Google Doesn't Hate Me

[Zeus66]

I don't pretend to be an expert on all things Google, but I can tell you that amidst all the shirt rending and hair pulling (I don't have any anyway), I didn't take a hit from this latest Google change. So I've been trying to figure out why that is. And the following are my conclusions. Take what you will from it, but keep in mind that I'm just one marketer. My results and conclusions might be way off base. Then again, perhaps not.

1. Link Diversity - I make a concerted effort to get links from various sources, not all or even most from just one type. These include blog comments, social bookmarks, profile links, and forum links. Along with some good old-fashioned directory links. Yeah, I'm old school that way. It appears to me that Google just changed the game when it comes to link building. They appear to be downplaying link power and putting more emphasis on what's actually on your pages. That's a good thing!

2. Easy Keywords - I almost called these long-tail keywords, but honestly, as long as the Top 10 competition at Google is easy, it doesn't matter. That just happens to mean long-tails almost every time. My tip here: ignore how much total competition you have at Google. Nothing else matters beyond the Top 10 or 20. Period.

3. On-Page Factors - you simply must get this right or Google will (and just did) smack you upside the head. I'm not just talking about where to put your keyword, either. That matters, but a big part of it is also the experience you give your visitors. My tip here: don't just fill your pages with links that make you money. Strive to give your visitors a better overall experience at your site and Google will reward you more now.

Overall, it seems to me that Google has reset the balance between links and content - in favor of content. That's how it should have always been, imho. If you have a blog, update it regularly. If you have a static site, add more content to freshen things up. And make sure Google can find those new pages easily (link from the homepage and site map).

None of this is Earth-shattering, I know. But the point is, I didn't take really any kind of hit with this last big update at Google. And I think it's because I put my emphasis on the points above. A lot of people who take shortcuts - even some with big-time authority sites - did take hits.

If you remember to think about the experience your visitors have at your site, I don't think you can go wrong in the long run. In other words, mimic Google's stated goal to give their visitors the best results and experience on their pages.

John

[JayXtreme]

Yes, Yes, Yes.!!!

Trust you to bring logic and reasoning into the forum, John

What you have said here is so true.

It's these basic principles that people overlook in the day to day running of an internet based business. The very same basic principles that can manufacture success and results.

Great stuffz!

Jay

[Leslie B]

I can't agree with you more, John. Not one of my blogs has decreased in ranking with the google changes, actually a couple of them have increased their google ranking, so I can only conclude that I must be doing something right. Don't know what exactly although I'm sure the content on my sites will be one of those factors, but I guess I just keep doing what I did before and I'm sure it will give the same results

Leslie

[Josip Barbaric]

John, you hit the nail on the head with this post(maybe even more than one nail)!

I see folks getting into a panic every time the big G updates its algorithm. Basically, any time a change is announced, most marketers seem to fall into a pit of despair, instead of focusing on building a business on a healthy foundations.

I mentioned this a few days ago and said that I wouldn't even know that Google changed anything if so many people didn't mention it here. My rankings keep getting better and better, no matter what change occurs.

Cheers,

Josip

[JohnMcCabe]

Testify!

I'm very happy to see things swing back to where providing a high value experience is more important than a bunch of unseen profile links on unrelated sites.

Seriously, why should having a profile for Playa122 linked to a dating site from the geophysics blog at Cal State mean anything?

Edit: As others have said, I really haven't noticed a change in my own stats.

[yukon]

3 good points!

I follow those steps & then some.

I've been posting here on WF that I'm involved in MFA, & I think that others get the idea of a typical MFA that is all Ads, when that's not the case here.

I'm all about great content, I silo my pages, I don't spam my links, I do on-page SEO (a lot).

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by Zeus66

ignore how much total competition you have at Google. Nothing else matters beyond the Top 10 or 20.

If you only take away one thing from this post...

[LucasT]

You guys are great.

I used to be afraid of google. This was because I was trying to trick it into ranking my sites, so that I could make easy money.

That was then... now I build sites that I take pride in. I add content that I believe others can use to improve their lives. I naturally bring visitors to my sites through comments and forum posts that are related to my webiste's niche, this brings in targeted traffic that is interested in my content, which also happens to bring my sites up in the rankings through these backlinks.

It's a much better feeling doing this work in an honest fashion, and it really does pay off.

Quote: [Seriously, why should having a profile for Playa122 linked to a dating site from the geophysics blog at Cal State mean anything?]

Totally agree with you. It creates irrelevancy and google will eventually learn to dismiss these types of comments as being unqualified backlinks.

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by LucasT

I was trying to trick it into ranking my sites, so that I could make easy money.

The thing that always makes me just scratch my head in amazement is the part where people think it's easy to trick a multi-billion dollar international company with a reputation for hiring the most brilliant programmers on the planet.

The bind moggles.

[LucasT]

Originally Posted by CDarklock

The thing that always makes me just scratch my head in amazement is the part where people think it's easy to trick a multi-billion dollar international company with a reputation for hiring the most brilliant programmers on the planet.

The bind moggles.

Yes, and I hope those just getting started realize this sooner than I did.

[Steven Wagenheim]

Well, Google doesn't hate me...but a lot of other people do.


(Deleted...Sorry for the hijack John)

Sorry...couldn't resist.

[Zeus66]

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

Well, Google doesn't hate me...but a lot of other people do.

DELETED LINK

Sorry...couldn't resist.

Hijacked! If it was anyone other than you, Wags.

[Steven Wagenheim]

Originally Posted by Zeus66

Hijacked! If it was anyone other than you, Wags.

I'm sorry John, I just couldn't resist. Your post just opened the door and
I had to walk through it.

I'll edit my post.

I suggest you edit your response.

Next time, don't give me such a tempting opening.

[bgmacaw]

Originally Posted by CDarklock

The thing that always makes me just scratch my head in amazement is the part where people think it's easy to trick a multi-billion dollar international company with a reputation for hiring the most brilliant programmers on the planet.

Ask Microsoft how two college students outsmarted them and their oddles of brilliant programmers when it came to Internet search engines.

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by bgmacaw

Ask Microsoft how two college students outsmarted them and their oddles of brilliant programmers when it came to Internet search engines.

Outsmarted? Caffeine's search results look an awful lot like Bing's, when you use the same queries we used in the Redmond test labs.

[Zeus66]

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

I'm sorry John, I just couldn't resist. Your post just opened the door and
I had to walk through it.

I'll edit my post.

I suggest you edit your response.

Next time, don't give me such a tempting opening.

Hey, I was totally kidding! Just to show you, I'm gonna leave your quote in my response. I don't mind being hijacked by one of the good guys, amigo.

John

[Steven Wagenheim]

Originally Posted by Zeus66

Hey, I was totally kidding! Just to show you, I'm gonna leave your quote in my response. I don't mind being hijacked by one of the good guys, amigo.

John

Thanks, but please take it out. I really feel bad. It wasn't my intention
to hijack your thread.

FYI, Google doesn't hate me either. They don't have a love thang for me,
but they don't hate me.

Maybe I need to send them some flowers and a tea cozy.

[yukon]

Originally Posted by CDarklock

The thing that always makes me just scratch my head in amazement is the part where people think it's easy to trick a multi-billion dollar international company with a reputation for hiring the most brilliant programmers on the planet.

The bind moggles.

Be amazed!

It's not really that hard to trick Google. I know of a few Very large sites that trick Google everyday & have been doing it for years, still pulling tricks as of this post.

I'll tell you this, the first site I discovered pulling a fast one on Google is in the top 1000 sites on the net, & has been ranked #1 for it's main keyword in the SERPs for many years.

Google hasn't advanced as far as most folks think they have.

The lesson here is, If it can be built, it can be broke.

Troll enough source code, then you'll be amazed...

[Zeus66]

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

Thanks, but please take it out. I really feel bad. It wasn't my intention
to hijack your thread.

FYI, Google doesn't hate me either. They don't have a love thang for me,
but they don't hate me.

Maybe I need to send them some flowers and a tea cozy.

Done. And I know you really weren't trying to hijack anything. You're one of the people around here of whom I would never suspect that.

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by yukon

the first site I discovered pulling a fast one on Google is in the top 1000 sites on the net, & has been ranked #1 for it's main keyword in the SERPs for many years.

That's not the issue. The issue is whether it's #1 for that keyword and shouldn't be. Because that, in general, doesn't happen for very long.

[Mohammad Afaq]

Originally Posted by yukon

Be amazed!

It's not really that hard to trick Google. I know of a few Very large sites that trick Google everyday & have been doing it for years, still pulling tricks as of this post.

I'll tell you this, the first site I discovered pulling a fast one on Google is in the top 1000 sites on the net, & has been ranked #1 for it's main keyword in the SERPs for many years.

Google hasn't advanced as far as most folks think they have.

The lesson here is, If it can be built, it can be broke.

Troll enough source code, then you'll be amazed...

But remember, Google with ALWAYS catch up and fill those gaps and people who try to play
the system will be in trouble.

[yukon]

Originally Posted by CDarklock

That's not the issue. The issue is whether it's #1 for that keyword and shouldn't be. Because that, in general, doesn't happen for very long.

The reason I found out was that site is my competition, for a site I started back in '09, I got to looking at his Google Cache page for his Index page. Almost 50% of his content is hidden, he has the Cache page striped down to all keywords.

No other site on the first 2 pages in the SERPs for that keyword is doing the same thing, besides me.

I'm not trying to get folks to go BH on Google, I'm just sayin Google isn't anything for someone to be afraid of.

Follow the big sites tactics, look at some code, it works for me.

[jgand]

I definitely agree. Google likes consistency, any drastic changes in your on-page optimization is likely to cause google to penalize your site, changing keywords or metatags can have a negative effect and having strong effective links with the correct anchor text is a must.

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by yukon

No other site on the first 2 pages in the SERPs for that keyword is doing the same thing, besides me.

You don't seem to understand the question.

Does his site NOT BELONG THERE?

It's not about whether the site's doing something stupid in the code. It's about whether these tricks are leading Google to rank the site for keywords that aren't appropriate.

[hotlinkz]

This is one case where I can honestly say that "caffeine" is a good thing. Fresh, quality content will definitely be more beneficial than "link wars" and "link races".

[Skid_Roe]

In relation to number three. I am not sure how effective this may be as I have never tried it myself but;

I would suggest not putting any affiliate links at all, build your list and use that as your way of making your money.

Personally, I feel that this makes your site look cleaner and give people the impression (lack of better words...) that your hear to help them and not just make money from them.

[JayPeete]

Originally Posted by Zeus66

They appear to be downplaying link power and putting more emphasis on what's actually on your pages. That's a good thing!

A very good thing for us snipers out there and you know who you are...

[Dennis Gaskill]

Good post, John. You actually help make the case for a thread I started yesterday about making money with content sites. I'd give you the link to it, but I'm not like that old Wagenheim fellow, going around hijacking threads right and left (just kidding, Steve).

In regards to your first point, that's why I've never paid attention to whether or not sites use the "nofollow" tag. If you're not trying to game the system, you'll have a good share of links that are no follow. If you don't, it might look to Google that your links aren't natural. Besides, Matt Cutts said a little link juice flows through no follow links anyway.

It appears you're feeling better - good to see you back on your fe...backside, posting again.

[sanssecret]

Great advice.

Only wish I could come up with a way of hijacking the thread. Might have to go ask Steven?

Seriously good though. Funny how the simple stuff always is.

[bgmacaw]

Originally Posted by Zeus66

They appear to be downplaying link power and putting more emphasis on what's actually on your pages.

Not really. It does give one a warm and fuzzy feeling to think that but I actually see glorified scrapper sites like thefind.com and bizrate.com, which have nearly zero original content but considerable site authority, ranking better than before. My take is that link quality and link age is where the emphasis is being placed.

Originally Posted by Zeus66

3. On-Page Factors - you simply must get this right or Google will (and just did) smack you upside the head.

Once again, not really. I still see sites that look like the pinnacle of 1998 FrontPage development, frames and all, still ranking #1 due to age and authority. If having a perfectly coded and SEO'ed site really mattered that much these sites would no longer be on page one of Google.

Originally Posted by Zeus66

If you have a blog, update it regularly. If you have a static site, add more content to freshen things up.

The performance of QDF (Query Deserves Freshness) seems to have been enhanced. New content on authority sites, gets pushed to the top very quickly, typically within a matter of minutes for low to mid range competition keywords.

However, you can still hang on to rankings without updating simply by having authority for particular keyword by virtue of having authority links, especially aged ones. In fact, I've seen older sites that have been long dormant spring back to life with the recent changes. 'Dead' sites that were getting 10-20 visits a day went up to over 100.

[Zeus66]

Originally Posted by bgmacaw

Not really. It does give one a warm and fuzzy feeling to think that but I actually see glorified scrapper sites like thefind.com and bizrate.com, which have nearly zero original content but considerable site authority, ranking better than before. My take is that link quality and link age is where the emphasis is being placed.



Once again, not really. I still see sites that look like the pinnacle of 1998 FrontPage development, frames and all, still ranking #1 due to age and authority. If having a perfectly coded and SEO'ed site really mattered that much these sites would no longer be on page one of Google.



The performance of QDF (Query Deserves Freshness) seems to have been enhanced. New content on authority sites, gets pushed to the top very quickly, typically within a matter of minutes for low to mid range competition keywords.

However, you can still hang on to rankings without updating simply by having authority for particular keyword by virtue of having authority links, especially aged ones. In fact, I've seen older sites that have been long dormant spring back to life with the recent changes. 'Dead' sites that were getting 10-20 visits a day went up to over 100.

It's obviously speculation on everyone's part (outside of Googleplex). I'm just reporting here what I do that might be a bit different than those who did see their rankings tank after this latest Google update. I realize it could be completely different factors at play. So much depends on what keywords you target... it's apples and oranges if two or more people are trying to compare notes on search phrases that are not similar in terms of competition strength.

John

[Clyde]

A link is a link is a link.

1. Build trust. (high PR with low OBL's)

2. "Spam" ish links. (low PR)

Use #1 and #2 to complement each other and you'll have what you want.

[jasonl70]

One of my former clients has a competitor who decided 1 year ago to wipe out their entire site and just frame in a site that was given to them from a manufacturer (that sits on another domain). So their domain has a frameset page, and 1 other html page with their business hours. That site they are framing in never ranked for 2 years.

They sit at #1 in the serp's, out ranking a lot of other sites with over 100 pages of relevant content, domains up to 10 years old, etc.

This latest google change did nothing to bump them off.

I've been scratching my head on this one for a while now.

for the record (and off topic): when I managed this former clients website/seo for 4 years, they outranked these guys.. now they have been several pages back for nearly a year, yet the new manager who cancelled my contract insists their new vendor is 'the best in the business' when it comes to seo! This is an example of how people make decisions based on emotions - 1 year later they will ignore all evidence to the contrary.

[bgmacaw]

Originally Posted by Zeus66

... it's apples and oranges if two or more people are trying to compare notes on search phrases that are not similar in terms of competition strength.

We all see the same elephant, differently...

YouTube - The Elephant and Blind Men Parable