Is My Site Sandboxed?

76 replies
  • SEO
  • |
I have a site that is almost 4 months old. It had been ranking for a number of keywords centered around product names. However, today I checked and I now find these pages are not ranked on the 1st page for these keywords but are on the very last page of results for the keyword in the SERPs. Other pages of the site are showing up. However, these are not pages that I had done any link building to.

My link building strategy has been to write articles and blog commenting. I only started the blog commenting about a month ago. This has consisted of me making anywhere from 5 to 13 links a day on do follow blogs. My question is has my site been sandboxed or is this just an initial fluctuation?
#sandboxed #site
  • Profile picture of the author dburk
    Hi JDSalinger,

    There is no sandbox, it is just a myth.

    We get at least one of these threads a week and most of the time it is just the temporary boost effect of QDF wearing off and your new web pages going to it's currently earned position.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3778119].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
      Originally Posted by dburk View Post

      Hi JDSalinger,

      There is no sandbox, it is just a myth.

      We get at least one of these threads a week and most of the time it is just the temporary boost effect of QDF wearing off and your new web pages going to it's currently earned position.
      Thank you for responding. I know you know your stuff. However, I recognize that sites can jump around in position but this is a pretty dramatic jump where my page is moving from position #5 to position #429. I do not know what QDF is, but it seems like that is more than just google dance. Believe me, I would be happy to realize it is a myth. But why would I see multiple pages basically fall out of the top 400 overnight?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3778183].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author dburk
        Originally Posted by JDSalinger View Post

        Thank you for responding. I know you know your stuff. However, I recognize that sites can jump around in position but this is a pretty dramatic jump where my page is moving from position #5 to position #429. I do not know what QDF is, but it seems like that is more than just google dance. Believe me, I would be happy to realize it is a myth. But why would I see multiple pages basically fall out of the top 400 overnight?
        Hi JDSalinger,

        There are dozens of threads on this forum about QDF.

        Your web page hasn't yet earned that #5 position. It was temporarily boosted by QDF (the freshness factor), and now that that temporary boost has worn off, your page has gone to it's truly earned ranking. It is just that simple.

        Now you need to get busy earning the ranking that you desire by promoting your web pages.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3778387].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
          Originally Posted by dburk View Post

          Hi JDSalinger,

          There are dozens of threads on this forum about QDF.

          Your web page hasn't yet earned that #5 position. It was temporarily boosted by QDF (the freshness factor), and now that that temporary boost has worn off, your page has gone to it's truly earned ranking. It is just that simple.

          Now you need to get busy earning the ranking that you desire by promoting your web pages.
          Ok but here is the thing, my sites pages didn't start in the #5 position, it started back at 80th position then the 50th, then all the way down to #5. So why would your freshness factor improve over time? I would be with you if it was at #5 all the time and then dropped out but that is not happened here.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3778426].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ElectronPlumber
            JD, I've been working on an FAQ for just this sort of thing. As was stated above, this sort of thing is posted here 10 times a day. You've most likely lost your honeymoon effect.

            Check out http://www.warriorforum.com/adsense-...deindexed.html for more details.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3779290].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author dburk
            Originally Posted by JDSalinger View Post

            Ok but here is the thing, my sites pages didn't start in the #5 position, it started back at 80th position then the 50th, then all the way down to #5. So why would your freshness factor improve over time? I would be with you if it was at #5 all the time and then dropped out but that is not happened here.
            Hi JDSalinger,

            That seems fairly typical of the usual pattern we see with QDF. The algorithm is dynamic with many different signals contributing to the ranking score. I have seen a similar pattern at least a thousand times before. It is nothing new nor unusual.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3779670].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
      Originally Posted by dburk View Post

      There is no sandbox, it is just a myth.
      You keep clamoring this over, and over, and over.

      Create a new site and give me the URL.

      I guarantee you I will sandbox it for months.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3779703].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author dburk
        Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

        You keep clamoring this over, and over, and over.

        Create a new site and give me the URL.

        I guarantee you I will sandbox it for months.
        Hi Mike,

        LOL, and how would you do that? Do you have the magical key to the mythical Sandbox?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3779756].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
          Originally Posted by dburk View Post

          Hi Mike,

          LOL, and how would you do that? Do you have the magical key to the mythical Sandbox?
          Yes, I do.

          Give me a brand new site's URL of yours and I will sandbox it.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3779765].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author dburk
            Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

            Yes, I do.

            Give me a brand new site's URL of yours and I will sandbox it.
            Hi Mike,

            Here's a brand new website just asking to be sandboxed by you:

            No Sandbox | The Sandbox is Just a Myth!

            Let's see your sandboxing prowess!
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3780501].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
              Originally Posted by dburk View Post

              Hi Mike,

              Here's a brand new website just asking to be sandboxed by you:

              No Sandbox | The Sandbox is Just a Myth!

              Let's see your sandboxing prowess!
              Give me a new URL of yours, not one of WP.

              Domain authority extends to subdomains, not the other way around.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3781194].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
                Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                Give me a new URL of yours, not one of WP.

                Domain authority extends to subdomains, not the other way around.
                Should I continue waiting, or am I not going to receive one?
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3783915].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
                  Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                  Should I continue waiting, or am I not going to receive one?
                  LOL, I don't think you are going to get one from him. I think if you are truly motivated to prove this point (like you appear to be), you will have to get one yourself and do it. It would be a nice little case study though.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784006].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
                    Originally Posted by JDSalinger View Post

                    LOL, I don't think you are going to get one from him. I think if you are truly motivated to prove this point (like you appear to be), you will have to get one yourself and do it. It would be a nice little case study though.
                    For someone who refuses to acknowledge the sandbox and calls it "mythical", he sure does try to skip around the test a lot.

                    Hell, using his rationale, he should do awesome in the SERPs with what I'm going to do to the domain.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784099].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author dburk
                      Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                      Should I continue waiting, or am I not going to receive one?
                      Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                      For someone who refuses to acknowledge the sandbox and calls it "mythical", he sure does try to skip around the test a lot.

                      Hell, using his rationale, he should do awesome in the SERPs with what I'm going to do to the domain.
                      Hi Mike,

                      I guess you missed my post above. I created a new website just for you to use you magical sandbox key on.


                      Since it is brand new, it hasn't even been indexed yet. I suggest that we give the Googlebot a chance to find it and index it, then do your best to sandbox it.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784230].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author dburk
                Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                Give me a new URL of yours, not one of WP.

                Domain authority extends to subdomains, not the other way around.
                Just another myth IMO, search engines do not recognize domain level authority, only page level authority.

                If you kept up with Fish Randkin's research you would already be aware that he backed off the claim of "domain authority" as a measurable influence in SERP ranking in favor of "page authority". My own research has led me to believe there is no domain level signals used in SERP except to group results post query. If you have anything that suggest otherwise I would love to see the source.

                In the interest of learning and sharing knowledge I will register a new domain, setup a new hosting account and create yet another website so you cannot hide behind the notion of "domain authority". I will even research the domain to be sure that it was not previously registered, we wouldn't want any latent "domain authority" skewing the results.

                Please let me know if there are any other prerequisites for what you would consider a valid tests before I proceed.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784375].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
                  Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                  Just another myth IMO, search engines do not recognize domain level authority, only page level authority.

                  If you kept up with Fish Randkin's research you would already be aware that he backed off the claim of "domain authority" as a measurable influence in SERP ranking in favor of "page authority". My own research has led me to believe there is no domain level signals used in SERP except to group results post query. If you have anything that suggest otherwise I would love to see the source.

                  In the interest of learning and sharing knowledge I will register a new domain, setup a new hosting account and create yet another website so you cannot hide behind the notion of "domain authority". I will even research the domain to be sure that it was not previously registered, we wouldn't want any latent "domain authority" skewing the results.

                  Please let me know if there are any other prerequisites for what you would consider a valid tests before I proceed.
                  SEs don't recognize domain level authority?! How are you to explain the Amazon's, Overtstock's, Walmart's, eHow's, etc. rankings?

                  No other prereqs. Just a brand new domain that is well-optimized on-page. I ask that you don't try to do any indexing.

                  Edit - also link @ where Rand "backs off the claim of 'domain authority'".
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784398].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author HKSEO Rotzee
                    Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                    SEs don't recognize domain level authority?! How are you to explain the Amazon's, Overtstock's, Walmart's, eHow's, etc. rankings?

                    No other prereqs. Just a brand new domain that is well-optimized on-page. I ask that you don't try to do any indexing.

                    Edit - also link @ where Rand "backs off the claim of 'domain authority'".
                    *Grabs popcorn and sprite zero
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784438].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
                      Originally Posted by HKSEO Rotzee View Post

                      *Grabs popcorn and sprite zero
                      I was thinking the same thing. I almost posted that Michael Jackson gif where he is eating the popcorn.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784457].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author HKSEO Rotzee
                        Originally Posted by JDSalinger View Post

                        I was thinking the same thing. I almost posted that Michael Jackson gif where he is eating the popcorn.
                        yeah, internet fights are awesome, now I have something to look forward to for a little while
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784534].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author dburk
                    Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                    SEs don't recognize domain level authority?! How are you to explain the Amazon's, Overtstock's, Walmart's, eHow's, etc. rankings?
                    ...um, how about massive advertising?

                    Perhaps our next experiment should be outranking those websites using a new domain with no "domain authority". We can save that for another day.

                    Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                    No other prereqs. Just a brand new domain that is well-optimized on-page. I ask that you don't try to do any indexing.
                    So you want a brand new domain, not even indexed and what... you will get the site indexed? I assume that if you don't want me to get the site indexed that you also don't want me to promote the website either?

                    So remind me, what exactly are we trying to prove again?

                    Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                    Edit - also link @ where Rand "backs off the claim of 'domain authority'".
                    It's been a couple years ago, and Rand doesn't like to focus too much attention on it since he made his bones promoting the whole notion of "domain authority". I will look for it and post later.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784999].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author dburk
                      I have a dinner engagement, one of my local clients is being honored for his success and he asked me to attend. I will get this new website up first thing in the morning.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3785039].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
                      Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                      ...um, how about massive advertising?

                      Perhaps our next experiment should be outranking those websites using a new domain with no "domain authority". We can save that for another day.



                      So you want a brand new domain, not even indexed and what... you will get the site indexed? I assume that if you don't want me to get the site indexed that you also don't want me to promote the website either?

                      So remind me, what exactly are we trying to prove again?



                      It's been a couple years ago, and Rand doesn't like to focus too much attention on it since he made his bones promoting the whole notion of "domain authority". I will look for it and post later.

                      Advertising? Care to show me what advertising Wikipedia does? Outranking the aforementioned sites does nothing to prove your point on the lack of importance of domain authority. There's a reason why domains like I've mentioned rank much easier with much less page authority.

                      Yes, do not index the site. I want it as new as possible. Just have good on-page optimization, as I've already said. I've also already said what I'm going to do.

                      Oh, one of those, "he said it, but I can't find it right now despite him pushing the notion of domain authority importance". Sure, sure. :rolleyes:. That's an easy backing out of your statement.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3785053].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author siwell16
        Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

        You keep clamoring this over, and over, and over.

        Create a new site and give me the URL.

        I guarantee you I will sandbox it for months.
        I agree sandboxing is not a myth if you want proof just get thousands of links to a newly indexed site and watch it get buried in the sand!

        Signature

        The path of being an Entrepreneur and being successful starts with the right mindset. Learn how to be a successful Entrepreneur and have a positive mindset.


        http://entrepreneurpsych.com/

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3910502].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author dburk
          Originally Posted by siwell16 View Post

          I agree sandboxing is not a myth if you want proof just get thousands of links to a newly indexed site and watch it get buried in the sand!

          So are saying websites that go viral are buried in the sand? How do those sites, that do go viral, avoid this sandbox burial? Are they bribing Google? Exploiting a secret loophole? What is you theory on viral websites that contradict your conclusion?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3911455].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Josh MacDonald
    Type your domain into Google search engine, tell me your results.
    Search your domain like this:
    mydomainname.com

    Tell me what rank you are.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3778150].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
      Originally Posted by macdonjo View Post

      Type your domain into Google search engine, tell me your results.
      Search your domain like this:
      mydomainname.com

      Tell me what rank you are.
      I am in the first position and it is showing 243 results.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3778159].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Josh MacDonald
        Originally Posted by JDSalinger View Post

        I am in the first position and it is showing 243 results.
        Romor has it that you are not sandboxed.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3778207].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
          Originally Posted by macdonjo View Post

          Romor has it that you are not sandboxed.
          Thanks mac, I assume you mean rumor. If not, you will need to explain further. so what do you think is going on? Do you think I will be back at my old spot in a couple of days?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3778217].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tim Wallace
    you should put some content of your website into the google to search, to see whether the page of your site ranks No. 1, if not, It may be in sandbox.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3779374].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Shane Hale
    Google will Sandbox sites aka De-index. If your site is doing bad stuff to the point of abuse like Phishing it will happen. Check by googling your name.com if it pulls up you are not sandboxed.

    Google Dance- New site with links tend to bounce around in rankings.

    Serp Filter penalties. If you have an established site and run abnormal amount of backlinks or bad neighborhood links via Anchor text backlinks for certain target keywords. Google will take your rankings and penalize you for indeterminate amount of time.

    Google Panda/Farmer update was implemented end of Feb 2011 and March 2011 which hammered sites with duplicate content and bad neighborhood links.

    Another thing is sites like Ezine Articles and directories were hit hard with this update. There are some steps you can do to fix this. I wrote a blog post with more detail about Google Panda here
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3779755].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
      Originally Posted by Shane Hale View Post

      Google will Sandbox sites aka De-index. If your site is doing bad stuff to the point of abuse like Phishing it will happen. Check by googling your name.com if it pulls up you are not sandboxed.

      Google Dance- New site with links tend to bounce around in rankings.

      Serp Filter penalties. If you have an established site and run abnormal amount of backlinks or bad neighborhood links via Anchor text backlinks for certain target keywords. Google will take your rankings and penalize you for indeterminate amount of time.

      Google Panda/Farmer update was implemented end of Feb 2011 and March 2011 which hammered sites with duplicate content and bad neighborhood links.

      Another thing is sites like Ezine Articles and directories were hit hard with this update. There are some steps you can do to fix this. I wrote a blog post with more detail about Google Panda here
      Sandbox =/= deindexed.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3779771].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author robertjack07
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3780573].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
      Originally Posted by robertjack07 View Post

      if your site new to Google and not older than 6 month then it is in sandbox.check your site by Google.
      My site is not older than 6 months but I can find it in the first position by doing a google search with mydomainname.com.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3783150].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Phasm
    There are several possibilities right now judging by the given information. This happens all the time and is not uncommon at all, though so I wouldn't worry too much.

    1. The theory that your rankings are now 'settling in' to where they belong
    2. Your website triggered a filter for overly aggressive link velocity, non-varied anchor text or not building enough separate page links.

    In my opinion it's more likely the second option. The phenomenon in #1 referred to in this thread is generally something that only happens with newer websites than yours and rarely happens after you've already climbed up.

    If you went from position 300 to position 3 overnight then a temporary grace period is more likely, but since you climbed up slowly I don't think that's the case. Make sure you're using more than one keyword and page when you're link building, anchor text filters are easy to trigger.

    The best thing to do from here IMO is to keep building links and SEOing your website like nothing happened. The only thing I would change are your backlinking behaviors if you're not appearing natural enough.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3781306].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
      Originally Posted by Phasm View Post

      There are several possibilities right now judging by the given information. This happens all the time and is not uncommon at all, though so I wouldn't worry too much.

      1. The theory that your rankings are now 'settling in' to where they belong
      2. Your website triggered a filter for overly aggressive link velocity, non-varied anchor text or not building enough separate page links.

      In my opinion it's more likely the second option. The phenomenon in #1 referred to in this thread is generally something that only happens with newer websites than yours and rarely happens after you've already climbed up.

      If you went from position 300 to position 3 overnight then a temporary grace period is more likely, but since you climbed up slowly I don't think that's the case. Make sure you're using more than one keyword and page when you're link building, anchor text filters are easy to trigger.

      The best thing to do from here IMO is to keep building links and SEOing your website like nothing happened. The only thing I would change are your backlinking behaviors if you're not appearing natural enough.
      Hi Phasm,

      Thank you for responding. Right now, I am building backlinks to several different product pages. I write some articles that I post on my blog and then when these are indexed, I post the same article to only one article directory. Then, with each additional post, I then post to another article directory.

      The other thing I do is post blog comments to sites that have page rank and are do follow. Most of these blogs tend to be ones that automatically accept comments. I tend to use the same anchor text for these comments but I have only been building links this way for less than a month. I also am not doing more than 5 a day for any one keyword and only doing about 8-13 overall links each day.

      What would you suggest I adjust based on this information? Is this natural enough? Do you see there being any issues with Panda/Farmer update?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3783184].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author dburk
        Originally Posted by JDSalinger View Post

        Hi Phasm,

        Thank you for responding. Right now, I am building backlinks to several different product pages. I write some articles that I post on my blog and then when these are indexed, I post the same article to only one article directory. Then, with each additional post, I then post to another article directory.
        I see two possible issues here.

        First, if you are posting on a blog then your blog's home page content is likely changing with each new blog post. As you content changes, so will your rankings.

        Second, if you are duplicating all of your content through article syndication then none of your content is unique. Even though your content is the original, it is not unique and may not rank as high as unique content typically does.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3783579].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
          Originally Posted by dburk View Post

          I see two possible issues here.

          First, if you are posting on a blog then your blog's home page content is likely changing with each new blog post. As you content changes, so will your rankings.
          Don't think this is an issue. For starters, I am not trying to rank for any keywords for my home page or even building links to it. I am building links to individual product review pages. Also, the blog posts are not listed on the home page. Only the 5 most recent blog post titles are shown (i.e, a Latest Blog Posts). I also am still ranking in the #12 position for the keyword phrase of the site eventhough I have not done any link building to the home page and it is still ranked in that position eventhough the other pages where I am building links have dropped.

          Originally Posted by dburk View Post

          Second, if you are duplicating all of your content through article syndication then none of your content is unique. Even though your content is the original, it is not unique and may not rank as high as unique content typically does.
          My site has blog posts and pages. The pages are unique content on the site and are not being posted anywhere else. They are product review pages. The only thing that is being reposted is the blog posts and then they are only being reposted to one article directory. The blog posts have a link in the resource box back to these product review pages.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3783971].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Phasm
        Originally Posted by JDSalinger View Post

        Hi Phasm,

        Thank you for responding. Right now, I am building backlinks to several different product pages. I write some articles that I post on my blog and then when these are indexed, I post the same article to only one article directory. Then, with each additional post, I then post to another article directory.

        The other thing I do is post blog comments to sites that have page rank and are do follow. Most of these blogs tend to be ones that automatically accept comments. I tend to use the same anchor text for these comments but I have only been building links this way for less than a month. I also am not doing more than 5 a day for any one keyword and only doing about 8-13 overall links each day.

        What would you suggest I adjust based on this information? Is this natural enough? Do you see there being any issues with Panda/Farmer update?
        The first thing I would suggest is to stop posting your unique content to article directories, even if you're spinning it. This could be the result of the duplicate indexing and triggering a panda-like penalty.

        Anything I submit to a article site or anywhere the content is public and can be syndicated I never use the content from my money site. It's like saying, hey I wrote this really high quality piece of content but there are similar versions of it already all over the internet on sites that are infinitely more credible than mine.

        Because it's still difficult to isolate the problem I would also start varying the anchor text on your blog comments. Even 15-30 daily blog comments to an unestablished website can look unnatural if they all use the same anchor text. Even if you only use tiny variations it will help your anchor text diversity because it won't be as systematic.

        For example lets saying your keyword is "San Diego Dry Cleaning", some slight variations you can use are:
        • San Diego Dry Cleaner
        • San Diego Dry Clean
        • Dry Cleaning San Diego
        • SanDiego Dry Cleaning
        • Best San Diego Dry Cleaning
        • Affordable San Diego Dry Cleaning

        Google views spaces in your keywords as a separating character so "dog training" and "dogtraining" are seen as two different keywords and will sometimes display completely different results. These slight variations in your anchor text will make your website come off a lot more natural. If you still have any problems I would try to throw in some non-anchor text links to make it even more natural looking.

        The real trick is to continue SEOing your website like nothing happened and you'll come back up.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784078].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author JDSalinger
          Originally Posted by Phasm View Post

          The first thing I would suggest is to stop posting your unique content to article directories, even if you're spinning it. This could be the result of the duplicate indexing and triggering a panda-like penalty.

          Anything I submit to a article site or anywhere the content is public and can be syndicated I never use the content from my money site. It's like saying, hey I wrote this really high quality piece of content but there are similar versions of it already all over the internet on sites that are infinitely more credible than mine.
          I understand this point. I don't know if I mentioned it earlier. However, I only submit the blog post to an article directory after it has been indexed by Google. This way it is clear to Google that my site has the original content. Also, as I said above, I am only posting the blog posts to article directories. The blog pages (product review pages) roughly 15-20 pages are not posted elsewhere so there is unique content on the site. Do you still think this could be an issue. I have done this same thing on other sites with no issues. One of which is only two weeks to a month older than this site.

          Originally Posted by Phasm View Post

          Because it's still difficult to isolate the problem I would also start varying the anchor text on your blog comments. Even 15-30 daily blog comments to an unestablished website can look unnatural if they all use the same anchor text. Even if you only use tiny variations it will help your anchor text diversity because it won't be as systematic.

          For example lets saying your keyword is "San Diego Dry Cleaning", some slight variations you can use are:
          • San Diego Dry Cleaner
          • San Diego Dry Clean
          • Dry Cleaning San Diego
          • SanDiego Dry Cleaning
          • Best San Diego Dry Cleaning
          • Affordable San Diego Dry Cleaning

          Google views spaces in your keywords as a separating character so "dog training" and "dogtraining" are seen as two different keywords and will sometimes display completely different results. These slight variations in your anchor text will make your website come off a lot more natural. If you still have any problems I would try to throw in some non-anchor text links to make it even more natural looking.

          The real trick is to continue SEOing your website like nothing happened and you'll come back up.
          I could certainly vary the anchor text as that is easy enough. I am just really surprised that blog commenting could be an issue. The most links I was building to any page on the site was 5 links a day. The 10-13 links in total were spread out over several different pages. I just wonder what has triggered this issue with Google: was it the blog commenting, the articles, or is it mainly just b/c this is a new site? Regardless, what time can I reasonably expect that my rankings will come back? Should I expect this will take 3 months?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784216].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JamesGw
    Your site is just too new to make assumptions about. You're definitely not sandboxed. Just keep building links and you'll climb back up.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784362].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HKSEO Rotzee
    *Starts bitching at the guy next to him about how long its taking for the movie to start
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784530].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
      Originally Posted by HKSEO Rotzee View Post

      *Starts bitching at the guy next to him about how long its taking for the movie to start
      Right there with ya. I'd love to see his reasoning for his beliefs.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784535].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author HKSEO Rotzee
        Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

        Right there with ya. I'd love to see his reasoning for his beliefs.
        Can you clarify what your goal is.

        Are you trying to get him sandboxed/penalized for months...meaning you believe he will go away for a long time but possibly come back stronger/weaker....or are you going to try and get him completely de-indexed for ever.

        What exactly are you stating you are going to do...and what EXACTLY is he stating you can't do. So that there is no "I TOLD YOU", "No, I knew THAT would happen.. I was talking about blah blah"
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784588].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
          Originally Posted by HKSEO Rotzee View Post

          Can you clarify what your goal is.

          Are you trying to get him sandboxed/penalized for months...meaning you believe he will go away for a long time but possibly come back stronger/weaker....or are you going to try and get him completely de-indexed for ever.

          What exactly are you stating you are going to do...and what EXACTLY is he stating you can't do. So that there is no "I TOLD YOU", "No, I knew THAT would happen.. I was talking about blah blah"
          I'm going to sandbox his site.

          He claims it's not possible because the sandbox does not exist.

          I'm going to send hundreds of thousands of links at his domain, ping them, and watch nothing happen and watch the domain be a ****load harder to move afterwards.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3784600].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
    And I thought sandboxes only existed in childrens' playgrounds? :confused:

    People always think something's all true. ~Holden Caulfield, The Catcher in the Rye (J.D. Salinger.)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3785218].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
      Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

      And I thought sandboxes only existed in childrens playgrounds? :confused:

      People always think something's all true. ~Holden Caulfield, The Catcher in the Rye (J.D. Salinger.)
      I guess you stand to learn a bit as well
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3785230].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
        Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

        I guess you stand to learn a bit as well
        I've no fish to fry in this particular debate, Mike, it has to be said.

        I will say that on the one hand, I concur with your beliefs that "domain authority" exists and counts for something.

        On the other hand, I can't say that I've ever experienced anything that'd constitute "sandboxing" with any of my sites. Nor has my brother or anyone else who I know.

        Penalisation for on-site "b1ackhat" tactics - yes. And possibly for off-site stuff, in very extreme, rare and obviously traceable/identifiable cases of self-backlink-spamming. Apart from that, all I've ever experienced is the sometimes-expected wild fluctuation of rankings that can occur when a site's still in its relative infancy and doesn't command enough authority and incoming link-juice (or have sufficient "roots", if you will) to withstand sudden and significant changes to its backlinking profile.

        But I've never seen any of that as what has long been referred to as "the sandbox". Because I've never seen a site just get "stuck" in the dark depths of the SERPs for reasons that I cannot reasonably attribute to something pretty specific, and hopefully (and usually) resolve without "hoping and praying".

        So on the basis of that, I don't know. But whatever the case, I'm not about to start losing sleep over it now, myself.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3785354].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
          Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

          I've no fish to fry in this particular debate, Mike, it has to be said.

          I will say that on the one hand, I concur with your beliefs that "domain authority" exists and counts for something.

          On the other hand, I can't say that I've ever experienced anything that'd constitute "sandboxing" with any of my sites. Nor has my brother or anyone else who I know.

          Penalisation for on-site "b1ackhat" tactics - yes. And possibly for off-site stuff, in very extreme, rare and obviously traceable/identifiable cases of self-backlink-spamming. Apart from that, all I've ever experienced is the sometimes-expected wild fluctuation of rankings that can occur when a site's still in its relative infancy and doesn't command enough authority and incoming link-juice (or have sufficient "roots", if you will) to withstand sudden and significant changes to its backlinking profile.

          But I've never seen any of that as what has long been referred to as "the sandbox". Because I've never seen a site just get "stuck" in the dark depths of the SERPs for reasons that I cannot reasonably attribute to something pretty specific, and hopefully (and usually) resolve without "hoping and praying".

          So on the basis of that, I don't know. But whatever the case, I'm not about to start losing sleep over it now, myself.
          Right there with ya. I just don't agree with feeding newbies BS, especially when telling them it's normal for the QDF to last for months. That's laughable, at best.

          But you've pretty much nailed it in your fourth paragraph regarding BH tactics. I've noticed the effects when the site is over-optimized, and the site comes blazing out the gates with a ton of low quality links - exactly what I'm going to send to dburk's domain. I'll be sending hundreds of thousands of links in a 48 hour period, and then have them all pinged.

          Interesting read over at SEOmoz. Since dburk attempts to use Rand as a pawn to further his point then I may as well, also.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3785446].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
            Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

            Right there with ya. I just don't agree with feeding newbies BS, especially when telling them it's normal for the QDF to last for months. That's laughable, at best.

            But you've pretty much nailed it in your fourth paragraph regarding BH tactics. I've noticed the effects when the site is over-optimized, and the site comes blazing out the gates with a ton of low quality links - exactly what I'm going to send to dburk's domain. I'll be sending hundreds of thousands of links in a 48 hour period, and then have them all pinged.

            Interesting read over at SEOmoz. Since dburk attempts to use Rand as a pawn to further his point then I may as well, also.
            Yea but whats the timeline on this Mike? I do this tactic to many of my sites. They get totally sunk in the rankings for about 2 months and then come back strong as ever. Ive actually recommended this for niche sites as a set it and forget it quick link building approach. Blast away, watch your site plummet wait a month or two, BAMM page 1 and im talking tens of thousands of profile links and blog comments in a 2-3 day span. If you'd like proof, I can show it. 2 days ago I was ranked 10th for a term, it wasn't moving so I just destroyed it with links. Now its ranked #259 and I will guarantee this site will be top 5 in the next 2 months, I just have to wait it out.

            Now I fully admit I don't deal with highly competitive search's but if this is what the sandbox is then it is not at all what people like to believe it is. I also don't think it would be fair for the sake of the argument for you to do this, the site plummets, you declare victory and then 2 months or 6 months later when we've all completely forgotten about this thread, have the site bounce back strong as ever.

            I'd also like to say Mike I consider you a well respected member of this forum and I always read through your posts looking for extra nuggets of wisdom as I know the huge success you've had, but in this case I don't see how this can possibly be proven unless you are saying "I can sandbox your site for 2 months" or a specific amount of time because from what ive seen and from what many have seen you almost always eventually bounce back strong.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3801643].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
              Originally Posted by dp40oz View Post

              Yea but whats the timeline on this Mike? I do this tactic to many of my sites. They get totally sunk in the rankings for about 2 months and then come back strong as ever. Ive actually recommended this for niche sites as a set it and forget it quick link building approach. Blast away, watch your site plummet wait a month or two, BAMM page 1 and im talking tens of thousands of profile links and blog comments in a 2-3 day span. If you'd like proof, I can show it. 2 days ago I was ranked 10th for a term, it wasn't moving so I just destroyed it with links. Now its ranked #259 and I will guarantee this site will be top 5 in the next 2 months, I just have to wait it out.

              Now I fully admit I don't deal with highly competitive search's but if this is what the sandbox is then it is not at all what people like to believe it is. I also don't think it would be fair for the sake of the argument for you to do this, the site plummets, you declare victory and then 2 months or 6 months later when we've all completely forgotten about this thread, have the site bounce back strong as ever.

              I'd also like to say Mike I consider you a well respected member of this forum and I always read through your posts looking for extra nuggets of wisdom as I know the huge success you've had, but in this case I don't see how this can possibly be proven unless you are saying "I can sandbox your site for 2 months" or a specific amount of time because from what ive seen and from what many have seen you almost always eventually bounce back strong.
              I'm not saying the site won't bounce back strong. I'm saying I'll send his site to the abyss of G. It'll probably be about two months, but how long he'll be in the sandbox is not something I can control.

              A site being able to bounce back after being sunk in the rankings - what would you call that? Why would it sink? Why would it bounce back? Surely this is not QDF.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3802651].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
                Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                I'm not saying the site won't bounce back strong. I'm saying I'll send his site to the abyss of G. It'll probably be about two months, but how long he'll be in the sandbox is not something I can control.

                A site being able to bounce back after being sunk in the rankings - what would you call that? Why would it sink? Why would it bounce back? Surely this is not QDF.
                I totally agree its not QDF. I have a few theories on why it does this none of which have any real proof behind them but here they are.

                The most likely I think is that you have this incredibly vast algorithm that has to literally deal with every single collection of letters, numbers and sort webpages in some order that will give a quality result. Now lets say you take a search term "black leg warmer for dancers". Hypothetically this robot maybe has a collection of about 5000 times that its seen this exact phrase in anchor text. Now someone goes and throws 20,000 links all with that phrase or something extremely similar at the robot all going to the same page.

                Now if I were sorting threw something physically id take that thing that was getting lots of votes and put it to the side. Then i'd reorganize everything that didn't change and then find where to place this newly popular thing. I think we all like to believe Google is better then it is. Maybe it takes time to reorganize this, especially for these niche phrases that it probably doesn't care much about and possibly more time then we like to believe the almighty Google could possibly take. Combine this with a little bit of wanting to hide the algorithm to possible spammers and analysts and I think you have a so called "sandbox".

                For those interested though what ive found is that lets say you got your site "Sandboxed" for a ton of spammy blog comments. My tests have shown that if you wait a bit then throw a lot of articles and web 2.0, basically some different link method it kind of kicks the site back to the front. Almost as if you've forced the system to reorganize you earlier or whatever. I don't know all of this is just my own crazy theories but it works.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3803941].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
                  Originally Posted by dp40oz View Post

                  I totally agree its not QDF. I have a few theories on why it does this none of which have any real proof behind them but here they are.

                  The most likely I think is that you have this incredibly vast algorithm that has to literally deal with every single collection of letters, numbers and sort webpages in some order that will give a quality result. Now lets say you take a search term "black leg warmer for dancers". Hypothetically this robot maybe has a collection of about 5000 times that its seen this exact phrase in anchor text. Now someone goes and throws 20,000 links all with that phrase or something extremely similar at the robot all going to the same page.

                  Now if I were sorting threw something physically id take that thing that was getting lots of votes and put it to the side. Then i'd reorganize everything that didn't change and then find where to place this newly popular thing. I think we all like to believe Google is better then it is. Maybe it takes time to reorganize this, especially for these niche phrases that it probably doesn't care much about and possibly more time then we like to believe the almighty Google could possibly take. Combine this with a little bit of wanting to hide the algorithm to possible spammers and analysts and I think you have a so called "sandbox".

                  For those interested though what ive found is that lets say you got your site "Sandboxed" for a ton of spammy blog comments. My tests have shown that if you wait a bit then throw a lot of articles and web 2.0, basically some different link method it kind of kicks the site back to the front. Almost as if you've forced the system to reorganize you earlier or whatever. I don't know all of this is just my own crazy theories but it works.
                  I agree with everything except the last paragraph. The web 2.0, articles, or other various links didn't work for me but a trait of some specific link did. Can't reveal it, though.

                  Doesn't seem like this test is going to happen.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3804016].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
                    Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

                    I agree with everything except the last paragraph. The web 2.0, articles, or other various links didn't work for me but a trait of some specific link did. Can't reveal it, though.
                    Any chance at a hint? Ive been using AMR which seems to work and if not, I'll do a huge Senuke campaign. Neither are a sure shot but im always looking for better ways.

                    Also just thought i'd mention Mike ive been doing my own dumbed down version of the link service you offer. Now mind you its not nearly as powerful and exactly constructed but it has given me huge boosts. You really know your stuff and even after just 2 weeks of seeing what you offer Ive been able to dramatically move my ranks for tougher keywords. I recommend anyone looking for quality link juice to buy your package or at least look at the structure. I know it wasn't necessarily intended as a learning tool but I appreciate the top tier warriors sharing some of their secrets and tactics.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3804101].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author jack jastin
          I think You need not to worried about it so much. Keep doing your link building strategies and you will get all fine. Because this is the starting stage of your site, And all you need is to concentrate on link building techniques. This is the only platform where you can get help for You.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3912012].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3799443].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author R3Rbot
      Well Hi guy's. This is an interessting post... Joining the show to learn..
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3801051].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

      Well this was awfully disappointing.
      Hi Mike,

      Please don't give up yet!

      I have registered a new domain and created a hosting account. I haven't had time to setup the Wordpress script yet. I'm working on it now so please give me about an hour to finish up.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3801415].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dp40oz


    So here is just 1 example of the so called sandbox. When my site started it got indexed with a few articles and was ranking in the lower 20's. I then sent 10,000 profile links and 10,000 blog comments at the site in 1 day. As you can see it then plummeted for about 2 weeks to the 300's and then BAMM! Back strong! Now ive had a steady rise but the site just wasn't getting to the top 5 like I wanted. Now a few days ago I blasted the hell out of the page again, I went up to #7, then to #10 now im at #295. Like I stated in my previous post I will guarantee that I'll be back on the 1st page soon. This is proof rather then speculation and talk.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3801910].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
      Originally Posted by dp40oz View Post



      So here is just 1 example of the so called sandbox. When my site started it got indexed with a few articles and was ranking in the lower 20's. I then sent 10,000 profile links and 10,000 blog comments at the site in 1 day. As you can see it then plummeted for about 2 weeks to the 300's and then BAMM! Back strong! Now ive had a steady rise but the site just wasn't getting to the top 5 like I wanted. Now a few days ago I blasted the hell out of the page again, I went up to #7, then to #10 now im at #295. Like I stated in my previous post I will guarantee that I'll be back on the 1st page soon. This is proof rather then speculation and talk.
      Im sending a lot more than 10k comments and profiles, lol.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3802576].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author aditech
    When our site is new and we start the link building campaign once the keyword position goes down and its quiet natural don't worry you will be back to the previous position.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3802177].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author syahbiz
    you are not sandboxed, do some improvements on your seo
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3805264].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kennygoodman
    I would say initial fluctuation - see how you are in a couple of weeks


    Kenny
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3808668].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dagaul101
    It could be a temporary fluctuation 5-13 links a day is hardly going to raise suspicion that you are building links too quickly, which is one of the factors that can get your site sandboxed
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3912532].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Originally Posted by dagaul101 View Post

      It could be a temporary fluctuation 5-13 links a day is hardly going to raise suspicion that you are building links too quickly, which is one of the factors that can get your site sandboxed
      Hi dagaul101,

      Google has no problem with building links quickly. They love finding meritorious links no matter how fast they are created and they hate finding spam no matter how slow you drip feed it.

      The more aggressive you link building the more exposure your website gets and the quicker your spam is discovered and devalued.

      Creating spam slower isn't necessarily going to delay the discovery of that spam, since it is often found on the same page along with spam created by other highly aggressive spam campaigns. If you want to hide your spam for as long as possible, you need to find places that no other spammers have discovered.

      Or, you could build meritorious links at the fastest pace you can manage and not worry about "looking natural".
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3913632].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author racheltom
    I guess that its not penalized you need to work on content n keep working on your back links soon you can get back your place on google
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3912638].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Keep Trying
    Oh man... I actually read through this entire thread, and was anticipating the experiment. I really wanted to see if Google Sandbox was a myth or not.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3974567].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Peter Clark
      Originally Posted by Keep Trying View Post

      Oh man... I actually read through this entire thread, and was anticipating the experiment. I really wanted to see if Google Sandbox was a myth or not.
      Hahaha me too!

      Lets see if DBurk actually steps up...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3974616].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author dburk
        Originally Posted by Peter Clark View Post

        Hahaha me too!

        Lets see if DBurk actually steps up...
        Hi Peter,

        I'm still game if Mike is.

        I already created a new blog just for this experiment. In fact I registered a .info domain so that those who believe in the domain authority myth... err... I mean theory, can not say the domain authority is preventing the mythical "Sandbox" from attacking the website.

        So it is a newly registered domain (never previously registered) using a so called "weak" top level domain. So in theory I have a domain that should be easy to "Sandbox", if Mike is still willing to try.

        @Mike Grant,

        What do you say, still willing to give it a go?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3977858].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author anislagan
    I have a new site in April and blast XRumer after a month. After checking the PR in June it rose up to PR 2. Sometimes, big G is generous.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4172696].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Fancypants
    you are not sandboxed, do some improvements on your seo
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7207116].message }}

Trending Topics