Was just Google Slapped :/

[Matt MacPherson]

I was just "Google Slapped" and after lots of research I'm still not sure why.

I've been advertising the site for a few years in it's current form without any issues. CTR is high, conversion is high, since I'm the vendor no affiliate links, targeted relevant keywords, etc. Very confusing.

Also, how do I reverse a Google Slap?

Matt

[Mike Grant]

Your site has no positive user experience, that's why. It's a landing page, and only a landing page.

[InternetMarketingIQ]

I'm not seeing a slap

I can find your site just fine. PR5
Last Cache July 24

[Mike Grant]

I justed checked as well, you're not slapped.

[Matt MacPherson]

AdWords. Nothing to do with SERPS.

[Mike Grant]

Originally Posted by Matt MacPherson

AdWords. Nothing to do with SERPS.

Then it's my first response. Your quality score must've been crap.

[dburk]

Hi Matt,

It appears that you have what Google sometimes refers to as a bridge page. When you click Your "download now" which appears as the order button, it takes you to yet another page where users must locate yet another button that is labeled "Add to Cart" yet that doesn't go to a shopping cart as one might expect instead it goes to a checkout page. This can be confusing to users and provides for a poor user experience.

Additionally, your page contains copy that explicitly implies that your website is served through a secure server, yet it is not. I realize that the checkout page is on a secure server, however that is not exactly what your copy states. This may be interpreted by Google as misleading.

Another thing to consider is the type of offering you have. There are certain types of offers that Google is distancing itself from and there are new FTC rules that may classify your website as misleading. Either of these two reasons should be considered.

Originally Posted by InternetMarketingIQ

I'm not seeing a slap

I can find your site just fine. PR5
Last Cache July 24

Hi InternetMarketingIQ,

Apparently you do not understand the meaning of the term "Google Slap", it has nothing to do with organic search results.

The Internet Marketing Dictionary|Definition Google Slap
Quirk's eMarketing Glossary | Online Buzz Words

If you going to be in the business you might as well learn the terminology.

[growclicks]

Great advice Don... This is the first time I've seen a bridge page slap

[tryinhere]

I will have a guess, the topic - as mentioned above there are some topics now that throw long shadows and spin doctor / love / health type sites are like a stack of cards, falling over.

(i am not refering you are a spin doctor of love)

also as mention the site is a little thin with some support pages probably being able to be added, and the auto play on start up seems to bounce or jump when first logged into that site and probably should not be set to run ?

the checkout part probably is fine in that the second page is a guide on what to do but i can also see the point made / close call there.

overall dollar to a dime it wont matter how you fix it up i doubt it will ever see the rays of google adwords sunshine again as the topic will be enough to banish it to the darkness of the back corner of never return. ? I may be wrong

look at alternate ppc options maybe, and other promotional efforts.

[RonnieW]

Google has swung the pendulum again. So it's imperative that you give the google user what google thinks they are after. In my experience - that is a blog type site with fresh content in the form of well written articles related to the topic with links to whatever landing page you are promoting.

[abugge]

Always get other people (preferably non technically savvy types!!!!) to test out your page before you make it live and get disappointed by Google. Sometimes they can provide you with insight on what give bad usability that you would yourself overlook because you know the game more! For example, I once had a site where I took away the hand cursor for links and made the cursor a crosshair for everything. I had no idea that would make it hard to know where the links were. Yet I had people who didn't know how to use the MENU graphics because they didn't realise you could click on them!!!!

[abugge]

Originally Posted by abugge

Always get other people (preferably non technically savvy types!!!!) to test out your page before you make it live and get disappointed by Google. Sometimes they can provide you with insight on what give bad usability that you would yourself overlook because you know the game more! For example, I once had a site where I took away the hand cursor for links and made the cursor a crosshair for everything. I had no idea that would make it hard to know where the links were. Yet I had people who didn't know how to use the MENU graphics because they didn't realise you could click on them!!!!

That was back when I first started designing though I didn't know much about universal web accessibility etc and I thought it was just pretty!

[Derek S]

Hey Matt long time,

Google has changed the game a little for direct response landing pages and there have been loads of others with this issue and I'm sure lots more who will be hit with the slap in the near future. Leave it to Eban Pagen to be one step ahead as he has changed his landing page in the past month or so: doubleyourdating.com

Shocked no one has brought this up in the forum yet that I know of!

My plan is using my alternative .net domain to run this blog/article style site for adwords and use individual articles for their appropriate landing page keywords

"Win Him Back" exboyfriendguru.com/win-him-back
"Get Him Back" exboyfriendguru.com/get-him-back

With full navigation and "related articles" sections really just turning the old school landing page into one of those old school choose your own adventure style books lol

Cheers

[patey88]

I recently got a first-and-final warning from Adwords for my affiliate site ads. The email referred me to some Adwords help pages meant to explain what was wrong, but I found them too vague to be useful.

So I replied to the email. I stated my goal was to keep my Adwords account, and that I wanted to make whatever changes were necessary. I listed a few ideas I had about what I thought would be sufficient, and asked some specific questions. I also stated that it would take me a while to do all this.

A week or so later I received a reply that was meaningful. It referred to my sites by name, and actually listed options I could pursue -- some of them more simple than what I was originally thinking I would have to do.

My point is: write them back, and start a conversation. You might reach a human who will tell you what you need to do. -- Patey

[RichardHK]

In addition to problem comments above, my browser does not show pages (landing and follow up) to be secure as boldly claimed in the copy.

[Matt MacPherson]

Thanks for the suggestion Derek. I'm going to try that out. So far it's only that one product so if my others are not affectedt then I'm going to write it off as a fluke. Also try to work with the AdWords team to see what the problem is. Good thing AdWords isn't my only source of traffic these days.

[Lucid]

Matt, first define what you mean by Google slap. Since you are talking about Adwords, I can only assume you mean your QS dropped. Not just dropped from say 7 to 5 but all the way down to 1.

In my experience, a QS of 1 is the off switch and the number one reason for this is having a poor quality landing page. This simply means you are not following their rules and policies.

Taking a look at your page, I totally agree with Don back in post #7. Good news is that this should be a simple and quick fix. Make that button on your landing page go directly to your order page instead of this in-between (bridge) page.

[tryinhere]

are people now saying a bridge page now also involves linking to the same site ? or does it still stand a bridge is a link to another site and this is a new adaptation of that term ?

Bridge pages: Pages that act as an intermediary, whose sole purpose is to link or
redirect traffic to the parent company. This would include skinny affiliate sites or old one page style land pages.

[Onlinelupe]

Originally Posted by Matt MacPherson

Thanks for the suggestion Derek. I'm going to try that out. So far it's only that one product so if my others are not affectedt then I'm going to write it off as a fluke. Also try to work with the AdWords team to see what the problem is. Good thing AdWords isn't my only source of traffic these days.

I'm sorry that happened to you - it happened to me also.
Let me know if you have any luck talking to adwords staff. I can't find a way to contact anyone other than email and I haven't received a response.

When it happened to me a few weeks ago, I got an email from adwords first stating that my landing page was violating policy and that it was my final warning. The domain name was listed in the email.

Well, I did not even own this domain name and responded with an email stating that I did not own the domain name in question - that it was a typo when I first added the domain and I changed it that very same day (and actually at this point had canceled the campaign that had a similar domain name b/c it wasn't generating the kind of income I was getting from my other sites) and to please respond letting me know that I will be ok.
I never received a response.
1 week later, all my keywords said, "rarely shown due to low quality" and I was not seeing my ad in sponsored search results. Prior to this, my QS was 9/10 or 10/10.

I contacted adwords telling them what had happened and that I was concerned that I was possibly shut down due to a domain name that I don't even own. I received a response the other day saying it was being forwarded to adwords support staff. I have not received a response from them.

Let me know if you hear anything and I will do the same.

[Matt MacPherson]

Originally Posted by Onlinelupe

I'm sorry that happened to you - it happened to me also.
Let me know if you have any luck talking to adwords staff. I can't find a way to contact anyone other than email and I haven't received a response.

When it happened to me a few weeks ago, I got an email from adwords first stating that my landing page was violating policy and that it was my final warning. The domain name was listed in the email.

Well, I did not even own this domain name and responded with an email stating that I did not own the domain name in question - that it was a typo when I first added the domain and I changed it that very same day (and actually at this point had canceled the campaign that had a similar domain name b/c it wasn't generating the kind of income I was getting from my other sites) and to please respond letting me know that I will be ok.
I never received a response.
1 week later, all my keywords said, "rarely shown due to low quality" and I was not seeing my ad in sponsored search results. Prior to this, my QS was 9/10 or 10/10.

I contacted adwords telling them what had happened and that I was concerned that I was possibly shut down due to a domain name that I don't even own. I received a response the other day saying it was being forwarded to adwords support staff. I have not received a response from them.

Let me know if you hear anything and I will do the same.

Pretty much the same story as myself, minus the problem with the domain. AdWords contacted me saying my site had multiple violations / it was my "final" (and first) warning, etc. Before the slap the site in question had a quality score of between 7 - 10 depending on the keyword. Which dropped to a 1.

I responded to their email asking if they would specify what was being violated, as I have been very careful not to violate AdWords policy for years now. No response as of yet but I will PM you if I receive any response. Although I'm not expecting one.

Oddly enough I have a product targeting men as well (in the same niche) and that has not been effected (so far).

As for those saying it is a bridge site, I have always been under the impression that "bridge" referred to a landing page linking to another third party page. I know affiliates who do this and write their own sales copy and link to the payment page directly. Since I'm the vender and only link internally, I never though this applied to me. If this is the case and I'm not saying it is, I think it may have been a fluke. Humans evaluate these sites manually and it's possible the employee evaluating it was not totally knowledgeable on these matters.

Matt

[dburk]

Originally Posted by Matt MacPherson

As for those saying it is a bridge site, I have always been under the impression that "bridge" referred to a landing page linking to another third party page. I know affiliates who do this and write their own sales copy and link to the payment page directly. Since I'm the vender and only link internally, I never though this applied to me. If this is the case and I'm not saying it is, I think it may have been a fluke. Humans evaluate these sites manually and it's possible the employee evaluating it was not totally knowledgeable on these matters.

Matt

Hi Matt,

Think about why Google discourages, bridge or doorway pages, it's the poor user experience that they have a problem with. It doesn't matter whether it's the same site, or as is more typical a third party site, the user experience is just as annoying and that's why it's prohibited.

Clearly, Google has been looking more closely at all landing pages and requiring a more strict adherence than they have in the past. This is not a new trend, just the same trend finally catching up to you and others. At least they are giving you a chance to resolve it.

[Matt.Lake]

Matt,

I'm in the same niche as you and frankly have been wondering how you were getting away with it. I too have received the slap and was surprised you hadn't sooner.

It's a problem with this particular market. From the contact I've made with Google, they've received a lot of complaints from users from this "nature of website."

I've been watching your site for the last few weeks and waiting for it to get nuked.

Good luck and I'd appreciate to hear any progress that you make.

And as for those giving suggestions...

What exactly is the best format for a site selling ebooks via Adwords these days?

What exactly is defined as a "poor user experience"? Surely, if you have an advert advertising a product, then why is it a problem that it goes to a sales page selling the product that's bieng advertised?

Surely, when a user clicks on an advert that is advertising a product, they want to be taken to a page to buy it. They don't want a a load of information or links to articles.

Any insights would be appreciated. Again, Matt, I'd be appreciated to hear what progress you make with this. I'll keep you informed too if you like. I'm still working in resolving the issue.

Thanks,

Matt

[tryinhere]

Originally Posted by Matt.Lake

Matt,

I'm in the same niche as you and frankly have been wondering how you were getting away with it. I too have received the slap and was surprised you hadn't sooner.

It's a problem with this particular market. From the contact I've made with Google, they've received a lot of complaints from users from this "nature of website."

What exactly is the best format for a site selling ebooks via Adwords these days?

What exactly is defined as a "poor user experience"? Surely, if you have an advert advertising a product, then why is it a problem that it goes to a sales page selling the product that's bieng advertised?

Surely, when a user clicks on an advert that is advertising a product, they want to be taken to a page to buy it. They don't want a a load of information or links to articles.

Any insights would be appreciated. Again, Matt, I'd be appreciated to hear what progress you make with this. I'll keep you informed too if you like. I'm still working in resolving the issue.

Thanks,
Matt

I think only the big G can answer that one, but i can tell what is working, (not here saying what people must or must not do or what is right or wrong)

a good user experience is on where in the best way i can put is it has supporting pages, like about us, contact us, FAQ, resources, terms , privacy policy , site map to name a few other than that other very important factors are a good internal link structure for those support pages, make sure they all work and function.

no log out text boxes or any other detracting user experience as well

from there a good sales / home page will float a good q score no problem so long as the information on that page is detailed and on target with the keys / theme of your adwords campaign.

this can be enhanced by adding some quality articles to the site as well to help boost things along.

providing a good outlet for articles is a good call because it allows you to grow the site / strengthen it as and where needed , where you can even bring in adwords on those articles that are targeted if you wish, or you can bring them in on the home page.

as stated above, regardless of how you prep the site if you are running non G preferred sites no amount of site structure will pass the q score test.

but not going there as i seem to be standing alone with this as others are all saying the subject is not the problem, and they may be right.

but for everyday promotion as above would work fine (as it stands now, what they change tomorrow ?).

[Matt.Lake]

Pete,

Thanks for that. My site matches all that criteria.

You are right, the problem here is the niche.

Frankly, there are/were people selling a lot of crap in this market so now the ones selling quality products are getting shafted too. Shame.

As for what Google dislikes though... I think in general they don't like ebook sites. After spending hours in their support forum it's evident that is the case.

And they don't seem to like typical direct response sales letters. Going with Eben's DYD that was referenced earlier... I too noticed the changes he made. Obviously that's more the format to go, but I bet conversions aren't as good.

[nouseforaname]

Could be one of the reason (if they weren't check it manually), the phrase;

"I started xxxxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx and when he....."

Color of text and highlights are same.

[Lucid]

Originally Posted by Matt.Lake

What exactly is defined as a "poor user experience"? Surely, if you have an advert advertising a product, then why is it a problem that it goes to a sales page selling the product that's bieng advertised?

I've been telling advertisers for a couple of years but it seems I'm not doing a good job at it.

Here's a graphical way. First, GOOD user experience:

1. User does a search, sees attractive ad so clicks on it.

2. As expected, user lands on a page telling them about a product. In other words, a sales page.

3. User reads the page and is sold. He clicks on a "buy now" link.

4. As expected, user is shown a form to enter their payment information and does so. If it's a download product, he's directed to the download page. Transaction concluded.

In a BAD user experience, the first three steps are the same. Except that the fourth step becomes:

4. User is directed to another sales page when he expected to enter payment information and get the product. That is exactly what is happening with the OP's site.

5. User now has the choice of 1) leaving because of confusion, 2) read this other sales page (he has to just to find how he can pay and get the product, which leaves him frustrated as he has just read a sales page for the same product), or 3) scan for another "buy" link (which is just as frustrating). All three of course means a potential lost sale.

In the OP's case, it's a short page and clear what to do next. However, that page is not necessary and not needed. That's what Google is objecting to.

[crudenbay]

1. This isn't a bridge page but it could be mistaken for one because it looks like so many that are.

2. The red background and long sales page work against you because they have that "scammy/affiliate" feel

3. Turn it into a real website and tone down the color

4. Conversion rate may drop but it's all about staying alive and being in for the long haul

5. Get going on it fast, because your other products could be getting hit soon if they have a similar layout

6. Google's been clamping down on dating for a while so err on the side of a conservative look so the human reviewer doesn't immediately "oh here's another one of those sites."

Good luck, it is frustrating when you've had a long ride and then the legs are cut from under you!

Cheers,
Frank

[Matt.Lake]

Originally Posted by Lucid

I've been telling advertisers for a couple of years but it seems I'm not doing a good job at it.

Here's a graphical way. First, GOOD user experience:

1. User does a search, sees attractive ad so clicks on it.

2. As expected, user lands on a page telling them about a product. In other words, a sales page.

3. User reads the page and is sold. He clicks on a "buy now" link.

4. As expected, user is shown a form to enter their payment information and does so. If it's a download product, he's directed to the download page. Transaction concluded.

In a BAD user experience, the first three steps are the same. Except that the fourth step becomes:

4. User is directed to another sales page when he expected to enter payment information and get the product. That is exactly what is happening with the OP's site.

5. User now has the choice of 1) leaving because of confusion, 2) read this other sales page (he has to just to find how he can pay and get the product, which leaves him frustrated as he has just read a sales page for the same product), or 3) scan for another "buy" link (which is just as frustrating). All three of course means a potential lost sale.

In the OP's case, it's a short page and clear what to do next. However, that page is not necessary and not needed. That's what Google is objecting to.

Lucid,

Thanks for that, however if that's the case then there are no problems with my site. My site has no bridge page and to be honest, in the case with the OP, I doubt that is the problem.

But you advice also goes against the grain that you can't link the salesletters?

I think the very fact that a page is a typical direct response salesletter is a problem.

As suggested above, may be the solution is to go with a more "corporate feel"...?

[tryinhere]

Originally Posted by Matt.Lake

Pete,
As for what Google dislikes though... I think in general they don't like ebook sites. After spending hours in their support forum it's evident that is the case..

No Matt that is not the case as still run successful ebooks campaigns, change the topic and they float like a butterfly. (for now anyway)

but in that i also say yes, the love doctor, snake oil areas in the specific realm of ebook is right on the money, and by that early signs show that if your a qualified love doctor with a normal site / practice per say and promote that on G you would be fine per say, but add ebook download to that sum and it equals zero zippo your outahere with no lovin. from what i have seen.but may be wrong

[Matt.Lake]

Originally Posted by tryinhere

No Matt that is not the case as still run successful ebooks campaigns, change the topic and they float like a butterfly. (for now anyway)

Yes, you're right as obviously you are successfully running ebook campaigns and many others are. However, in the Google support forum, the actual Google reps were specifically stating that ebook sites are sites that merit a low quality score.

I personally don't see ebook sites as the future, no matter what the niche. Typical clickbank ebook sites anyway.

Wasn't there something recently that said Google were going into the world of ebooks themselves? If that's the case, then things would definitely change.

I'll be making the most of my ebook site but definitely intend on pursuing other business models as soon as possible.

Thanks,

Matt