Dear Google...Stop Making Me Look Like a Fool

by raviv
45 replies
  • SEO
  • |
Hello Warriors,
A very thought provoking article from Jill Whalen's (highrankings.com) latest newsletter. I am copying and pasting it below. Serious food for thought!
Cheers
Raviv

++Dear Google...Stop Making Me Look Like a Fool!++
Dear Google,
I'm tired of you making me look like a fool.

I've spent a good portion of the last 10 years patiently explaining to business owners and budding SEO enthusiasts that the key to being found in Google is to have one, great, all-encompassing website. That throwing up multiple keyword-rich domain doorway sites is a fool's errand. That writing crappy articles and submitting them to networks full of other crappy articles is a waste of time and bandwidth. That keyword-stuffed gibberish on your website just makes it look stupid. That link farms are spammy.

And I really thought that by 2010 all of the above would be 100% true. And yet they're not. I'm not sure if they're even 50% true.
Now don't go telling me that you'll eventually catch all that stuff - because that's what you've been saying for years and yet you don't. Even when it's repeatedly pointed out to you. I just don't believe you anymore.

I see the same search engine spam showing up today that I saw and pointed out 5 years ago. I see keyword domains and URLs that have nothing of value, yet they show up highly in the search results only because the URL matches exactly. I see fake links trumping natural links everywhere I turn. I see how one company with 10 similar but different websites can dominate the top 20 results.

The worst part is how you've single-handedly created the entire link-building and link-buying industries. Link building is the most distasteful, horrible act to have to perform for a website. It's unnatural and something that should not even exist. Which is why I've always told people to have a link-worthy site and get the word out about it to the right people (through marketing) and they'd receive great links.

But you've made a liar out of me. While that naïve suggestion can definitely bring links to a website, they rarely have the best anchor text that you require. You put way too much stock in anchor text, which one rarely receives through natural links. This in turn forces people to beg for or buy the "unnatural" links that you claim to dislike, but are secretly in love with.

Google, I'm sure you're aware of the companies that charge as much as $50,000 a month to write useless articles and spin them through spam-generating word-mixer-upper software (which turns a few articles into hundreds). Then they pop some keyword-rich anchor text links into their client's website and upload them to their network of thousands of blogs and fake review sites where the nonsensical (but appropriately linked) articles get posted.

And it works! Yes, Google, those keyword-rich links on crap sites hugely boost the rankings for the targeted website in YOUR search results - and for highly competitive phrases, no less. It's true that those links won't last or count for very long (cuz you're not that stupid), but because they continually repeat the process, it does indeed keep working. As long as the client is willing to pay for polluting the Internet (and for your search results), it works.

It's sad, Google. It really is.

If the fake link building didn't work so well, or the keyword-rich multiple domains never got ranked, maybe the companies looking for better placement in your search results would invest their money in the creation of amazing websites. But why should they? It's a lot easier for them to generate the spam that you love, Google, and point it to their small lead-generation website(s). Sigh.

Anyway, Google, I'm not telling you anything that you don't already know. Just let me know when you find an algorithm that really does reward the good stuff and not the bad. In the meantime, I'll keep telling people to make their websites be the best that they can be for their users so that there might be a few less horrible websites showing up at the top of your search results.

But when they ask me whether my way works better than spamming you, I'll have to tell them the truth.
Your friend,
Jill
P.S. I just got an email from someone asking if it was okay with you if they bought 10 keyword-rich domains and created "satellite sites" out them that point to their main site. I told them yes/no/I don't know. Sigh.
P.S.S. You're still way better than the other search engines!
Jill Whalen is the CEO of High Rankings an SEO Consultant in the Boston, MA area since 1995. Follow her on Twitter @JillWhalen
#dear #fool #googlestop #linkspam #making #seo
  • Profile picture of the author dvduval
    Google is still pretty good with new terms and news type results, but lately older search results are very stagnant, and not necessarily dominated by the best sites. I have this suspicion they are throttling results and there is something broken with their new architecture. They haven't updated pagerank in months and in general are getting pretty boring. Maybe that is their intention, but there are major drawbacks to getting stagnant.
    Signature
    It is okay to contact me! I have been developing software since 1999, creating many popular products like phpLD.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634418].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    Originally Posted by raviv View Post

    P.S.S. You're still way better than the other search engines!
    Jill Whalen is the CEO of High Rankings

    A Public Letter to Jill Whalen of http://www.highrankings.com/

    Kissing Google's proverbial bu++ has never helped anyone who has done it...

    So why should you follow a standard you know is wrong...

    If you are saying that Google is still best, then either you are living in denial or you have not looked at Bing recently... But you are a smart woman... I cannot believe that you are so saturated in the Google Kool-Aid that you don't look at the competition...

    Bing is the anti-Google...

    Whereas Google puts Inbound Links at the top of their measuring stick for their algorithms, with on-site content down the scale a bit in importance...

    Bing does not look at the web the same way that Google does...

    Bing focuses on all those things you say you wished Google would focus on...

    At Bing, on-site content is the most important factor, with Inbound Links a bit down the scale in its algorithms...

    I have always held you in the highest regards, Jill Whalen, and I still do...

    But while you spoke brilliantly in this piece, I have to wonder if you are kissing Google's proverbial bu++ to stay in good stead with them, or if you are really clueless about Bing's ability to provide better results to its users than Google can...

    Yours Truly,

    Bill Platt
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634443].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mohammad Afaq
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      A Public Letter to Jill Whalen:

      Kissing Google's proverbial bu++ has never helped anyone who has done it...

      So why should you follow a standard you know is wrong...

      If you are saying that Google is still best, then either you are living in denial or you have not looked at Bing recently... But you are a smart woman... I cannot believe that you are so saturated in the Google Kool-Aid that you don't look at the competition...

      Bing is the anti-Google...

      Whereas Google puts Inbound Links at the top of their measuring stick for their algorithms, with on-site content down the scale a bit in importance...

      Bing does not look at the web the same way that Google does...

      Bing focuses on all those things you say you wished Google would focus on...

      At Bing, on-site content is the most important factor, with Inbound Links a bit down the scale in its algorithms...

      I have always held you in the highest regards, Jill Whalen, and I still do...

      But while you spoke brilliantly in this piece, I have to wonder if you are kissing Google's proverbial bu++ to stay in good stead with them, or if you are really clueless about Bing's ability to provide better results to its users than Google can...

      Yours Truly,

      Bill Platt
      Dang, I had to lookup the dictionary three time after reading this post.

      I wish you still offered writing services
      Signature

      “The first draft of anything is shit.” ~Ernest Hemingway

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634649].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jill Whalen
    Perfect case in point. You found my article interesting enough to post it here but do you link to my site? No. in fact you removed the bio link. Nice. People don't naturally think to do so. (Although you on this forum certainly know better!)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634537].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author raviv
      Hi Jill,
      I am a new member to this forum. I looked for the article link on your site and could not find it. I subscribe to your newsletter and I copied and pasted the article (it ended with your Twitter account) that was part of the email. I did mention your site name in brackets at the beginning of the post. Is not that attribution enough? Pl clarify
      Cheers
      Raviv
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634658].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by raviv View Post

        Hi Jill,
        I am a new member to this forum. I looked for the article link on your site and could not find it. I subscribe to your newsletter and I copied and pasted the article (it ended with your Twitter account) that was part of the email. I did mention your site name in brackets at the beginning of the post. Is not that attribution enough? Pl clarify
        Cheers
        Raviv

        When reprinting articles, it is not enough to cite the name of the website... You must also give a live, clickable link to that website...

        She had a legitimate right to be pissed off by that...

        If it had been my article, I would have been angry too...


        p.s. But I still like you Raviv...
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634710].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author raviv
          Hey Bill,
          Thanks for clarifying. I am now wiser after the event
          Cheers
          Raviv
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634723].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by Jill Whalen View Post

      Perfect case in point. You found my article interesting enough to post it here but do you link to my site? No. in fact you removed the bio link. Nice. People don't naturally think to do so. (Although you on this forum certainly know better!)

      I could not fix the original poster, but I added your URL (http://www.highrankings.com/) to my post.

      Welcome to the Warrior Forum...

      Maybe you will get over your initial irritation and join us more often...

      We would surely enjoy your company, in our little corner of the Internet...

      Bill Platt
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634693].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Originally Posted by Jill Whalen View Post

      Perfect case in point. You found my article interesting enough to post it here but do you link to my site? No. in fact you removed the bio link. Nice. People don't naturally think to do so. (Although you on this forum certainly know better!)
      Hi Jill,

      Welcome to the Warrior Forum.

      I was about to flog the OP for failing to link to the source but you beat me to it.

      I have been a fan of your sage wisdom for many years and frequently lurk on your High Rankings Forum.

      For those warriors that aren't familiar with Jill Whalen, she is a well recognized expert in the SEO industry known for her sometimes harsh, but always sharp and cutting wit. She is to SEO what Simon Cowell is to American Idol.

      Jill, I hope you become a regular contributor, we could use your wisdom, and occasional scolding, around here.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2636738].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Hancox
    Nice article, although (as I just noticed), the author had to come here to point out you essentially just cut and pasted an article, with no link back.

    Back to the article: It's not sad, it's an arms race. Google need SOME algorithm to decide what gets ranked where, and there will always be people able to guesstimate how that algorithm works, and GAME the system.

    When it comes to search engines, is it even possible to devise an algorithm that can't be gamed in some way? I'm not so sure.

    The danger with gaming the system, is that at some point, Google may pull the plug on that way of doing it. Mind you, Google could pull the plug on any way (legitimate or not)... but I think they're far less likely to do so with really good quality content and authority sites.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634594].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DogScout
    Dear Ann Launders,

    I am in the middle of a psychotic break. I lie and tell people that Google is the best search engine and then I lie about what they need to do to get on page one. It is not like a real lie... it is more the way I wish it were. (I tell people car salesmen do not lie, too). I blame Google for this, even though I should know better. I am a little mad at God too. What should I do? Use Bing or continue to mis-lead everyone I meet?

    Signed,
    Swimming in Da Nile
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634624].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634637].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pavionjsl
    One of our members, made a good point in one thread on Google's level of caring when he basically created thousands of links to his new sites and ranked them in weeks. Or another example of great seo, the knock-off ugg boot site with hundreds of spam Chinese links busted by Interpol I think (I hope they don't stop by too, just in case they do - INTERPOL) but anyway they ranked #1 with the links made a fortune before being shut down for being knock off boots website. Keep wishing for what should be, right now the reality is different then all that high advice, some charge others for concerning ranking.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634755].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JayVance
    I was really amazed how google and other search engines worked when I first got into IM. I started doing back linking and I remember thinking, "really? this is how it works?" To me it seemed so easy to manipulate but for some reason I can't help to think that there is an easier way to do all this. But even if there was maybe it would shut the door on IM and we would all be out of the business.

    For now, I'll keep plugging along with back links and targeting keywords.
    Signature
    Free Article Directory -> Free Expert Article Directory, High Quality Submissions Only! Your-Answers.com PR3

    SEO Passive Income -> Learn how to make a Passive Income Online
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634927].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author born2drv
    If Google were smart, they'd make a small listing fee (like $20/yr) a requirement to get listed in their index.

    That would make spamming with thousands of domains less profitable. Over time, just increase the cost.... before you know it, every domain pays $500/yr to get indexed.... and no more spam (or very little).

    Problem solved.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2634976].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by born2drv View Post

      If Google were smart, they'd make a small listing fee (like $20/yr) a requirement to get listed in their index.

      That would make spamming with thousands of domains less profitable. Over time, just increase the cost.... before you know it, every domain pays $500/yr to get indexed.... and no more spam (or very little).

      Problem solved.

      Note: Jill Whalen's article is also posted here on SEO News this week:
      SEO News: Dear Google... Stop Making Me Look Like a Fool!



      Actually, Google doesn't even need to charge money to clean its results...

      I have been published several times in SEO News as well... I was published there three times in 2007 alone, and here is one of those articles, which got to the heart of this topic:
      SEO News: The Morality of Paid Links and Google's 'Intent Algorithm'

      Google fouled themselves up when they told the public how their search algorithm worked... The said up-front and even through today that they measure the value of a website by links and link popularity, and their Little Green Bar in the Google Toolbar (PageRank value) is the public acknowledgment of a web pages' link popularity as demonstrated by PageRank...

      I suggested then, and I will say it again here... Google needs to take the PageRank viewing option away from us... It always has been and always will be a thorn in their side...

      So long as you and I can see a pages' PageRank value, then you and I will be able to see how to push link popularity value around to game Google's search results...

      As I said in my original article, this is a clear case where "once the genie is out of the bottle, it is impossible to put it back into the bottle..."



      For sure, the only thing Google has going for it right now is that people are creatures of habit... They habitually use the same products and companies every day... That is why Google managed to retain its Search market share, after Bing entered the marketplace...

      Just this morning, I read an interesting piece about the Bing vs. Google market share battles:
      Mystic Mountain Media - Recessions Introduce Consumer Volatility, Which Makes Recession Marketing More Profitable
      The "recession" angle was just a small part of the article, and most of it fixated on how recessions are a great time to market a business, because consumer spending habits are starting to shift...

      I only bring it up here, due to the analysis of the Google vs. Bing angle...

      As the author pointed out, Bing entered the marketplace in early 2009, with what was clearly a much better search product... Bing was so good that Google management decided they needed to overhaul their search engine immediately... After about 6 months, Google released Google Caffeine Beta, then launched it system-wide in January of 2010...

      The author went on to say:
      Once Google's new search engine had been released, I imagine that its owners and managers sighed a collective sigh of relief... They had managed to return from the quality-underdog to an almost equal search engine, without losing any of its market share!!
      The author of the above article talks in depth about the human tendency to buy goods and services or use Internet Tools, based on ingrained habits...

      And of course, he or she is right about that...

      It is going to take a lot more than a lot of confusing Bing commercials to convince the public to give Bing a try...

      But if you have given Bing a try, you will have seen that it generally provides much better results than Google...

      If only Google users could put down their Kool-Aid long enough to explore the other options, people would surely switch engines... But I know I continue to talk to a brick wall here, because the people reading this rant are marketers who must acknowledge the painful reality that Google still holds nearly 80% of the Search Engine Market Share...

      As a marketer, you will only begin to change which search engine you obsess about, when you start to see the majority of your customers jumping ship to sail away with Bing...

      Until then, you will continue to obsess on Google, as the most-important search engine to follow and to optimize for...



      Personally, I never worried about ranking in MSN, because it was a Yahoo clone, which was a poor example of how to compete with Google...

      But as soon as a friend introduced me to the Bing search engine and the quality of its results, I sat up and began to pay attention...

      It is still a small player in search engines, but it does sell its results to Yahoo...

      1-in-5 of my current prospects have begun to use Bing/Yahoo religiously... I also suspect that as more people explore Bing and realize how crappy Google really is, there will be a larger market shift, and that is the reason I have started to optimize for Bing too...

      Google will continue to get most of my attention, but in preparation for tomorrow's Internet, I am giving much more time and attention to getting great search placement in Bing too...
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2635261].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Black Hat Cat
        Banned
        The worst part is how you've single-handedly created the entire link-building and link-buying industries. Link building is the most distasteful, horrible act to have to perform for a website. It's unnatural and something that should not even exist. Which is why I've always told people to have a link-worthy site and get the word out about it to the right people (through marketing) and they'd receive great links.
        Translation: Don't do stuff to build links, because it's just not right. Instead, go out and do stuff to build links.

        Frankly, she's talking out of her rear end. I've got news for you, Jill. Folks know how to game Bing and Yahoo listings too.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2635418].message }}
      • Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        But if you have given Bing a try, you will have seen that it generally provides much better results than Google...
        Why are you spreading BS? Have you considered taking up farming?

        Bing is a piece of crap, it's years away from Google

        For example, I have a webpage on the first page of google for "poker strategy" and it full deserves to be there

        on Bing it's practically no where and I actually find a horse racing system before I find my page

        the same applies for practically all of my sites, I only get involved in niches I know a lot about (very competetive niches hence why I'm a retired builder) and my sites always do well in Google because of honest hard work on SEO and because the sites are large and helpful, I never get anywhere in Bing
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2636862].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by TheRetiredBuilder View Post

          Why are you spreading BS? Have you considered taking up farming?

          Bing is a piece of crap, it's years away from Google

          For example, I have a webpage on the first page of google for "poker strategy" and it full deserves to be there

          on Bing it's practically no where and I actually find a horse racing system before I find my page

          the same applies for practically all of my sites, I only get involved in niches I know a lot about (very competetive niches hence why I'm a retired builder) and my sites always do well in Google because of honest hard work on SEO and because the sites are large and helpful, I never get anywhere in Bing

          Google Kool-Aid...

          No one deserves to be on page one... You may want, but that does not mean that you deserve it...

          Trashing a search engine just because you have not yet figured out how to rank well on it doesn't make me the local fertilizer dealer...


          p.s. You have stepped into the same trap as Jill Whalen... Sorry dude...
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2636929].message }}
          • Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            Google Kool-Aid...

            No one deserves to be on page one... You may want, but that does not mean that you deserve it...

            Trashing a search engine just because you have not yet figured out how to rank well on it doesn't make me the local fertilizer dealer...


            p.s. You have stepped into the same trap as Jill Whalen... Sorry dude...
            So you're telling me that a page primerally about horse racing should show up higher for the search term "poker strategy" than a site that is all about poker and has tens of thousands of links?

            I have several very profitable sites in the poker niche, some of my newer sites are outranked in bing by the disclaimers from my older sites, I kid you not

            Bing cannot index information as accurately as Google and anyone saying otherwise isn't firing on all cylinders
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637099].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Dellco
              Originally Posted by TheRetiredBuilder View Post

              So you're telling me that a page primerally about horse racing should show up higher for the search term "poker strategy" than a site that is all about poker and has tens of thousands of links?

              I have several very profitable sites in the poker niche, some of my newer sites are outranked in bing by the disclaimers from my older sites, I kid you not

              Bing cannot index information as accurately as Google and anyone saying otherwise isn't firing on all cylinders
              I know what you are talking about. I launched a site some time ago and till today, Bing doesn't bother much about my site. I'm on page-God-knows-where in Bing....

              I might sound like I am tooting my horn, but the truth is, I really DO know this topic really well. I believe my site is better than many of the current top results in Google and Bing. Yes, both.

              The top site is top because of its backlinks and nothing more. It even has major inaccuracies in the content which I noticed, and that is because the creator knows jack about the topic (Content was outsourced apparently). I even get emails from people asking me for advice because they now know I'm an expert on the topic....

              That said, Google has recognized my site as being worthy of attention and note, Google has finally given me a fairly good ranking with hardly any backlinks, in many competitive keywords, and some are major keywords.

              So, this is really a plus to Google, which shows they DO get some things right.

              I can say Google is FAR from being perfect, but it is still far ahead of its competition. The best Bing can come up with, is (still) to copy most of Google's front page listings, and then shake them up. Notice many of Bing's results being quite identical to Google's?

              At worst, Bing displays plenty of crap on its front page. Certainly more than Google. And finally, I can personally vouch for the Google Webmaster Team as being pretty responsive, I have no idea about Bing's Webmaster Team....

              There was a time when a site copied some pages from a site of mine, and despite repeated requests to the webmaster to take down those pages, I was ignored. I filed a report to Google, and that site was deindexed in a few weeks.....

              Conclusion:

              Is Google perfect? No. Still too dependent on backlinks.... but improving.

              Is Bing better than Google? Not by a long shot. Plenty of crap results displayed.

              Take it what you will.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637363].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author tpw
              Originally Posted by TheRetiredBuilder View Post

              So you're telling me that a page primerally about horse racing should show up higher for the search term "poker strategy" than a site that is all about poker and has tens of thousands of links?

              I have several very profitable sites in the poker niche, some of my newer sites are outranked in bing by the disclaimers from my older sites, I kid you not

              Bing cannot index information as accurately as Google and anyone saying otherwise isn't firing on all cylinders

              No, I am not saying that at all... Google and Bing are different algorithms... What works for Google will not work for Bing... Period...

              If you are link building, that will not help you in Bing at all... Damn waste of time trying that approach with Bing...

              Hint: Bing places inbound links lower on the totem pole than does Google, which places the majority of its value on links only... Bing could care less that you have tens of thousands of links... They just don't care about that...

              Bing is the anti-Google, and they deliberately do things backwards from Google...

              So in order to rank for Bing, you have to think contrary to how you think for Google...

              You have to put down the Google Kool-Aid...


              I am saying that Bing's algorithms should not automatically post you higher, if you are not giving them what they want to see... And who knows, the other guy might have crossed all the t's and dotted the i's for your niche too...


              And yes, Bing puts a lot of value on age of domain... Of course your new sites will never quite perform as well as your old sites, even if it has to reflect back to your Disclaimers on the old sites...


              This is pretty straight forward... You have no clue whatsoever about what it takes to rank in Bing... As a result, your results in Bing suck... And you say they suck because you act as if Bing (the anti-Google) should perform exactly as Google does... And it doesn't...

              That is exactly what I meant when I said:
              Originally Posted by tpw View Post

              Google Kool-Aid...

              Trashing a search engine just because you have not yet figured out how to rank well on it doesn't make me the local fertilizer dealer...

              p.s. You have stepped into the same trap as Jill Whalen... Sorry dude...

              Many people in this thread argue that since Bing won't rank them as high as Google, then it is Bing's fault...

              But they are not the same engine or algorithm are they...

              So you are going to ignore Bing, because you don't know how to rank well there... That is fair...

              But to say they are crap because you don't know how to rank for them, that is not fair...

              It is easier to admit that they suck, than to admit that you are not real sure what they want...

              Understood... Human nature...


              Originally Posted by Jacob Martus View Post

              In my experience, most of my Google rankings are very similar over on Bing.
              Same here.
              Signature
              Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
              Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637838].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author sbsb
                Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                No, I am not saying that at all... Google and Bing are different algorithms... What works for Google will not work for Bing... Period...

                If you are link building, that will not help you in Bing at all... Damn waste of time trying that approach with Bing...

                Hint: Bing places inbound links lower on the totem pole than does Google, which places the majority of its value on links only... Bing could care less that you have tens of thousands of links... They just don't care about that...
                .
                Do you have any good specific tips for bing optimisation? I havent been having much luck with them for a whlie, but have been doing ok with google.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2639194].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Dellco
                  The site I referred to earlier is now starting to rank well on a term that has a monthly search value of between 50K-100K. Millions of competing pages, as well.

                  When I built the site I paid no attention to backlinks. Just some blog commenting. Many here won't believe me, I'm sure. I just worked on my content for months....It wasn't easy, but it was something I liked doing and am very familiar with.

                  After some months, Google just slotted me in the first few pages (that with hardly any good links on my part) for some major terms, and now, I'm working to get to the first page in the top 5. And now, I am building backlinks, because it is moving into crunch time.

                  I still think I need many strong backlinks to get up there among the top results, because Google is still very dependent on backlinks. But the difference is, 5 years ago, I doubt Google would be able to recognize my site at all.

                  The way Google initially recognized my site and then gave me a fairly good rank literally out of nowhere, confirmed for me that they are getting better at recognizing quality content.....

                  But Bing has never recognized my site till today....

                  And now in Google, many of my new pages get indexed within 5 minutes, and end up in the first couple of pages for their main keywords.

                  So in my experience, that is good enough reason to believe Google is improving, and is superior to Bing in many respects, even though Google itself has a long way to go.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2639513].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Jacob Martus
                    Originally Posted by Dellco View Post

                    The site I referred to earlier is now starting to rank well on a term that has a monthly search value of between 50K-100K. Millions of competing pages, as well.

                    When I built the site I paid no attention to backlinks. Just some blog commenting. Many here won't believe me, I'm sure. I just worked on my content for months....It wasn't easy, but it was something I liked doing and am very familiar with.

                    After some months, Google just slotted me in the first few pages (that with hardly any good links on my part) for some major terms, and now, I'm working to get to the first page in the top 5. And now, I am building backlinks, because it is moving into crunch time.

                    The way Google initially recognized my site, confirmed for me that they are getting better at recognizing quality content.....

                    But Bing has never recognized my site till today....

                    And now in Google, many of my new pages get indexed within 5 minutes, and end up in the first couple of pages for their main keywords.

                    So in my experience, that is good enough reason to believe Google is improving, and is superior to Bing in many respects, even though Google itself has a long way to go.
                    Just because you didn't worry about building links doesn't mean that you didn't get any. If you focused so much on content you may have gotten some good natural links (as mythical as those are, they do occasionally happen).
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2639551].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Dellco
                      Originally Posted by Jacob Martus View Post

                      Just because you didn't worry about building links doesn't mean that you didn't get any. If you focused so much on content you may have gotten some good natural links (as mythical as those are, they do occasionally happen).
                      I did get a backlink from a site that I figured might be considered a fairly authoritative site in Google's eyes, but that was all. I doubt this was the main factor. The rest of my links during that period were mostly blog comments.

                      Oh yeah, and some article marketing. Very normal stuff.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2639586].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post


        As a marketer, you will only begin to change which search engine you obsess about, when you start to see the majority of your customers jumping ship to sail away with Bing...
        I can't speak for others, but...

        I have a number of keyword that rank similarly (well) in Google, Yahoo and Bing. What percentage of traffic do I get from Google versus the other 2 combined? I get north of 90% of my traffic from Google. At those numbers, it doesn't pay to waste a second of my time worrying about Yahoo or Bing (although, I have found that Bing ranking is easier to achieve than Yahoo on a consistent basis).

        Tom
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637071].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin View Post

          I can't speak for others, but...

          I have a number of keyword that rank similarly (well) in Google, Yahoo and Bing. What percentage of traffic do I get from Google versus the other 2 combined? I get north of 90% of my traffic from Google. At those numbers, it doesn't pay to waste a second of my time worrying about Yahoo or Bing (although, I have found that Bing ranking is easier to achieve than Yahoo on a consistent basis).

          Tom

          I get 80% from Google... 4 of 5 visitors...

          17% from Bing/Yahoo...

          with 20 billion searches per month on the top three search engines, decent rankings in Bing / Yahoo can bring significant traffic...

          On just one of my websites, Bing / Yahoo accounts for 3700 additional visitors per month...

          So the question you have to ask yourself is how many of my paying customers are among the 4400 that come from Bing / Yahoo and how many come from the 17,600 that come from Google... And how many of them came from the websites that are not search engines... the other 55% of my global traffic?

          Unless you know the answer to that question, you don't know which ones you should pay closer attention to...

          I know a significant amount of my traffic comes from google, and some of my customers come from google...

          But I also know that I also get customers from Bing / Yahoo, and some of my customers swear by the conversion rates from Bing...

          So, if I ignore Bing / Yahoo, which of my customers will I be giving up? And what percentage of my customers will I be tossing to my competitors?

          Therein lies the problem with ignoring 20% of the search market...
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637209].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
            Well, as I said, personally, I get a hair over 90% from Google.

            But, in any event...

            At the end of the day, it takes additional work to rank well in the other engines, and that is an opportunity cost.

            Could I go after that 10-20% in a more diligent matter? Sure I could.

            But, my time is better spent ranking my keywords in Google as high as possible (and using that time to go after more keywords in Google). That will produce the most profit for me and my business. Obviously that may differ from person to person. Not to rehash a thread over on the other WF forum (i.e., the forum from hell), but I don't cater or go out of my way for visitors or potential customers with dialup for the same reason. It is an opportunity cost, and the benefits are outweighed by the costs.

            I'll stick to maximizing the Google share, as that is where the $$ is at, not to mention that it is so much easier to rank quickly there.

            Tom


            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            I get 80% from Google... 4 of 5 visitors...

            17% from Bing/Yahoo...

            with 20 billion searches per month on the top three search engines, decent rankings in Bing / Yahoo can bring significant traffic...

            On just one of my websites, Bing / Yahoo accounts for 3700 additional visitors per month...

            So the question you have to ask yourself is how many of my paying customers are among the 4400 that come from Bing / Yahoo and how many come from the 17,600 that come from Google...

            Unless you know the answer to that question, you don't know which ones you should pay closer attention to...

            I know a significant amount of my traffic comes from google, and some of my customers come from google...

            But I also know that I also get customers from Bing / Yahoo, and some of my customers swear by the conversion rates from Bing...

            So, if I ignore Bing / Yahoo, which of my customers will I be giving up? And what percentage of my customers will I be tossing to my competitors?

            Therein lies the problem with ignoring 20% of the search market...
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637291].message }}
            • Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin View Post


              I'll stick to maximizing the Google share, as that is where the $$ is at, not to mention that it is so much easier to rank quickly there.

              Tom
              That's because Google is a much better and much more effiecient search engine

              It's so much faster at indexing and relevantly sorting information than bing

              It can take months and months to see any value at all when you do seo work in bing, but with google you see results just a few days later
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637303].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Bill_Z
    Originally Posted by raviv View Post

    e company with 10 similar but different websites can dominate the top 20 results.

    The worst part is how you've single-handedly created the entire link-building and link-buying industries. Link building is the most distasteful, horrible act to have to perform for a website. It's unnatural and something that should not even exist. Which is why I've always told people to have a link-worthy site and get the word out about it to the right people (through marketing) and they'd receive great links.
    I am so sick and tired of hearing this theory. Here's a scenario: I have a site for my local lawn mower business in East Bumble, USA...I am supposed to wait for people to link to my awesome "link-worthy" lawn mower site? Yes, let me start my marketing campaign now, and "get the word out", and wait 5 years to get on page 1. It's absurd. I hope more people "believe in google" and "wait for google to get it right" or "do the right thing" because it will make my job easier.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2635589].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dellco
      I totally disagree that Bing is a better search engine compared to Google. And I'm not saying Google is great either, but.....Jill Whalen is right, it is the best.

      For example...just one example.

      Here's what I mean - Look up Bing for 4 slice toaster.

      http://www.4slicetoaster. org/

      This site (and many others of similar ilke) are still ranked highly in Bing. And many here have discussed this site before and unanimously agreed it was pretty low quality.

      Google has deindexed it and probably banned the guys Adsense account. I've seen other craptaculous sites disappear from Google too....and I know they definitely do their job from time to time.

      Bing is not better. Bing has a LONG way to go to even match Google. I'll give credit to Bing for their nice wallpaper, but that is about it.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2635749].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
        Originally Posted by Dellco View Post

        I totally disagree that Bing is a better search engine compared to Google. And I'm not saying Google is great either, but.....Jill Whalen is right, it is the best.

        For example...just one example.

        Here's what I mean - Look up Bing for 4 slice toaster.

        http://www.4slicetoaster. org/

        This site (and many others of similar ilke) are still ranked highly in Bing. And many here have discussed this site before and unanimously agreed it was pretty low quality.

        Google has deindexed it and probably banned the guys Adsense account. I've seen other craptaculous sites disappear from Google too....and I know they definitely do their job from time to time.
        ...likely due to the fact that that particular site has been plastered on IM forums from New York to Tokyo. There is no doubt that particular site was on google's radar.

        There are at least 3 other similar sites still on page 1 for the keyword.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637009].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WealthWithin
    Someone who has done SEO for 10 years can't understand riding the wave is the best way to go?

    You can sit on a corner and whine, or put up 10 web-sites and help your client to cash in.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2635732].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
    Interesting read, and aligns almost 100% with what many of us here preach in terms of Google SEO (keywords in your domain do help quite a bit, keyword packed pages even if they don't make a lot of sense to a human reader can rank very well for the targeted keyword, building a site with the hope that the kind of anchored links you want will rain on you is fool's gold, etc.).

    Originally Posted by raviv View Post

    Hello Warriors,

    ++Dear Google...Stop Making Me Look Like a Fool!++
    Dear Google,
    I'm tired of you making me look like a fool.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2636986].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author forthright
    How about all the "lucky" Affiliates who own old domains that don't have to bother with link building or content but get ranked highly for putting in virtually no effort what so ever. Or all the great domains that were scooped up years and years ago. The internet and marketing on this thing is not always "Fair" So get use to it and work harder to over come it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637152].message }}
  • Honestly, I could give countless examples of a search terms which on Google give relevant results but the same searches in bing will give you horse mess until you get to page 3 where the relevant stuff is

    One thing I've noticed is that Bing don't put as much weight on page title as Google and this is NOT a good thing and it's one of the reasons why it's ultimately not as good

    If information exists for your search term, Google will give it to you, Bing unfortunately won't
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637400].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TristanPerry
      Originally Posted by TheRetiredBuilder View Post

      Honestly, I could give countless examples of a search terms which on Google give relevant results but the same searches in bing will give you horse mess until you get to page 3 where the relevant stuff is

      One thing I've noticed is that Bing don't put as much weight on page title as Google and this is NOT a good thing and it's one of the reasons why it's ultimately not as good

      If information exists for your search term, Google will give it to you, Bing unfortunately won't
      And I've seen loads of examples where the Google search results were rubbish and Bing's and Duck Duck Go's were much better and more relevant.

      Heck, as an example: a short while ago I searched for Mouse eating my bread?

      At least on Google UK, the SERPs were rubbish. When I tried the search, 5 of the results were about keeping pet mice, 1 was about the Christian Lord's Prayer ('Give us today our daily bread' etc), another was a piece of poetry entitled 'Diary of a Church Mouse' and the other 3 results were junky too. Great job, Google!

      I tried it on Bing and DDG and got relevant results on page 1.

      (Funnily enough though, when this happened I filled a "Give us feedback" Google report and the SERPs seem to be a little better now)

      But yeah, I wouldn't say that Google is always > everyone else. In 2010 it seems as though they've started going backwards and being less relevant, showing more spam, etc etc.

      Anywhoo, it's a bit of a moot point since Google are king at the moment.

      Sadly.
      Signature
      Plagiarism Guard - Protect Against Content Theft
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637516].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jacob Martus
      Originally Posted by TheRetiredBuilder View Post

      Honestly, I could give countless examples of a search terms which on Google give relevant results but the same searches in bing will give you horse mess until you get to page 3 where the relevant stuff is

      One thing I've noticed is that Bing don't put as much weight on page title as Google and this is NOT a good thing and it's one of the reasons why it's ultimately not as good

      If information exists for your search term, Google will give it to you, Bing unfortunately won't
      In my experience, most of my Google rankings are very similar over on Bing. It seems like they have a very similar ranking algorithm to me.

      I don't disagree with Tom and others that it is just way more efficient and profitable to spend my time aiming for high rankings with Google, but in most cases when my site ranks well on Google, it ranks well on Bing as well.

      Also, Google sends me about 90% of my traffic as well. Bing just simply isn't worth targeting at this moment in time. I think that will change though. In fact, with the introduction to smart phones, many more people are using Bing.
      Lots of cell phone browsers use bing as a preferred search engine from what I've seen. (I wouldn't know because I'm still using a dinosaur from 5 years ago.)

      On a side note, I do use Bing to search sometimes when I'm trying to keep something from Google. I think I'm probably being overly-paranoid, but still, better safe than sorry.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637547].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637775].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tom Goodwin
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      What is this Bing you speak of?

      Serious though, does anyone really use Bing? I mean every day?
      I have been to Bing twice in the last 6 months, does that count?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2637806].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author evanlambda
    Thanks for sharing the article, will read again.
    Signature

    I developed a new (FREE) PPC/SEO tracking system, go to lambdatracker.com to and enter your email and you will be sent the download link and install instructions .... Also increase your revenue with my Geotargeting script.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2638098].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Intrepreneur
    The anchor text links should be done with away with as a ranking factor. As Jill says.. it is unatural.

    Yet it seems Google encourage it still so maybe out there somewhere they are offering services because I can't see any other reason for it.

    The on-page factors should decide the outcome.. not some silly anchor text.

    Signature

    Owner bestfivereviewed.com

    Started this stuff 2009. Time is what will teach you the skills you need.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2640657].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Google.me
    Quick!! lets pull this thread down.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2640885].message }}

Trending Topics