here as far as I can see.
Hey Basstracker, got a package deal?
Back to the Lab, YO!
EDIT: I also noticed that in Google webmaster tools they wanted me to verify all the sites affected, all had been prior. Then all i did was hit verify again, same code still present on the sites. So this is definitely some sort of Google shake up. Check your webmaster tools folks if you haven't already!
Because they were rather uncontested keywords, and urls matching - I didnt put too much in the way of backlinking to them. They just did fine right off the bat for over two years.
Looks like I'm going to be spending a lot of time building links, seems to be the factor here as far as I can see.
Hey Basstracker, got a package deal?
Back to the Lab, YO!
EDIT: I also noticed that in Google webmaster tools they wanted me to verify all the sites affected, all had been prior. Then all i did was hit verify again, same code still present on the sites. So this is definitely some sort of Google shake up. Check your webmaster tools folks if you haven't already!
Last edited:
The sites that I have had drop are those which have high PR, ******** blog comments pointed at them. e.g. spam. I was 5th on the 1st page now 10th on the 2nd page. Sh*t.
So maybe one of the changes is combatting blog comment spam, even ********, even high quality comments.
I am wondering if linking power from indirect spam is also affected. E.g. the power of links from articles which are in turn juiced up by comment/profile links?
EDIT:
Or it *might* be something to do with devaluing exact match domains, which mine were too.
So maybe one of the changes is combatting blog comment spam, even ********, even high quality comments.
I am wondering if linking power from indirect spam is also affected. E.g. the power of links from articles which are in turn juiced up by comment/profile links?
EDIT:
Or it *might* be something to do with devaluing exact match domains, which mine were too.
Last edited:
BassTracker, I assume you use link pushing when you refer to white hat linking, but there are blog comment/profile links which juice up your web 2.0 properties/articles, right? And the rankings for those pages are doing ok?
I just feel your method might have been a decent prediction of where backlinking will have to go from now on, random complex structures with power rather than EMD's and blatant spam to money site. Back to the lab for me, too, I guess.
Last edited:
Maggie Adams
Senior Member
- Mar 9, 2009
- 1,152
- 263
Interesting thought... All of the sites of mine affected were just that!
- Mar 10, 2010
- 42,695
- 107,109
Sometimes I'll hit the Web 2.0s with SB but the sites that I have done nothing for in over a year and never did SB to the backlinks are all up in the serps as well.
For instance, I have one site that is 3 years old, 45 pages.. all unique content that I backlinked using my process and have not done a thing to it in about 17 months that is now better positioned in G for a lot of the keywords that I targeted... I didn't check them all and I won't bother because I see the traffic is strong.
Best way to not get sandboxed or losing rankings would be unique and relevant content, only several backlinks from authority sites in your niche, and by authority I do not have in mind web 2.0 or article directories and of course no profile or comment links. Thats the receipe that will hold against any google dance, though it takes lots of time.
So how do you 'juice up' the link network in your link pushing process? At the end of the day, per link push, you have relatively few links direct to your money site compared to the amount of work done. I can see the power in it but only if you're getting mass link juice from somewhere. ?
Yes, Matt Cutts did mention that he was going to review the value of EMD's so that might well be an effect of this change. I actually don't see that as too much of a bad thing, since it is so often the case that the person who snaps up the exact match domain gets a really unfair advantage, now we're on a little bit more of a level playing field.
Same here all my sites that was affected I had to re-verify in Google webmaster tools. I just verified them. I hope they will jump back to their previous rankings.
- Mar 10, 2010
- 42,695
- 107,109
Sometimes I build extended linkpushes... grab one of the tier one properties and use that as my target url for subsequent linkpushes.