Jump to content

velociphiles

New Member
  • Content count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Order placed Transaction ID: 3T269756L9342804H Created account on Marketers Media but on logging in there is no sign of my order. Please advise.
  2. After all the Google updates it is very clear that "big brands" are being favoured by Google in the organic rankings. In my niche - a garden accessory ecommerce site selling a specific product - the first page results are 80% big stores, including Amazon and Ebay. These sites are ranking high with inner pages that in some cases have no reported links. In the Australian market Bunnings is #1 with an inner page showing a product category for the product - but with no actual products available to buy! I believe the above is well known but probably varies significantly depending on the niche. How to compete in this environment ? What are the signals that Google is looking for and can these be "created" - has anyone had success in beating the big brands ? One option is to use Terry's parasite page approach - accept that big sites are going to dominate and take advantage of this by ranking an inner page that sends traffic to your offer.
  3. Any way of using this on non-WordPress sites ?
  4. From reading various forums and guru blogs it appears that buying aged domains with PR is still an effective SEO tactic. However, there is a choice of: 1. 301 redirecting the domain to a money site to get the benefit of the age, PR and existing backlinks OR 2. Adding niche relevant content and then linking out to the money site With (1) there are cost savings in content creation and hosting but only one page can be linked to. With (2) the start up and ongoing costs are higher and it is more time consuming but you build an asset that can link to multiple properties. Maybe a mix of the two would be a good approach ? Anyone have any real experience of the relative SEO benefits of the two approaches ?
  5. Since my sites were penguined out of the rankings from dominating the #1 spot I have analysed the backlink profile of the current top 2 sites in my niche. Both get the majority of links from simple link exchanges - they have a links page with masses of outbound links and get links in return from links pages on other sites (also with very high OBL) - these are two way exchanges. This was how to rank many years ago but I thought it had been killed off. It seems that with the shake up in the SERPS recently, some of these old techniques have floated to the top. Now wondering whether I should just copy the link pattern from these guys, but maybe through a 301 so I can switch them off if it all goes wrong?
  6. velociphiles

    Recovery Experiment from Penguin 1.1

    Same for me. I had two domains hit by penguin and 301d them to a new domain with the original content copied across. Rankings improved for a while but not back to the original levels. After three weeks the rankings vanished again. Have taken off the 301, reduced the old site to one page with a "this site has moved" message for real visitors and starting seo on the new site. I also 301d all the old site inner pages to the old site home page to avoid duplicate content issues and 404 errors.
  7. Having read the SEOMoz top ten about Google Ads: http://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2012/07/17/google-advertising?utm_source=bronto&utm_medium=email&utm_term=The+War+On+%E2%80%9CFree%E2%80%9D+Clicks%3A+Think+Nobody+Clicks+on+Google+Ads%3F+Think+Again!&utm_content=The+Moz+Top+10+-+July+2012%2C+Issue+2&utm_campaign=Moz+Top+10+-+July+%232 I was a bit surprised. I never click on Google ads, but maybe my customers do? So I did a simple test... I have an EMD in a foreign country which ranks #1 for it's exact match search. I setup an adwords campaign for the same KW (exact match) - specific to the same country and language. My ad was running at an average position of 1.6 eg. sometimes #1 and sometimes #2 in the ads at the top of the search results. Over one time period, adwords tells me the ad got 170 impressions and 37 clicks - a 22% CTR. Over the same time period my #1 ranking site got 1 click for the same exact match KW. This is in a low competition niche with low traffic levels, but the comparison is valid. Far more people clicked on the ad than the top ranking organic site. Just thought I would share this with you guys...
  8. I have a relatively young site (9m old) that has been affected by this weeks algo changes and thought I would post my simple findings here. This is an e-commerce site in the German market. Using the 2011 approach to SEO I was able to get the site ranking #3 for the main search term which brings 80% of traffic. This was using a variety of outsourced services, blog networks, etc but no blog comment spam or forum profiles and no high PR home page backlinks. No big deal so far. Site was not affected by Panda - content is good and unique. Penguin caused a rank drop to the lower half of page 1 - too many KW optimised anchor text links. Have since been working on diluting these but have not been able to shift the site much - a few places up and down over several weeks. No warning notice from Google and was not using the well known de-indexed blog networks. Since 19 July site has dropped from #9 to #35 and I received an unatural links warning in GWT. So I downloaded the last three months of links from GWT (about 1,000 of them) and ran these through scarpebox to extract the KW anchors. Then looked at the individual links using the affected KW. Some of these links were created more than 3 months ago and have taken time to be picked up by Google - suggesting that your rankings today can be affected by something you did up to 6 months ago? As far as I could see my problem seems to have been caused by having a lot of links contained within an irrelevant article. This used to be a great ranking technique - create a spun article ad post it to lots of places (or use a service to do this) and include a link within the content or in the resource box to your site. Following the Penguin update I had read that this method was still working as Google would find it too hard to determine relevancy - the articles themselves are pretty good quality. I should add the articles are in English and the link is to a German language site - which could be a giveaway. However, I have also used legitimate press releases to announce new products etc in English with links to sites in various languages. Anyone else convinced or otherwise about the necessity to have links in context especially for Tier 1? What still works.. I have another site in the French market for the same niche which was canned by the first Penguin update (was #1 for 2 years!). Just went through the backlink profile of the current #1 site and it is just a mass of link exchanges with some relevant and lots of non relevant sites- not even 3 way links, these are just direct exchanges. Their links page has 658 OBLs! This was how to rank a site about 5 years ago - but it seems to be working a treat for my competitor. Maybe an earlier tweak to the algorithm to discount or penalise these link swaps has been inadvertantly adjusted with all the latest changes? Thoughts anyone?
  9. velociphiles

    301 after Penguin Update

    Thanks for the sage advice. The plan I am currently working to is: 1. Wait it out but try a few things to see if they make a difference - de-optimize a few pages, try some additional links. 2. Build some new sites which will act as feeder sites to the original money sites (e-commerce in my case) - but don't over optimize them and promote them in a more "sensible" way. If things go well this could give multiple listings for similar KW. If it all goes to s&*t they could become the main site. 3. Paid traffic.
  10. velociphiles

    301 after Penguin Update

    I would like to know the answer to this too - as I suspect will many others. From what i have read it seems risky. The 301 redirect is intended to permanently move everything to the new location - so you should get most of the PR, link juice etc. This is great but I have read cases of the "penalty" being carried across as well. If the current "penalty" we are seeing is just an algorithmic adjustment based on backlinking patterns and some on page signals it might be possible to avoid carrying the penalty across by de-optimising the content at the same time. There may also be a difference depending on the level of hit you have taken. My site that received the WMT letter was hit far more than the others and is the one I would consider a 301 for. So I can see these options: 1. 301 the whole site and hope for the best 2. 301 the site and de-optimise the content on the new site 3. 301 all pages except the home page on the basis that the "penalty" and most of the links will be aimed at the home page - probably want to do some de-optimising at the same time 4. Forget the 301 and build a new site - but in this case you would need to create all new content or remove/de-index the existing content.
  11. Sorry - I mean pages that are contextually relevant or include LSI terms for your KW. So it is just a "test" I would apply before getting the link. Common sense really, but I have used some services (SENuke for example) where they scrape and spin an article which may not be related. It seems this approach has worked in the past but according to my anaysis it isn't working anymore. UPDATE - further analysing the data since my last post and I have noticed that for a lot of my target KW where I can see rank drops, the page that is now ranking is not the original one. The original page was "on page" optimised and would have had a few social bookmarks etc pushed at it to get indexed - these would then typically rank on the first page in my low competition niche. The ranks are now -20 or 30 and the page that is ranking is one that just includes the article teaser. So this gives some additional food for thought - maybe there were some on-page factors in this update as well?
  12. Good thread - lots of other discussion going on but this seems to be the most constructive and based on at least some facts. My own experience, based on a selection of quality e-commerce sites that I run for myself and clients and based on lots of analysis of the data I have is as follows: Feb 5th - rank drop for some sites but specific KW and pages. This drop was not widely reported elsewhere and for me the root cause was lack of anchor text diversity. I had sites ranking #1 - #3 for their main KW which dropped 10 places - but for some of these pages we had 70% plus of links with the same anchor. Doh! Feb 13th - Friday 13th! - rank drop on some sites due to the blog network de-indexing (AMR, ALN) - sites not in these were not affected. Feb 24 - the latest and biggest impact. Again only some sites affected. For me the evidence shows this was an attack on backlinks from pages just like the one in the Google post - a page of content containing KW anchors that bear no relation to the content. Lessons learned: 1. KW anchor text variation 2. Avoiding public blog networks 3. No direct linking from pages that don't pass the LSI test Positive points for my sites: 1. content and user experience are all fine - no content Panda issues at all 2. huge link type diversity (but not anchor text!) Recovery plan: Still working on this and more analysis to do. - Some sites have only dropped -7 so should be recoverable with a better link building plan and tiers. - Some are -25 at the moment, hopefully still reccoverable - One site did get a WMT warning and is now MIA - not de-indexed but doesn't even show for the brand name search. Only inner pages show for the main KW and they are well down.This may well be a case of start again. 301 redirect sounds risky from what i have read. I am considering removing the home page content, getting the site recrawled. then copy the site to a new domain and 301 everything except the home page - thinking being ths will not pass the penalty AND will not be seen as dupe content. Does mean I have to start from scratch with promoting the site. Still thinking about this one. Hope this helps
  13. velociphiles

    Fixing Over-Optimization Penalty

    Like many have already posted most of my sites suffered and they were original content, best in class sites. BUT I did have some spammy links in my backlink portfolio. Having checked through I am now surprised at how many spammy links! How have the links been devalued? Is the ranking drop we are seeing just due to the loss/devaluation of links possibly combined with a negative link velocity factor - losing lots of links quickly. The above seems most likely to me and means this is just an algorithmic "penalty". In which case it should be possible to rebuild the rankings again but using decent links. This will take time and because of the way the algorithm seems to work it feels like the starting point is a lower ranking that my site should have based on its good quality links alone. An alternative might be to copy the site to another domain and 301 all of the pages. As I control some of my better quality links I could send them to the new domain, but the algorithmic penalty should not read across - question is would this be a better/faster way to get my rankings back? At least I would have a clean and high quality site at the end of the process - which I guess is what Google is after? Anyone with any experience here - will a 301 work as described? does the current drop require more than just replacing the lost links to fix? and in what timescale?
  14. I have had one PR2 site in ALN since November and it has just been de-indexed by Google. Yes it was a default template but the about me etc were removed. It was only receiving posts from ALN. Looks like Google are picking off these sites?
×