Google "waiting period" after May 14 payday update?

I guess you don't understand the software then, the quality of the links depends on your filters and list, sure i you just let SB scrape you a site and you smack some crappy content on then you get shitty links.

But if you use the filters and go for quality in stead of quantity you can get good backlinks, btw even now i can get good backlinks on high PR blogs with scrapebox, spam is just one way to get links, there are others...


Scrapebox builds 1 type of shitty link,

GSA builds 14 different types of shitty links,

So how are they really "different" other than the fact that GSA produces 14xs as many shitty links as SB? :)
 
Last edited:
Comparing SB with GSA is oranges and apples, SB is just a comments spammer and that is it, GSA you can build any type of link you want, high quality, low quality, whatever... so as long Google is going to use backlinks as a ranking method tools like GSA are going nowhere

Totally agree with you. It's not GSA itself, it's the way people are using it that is the problem.
 
i've had a site stuck in this 'waiting period' for nearly 2 months. Month 1 I hammered it with high pr links, and it didn't budge.

month 2, after giving up and working on another project - it is starting to bare fruit, and ranking page 1 for many keywords. Shooting up 3-4 places every day.
 
after giving up

I think this is the #1 goal of this last algorithm update... having folks 'give up'. If you were renting links, and couldn't afford to keep renting them without a ranking, G would have won out - as I'm sure they have already in hundreds of thousands of cases since the update.

FWIW - I've noticed since the update that getting my existing sites from the 10-20 spot to top 3 actually seems to have been easier than before. I've got a bunch (well, 4 :p )that have rocketed up to top 3 with nothing more than a handful of links added to the mix...
 
That's bullshit. Warm, smelly, steamy bullshit.

The amount of articles is >>>relevant<<< to ranking. It may not be a primary factor but it absolutely something that Google considers. And apparently, you don't know how to do basic research. Because I checked your example "buy Viagra online" and:

#1 is Canada Drugs which has 403,000 pages of content.
#2 is Corey Nahman which has 304 pages of content.

So many marketers think Google doesn't favor big sites and that's bullshit because most marketers are too lazy to produce content. Sure, you might be able to find thin sites ranking in competitive niches, but generally speaking, the high majority of the time that is not what I see. What I do see more often that not is huge sites in the top 3.

I have also split tested this enough times to see for myself. My biggest sites never have problems cracking the top 3. They rank like mini-tanks. It's always my thin sites that get stuck on the top of page 2 and caught in this "filter" which is really just Google saying "I ain't ranking your shitty 4 pages wp site".

If you don't believe me, go run a few dozen split tests.

For every niche you target to 1 thin site, then 1 site that is beefed up with hundreds of pages of spun content.

I GUARANTEE you will notice that the big sites consistently outperform the thin sites.


Thanks for this post! :)
 
I have some new results, i rebuild a non performing site in to a silo lead gen site and right of the bat i have 13 (city + service) longtail on the first page, about 50% are in the top 3. (getting 10/20 visitors combined)

I have to say that these phrases have only 5 to 30 visitors per month and around 300K competition (without quotes) so i don't know how if it is just because of lack of comp or it is because of it already had trust.

Just putting it out there
 
@fc-dh: Maybe it is because the Kw's has very few Montly searches?
 
From my point of view, there are 2 things that matter after May update. I'm currently testing this out and will be post an update within next couple of days/weeks.

1) "link age" matters - it is created because many people buy subscription for high PR links for 30 days, and if they don't get ranked within these 30 days, they cancel subscription and quit. Google knows that and many people run out of money so they have to quit after first 30 days. Maybe website get ranked if links pass let's say 40 days age... That could be, I am currently testing this. I renewed like 400 PR1-PR3 SAPE links yesterday for another 30 days and today is 31st day of links, I will see what will happen within next few days/weeks.

2) It can be "waiting period" based on keyword Search Volume. For example, keywords with 1,000 MS gets rankings pretty fast, usually within 3-4 weeks after May update. On the other hand, keywords with let's say 10,000 MS takes 50 days to rank. Anyway, that "waiting period" seems as a great move by Google to prevent Churn and Burn, but they are also stopping White Haters, but they have enough time actually. :D
So Google now likes to take more time to rank keywords with higher Search Volume and High CPC.

Some people got ranked after they "left and forgot" their site and turned to another project. It seems to me that you should keep building links to some point, and then stop with link building and just wait for results next few weeks.

This is just my theory, I'll be testing this out and if I get some results within next few days/weeks, I will make a thread, Case Study or something like that to help others. I think there is no fixed "30 days waiting period", it could be 30, 50 or 60 days, it depends on many factors, but I guess these 2 above are most important.
 
@fc-dh: Maybe it is because the Kw's has very few Montly searches?


I am also leaning to that conclusion, there must be a correlation between MS and the waiting period, next week i will build a bunch of new sites, same structure, the same service but in different cities and we will see if i can get the low key/MS phrases ranked that quickly.
 
@fc-dh: Try to focus on high MS terms for the new sites. this will give a better view of things.
 
There are going to be high MS keywords, the low hanging fruits is basically a bonus of building the sites in a (yeas again :) ) silo structure.






@fc-dh: Try to focus on high MS terms for the new sites. this will give a better view of things.
 
This would support my preliminary views that very low search terms rank easily, and quickly.

Being able to rank for low volume search terms easily is certainly true for my site. Using a few aged PBN links I'm ranking page 1 - 3 for search terms 500<. For my main target term of roughly 10k monthly searches I'm still on page 20 after 4 weeks.

Some of you may recall that 5 days ago I started a minor 'study'. I was testing the hypothesis that perhaps a new web 2.0 blog and link that I had connected to my money site in the very early stages was the factor that tripped this so called Google delay. I removed this web 2.0 link to see if this would bring me out of the delay sandbox...it hasn't. So what does that prove? Well, nothing actually, I can't be sure that the link caused the delay in the first place, I can't be sure that once subject to the delay removing an offending link would bring you out.

While I haven't proven anything myself, what I've done may form another piece to the puzzle, then again it may just be bollocks.

Something promising though...one of my PBN pages ranked for my main 10k search term. This is an aged domain fairly loosely related to my niche, it started at page 4 and has slipped to page 8 but is outperforming my money site by far.

Currently testing my money site content on an aged domain with high PA/DA/TF/CF and replicating the links, will get back to you all with the results.
 
Last edited:
For those who haven't seen, this is the WF version of this thread -

http://www.warriorforum.com/search-...ogles-new-1-month-filter-did-you-get-hit.html

I made a thread <12 hours ago about the problem with internet forums, and one of those problems I highlighted was the gross spreading is misinformation.
That WF thread, and indeed some here on BHW, are prime examples of misinformation being perpetuated as truth - whoever said it's a 30 day delay? Nobody knows how long the delay is, and how it works.

It's irresponsible and foolish to suggest it's a 30 day delay.
 
I made a thread <12 hours ago about the problem with internet forums, and one of those problems I highlighted was the gross spreading is misinformation.
That WF thread, and indeed some here on BHW, are prime examples of misinformation being perpetuated as truth - whoever said it's a 30 day delay? Nobody knows how long the delay is, and how it works.

It's irresponsible and foolish to suggest it's a 30 day delay.

Completely agree. There is 1 theory in psychology that I take very seriously and it's called "confirmation bias" which forums are LITTERED with.
Like 1 person posts something, a few people agree, then you fast forward a month and thousands of people have hopped on the bandwagon.

This thread is confirmation bias at it's best. There is no significant statistical evidence of anything but everyone's trying to prove their own hunch.
I even get caught into this bs myself. For all we know, this update could have been rolled out in January and people are just noticing it now.

It's sad because people come to forums to get answers. But lately I've leaving BHW and WF with 1000xs more questions than when I arrived.

There are only 2 things I can really say for a fact right now -

1) YT has slaughtered the retention view market place which has obliterated the incomes and livelihoods of thousands and thousands of rookie
and amateur video marketers. People who don't know much of anything about SEO in the first place. And now these people are flocking over to
website SEO in hoards, desperate as all hell to find new and working methods.

2) Google has *allegedly* made some changes to SEO. Nobody really knows what those changes are, when they were actually implemented,
whether these reported changes are the results of 1 update or a series of updates.... but at the same time people have 0 reservations in
guessing what's going on and finding their own flawed and insignificant anecdotal evidence to support these popular trends.

Right now, to me, this thread is nothing but a trend.

And it's a very DISTRACTING trend.

It's causing people to seek out answers that don't exist. It's distracting people from work. It's robbing forums of quality threads.

The IM journey section has went to shit. Like 6 months ago there were a lot of active threads with people making money, now there is very little
if anything happening there.

The SEO forums have been cluttered with conspiracies and rumors.

I really think it's time to ban myself from WF and BHW for 30 days. Just to clear my head and get back to what I should be doing which is work. :)

-BB
 
Last edited:
leaving BHW and WF with 1000xs more questions than when I arrived.

get back to what I should be doing which is work. :)

Isn't that the point of BHW, though? It is for me. I come here with thoughts, and mix those thoughts up in a tumbler by reading the posts and threads, and then go away with more questions that need answer - then, set about testing ideas and concepts in order to answer those questions. I think I'd have a hard time thinking of the questions without seeds that I find, including significantly here on BHW.

Which goes to the second point of my quote above - isn't it the case that 'work' (as it relates to IM, at least) is 90% testing and theorizing? If it is, then my work would not be possible without the questions that arise in my mind from reading forums. The tough part, as I posted a while ago, is being guarded enough to not form views or conclusions on the basis of a few posts :)
 
Back
Top