Google's New 1 Month Filter: Did You Get Hit?

39 replies
  • SEO
  • |
As reported over on BHW, it looks like Google have secretly embedded a new anti-SEO weapon into the Panda 4/Payday Loan update (around May 15-18).

You can read the relevant BHW threads here:

Google "waiting period" after May 14 payday update?

Anyone Noticing Rankings Taking Much Longer Than Usual?

To summarise, it looks like trying to a rank a new site after the last update will hit a filter that stops it from ranking on Page 1 for a month - regardless of the quality, quantity or type of links thrown at that new site.

One BHWer reported the same with aged domains.

If that filter is running now (my ongoing testing suggests that it is active), it raises a bunch of interesting questions:

1. Are Parasite Pages affected by the filter, given that they are new pages but on long established sites? Early reports say that Parasite Pages have the same problem.

2. Is Google willing to ignore genuinely viral new pages (less likely) and sites (more likely) for at least a month in its search results?

3. What happens after the 4 week filter period expires - is it business as usual then or not?

4. Is this filter more about psychological mind games against SEOs to drive them out (like the painful process of link disavowal and recon requests)?

5. Is it a permanent change or just a temporary experiment?

It may just be that more patience will need to be factored into our future SEO work - report your experiences with this possible new filter below.
#filter #google #hit #month
  • Profile picture of the author twilightofidols
    Hi Terry I'm one of the BHWers who has been experiencing this as well.

    I've got a 1 page parasite using nothing but auto-gen spun content on site and off that ranked after the Payday update, it ranked at around 180 after 2 days of SER spam for it's main KW, disappeared for two weeks, then debuted on page 1 and has only increased in ranking since.

    My other parasites have all failed. My long-term projects with powerful PBN links, manual Web 2's boosted with contextual links have all failed to crack page 4 for anything competitive. I've even bought an expired domain with good quality niche relevant backlinks, hasn't cracked the top 1000 though admittedly I haven't built more than 2-3 PBN links to it on top of it's existing link profile.

    My Penguin hit site that I'm trying to recover saw ranking increases after Panda (I'm thinking there was a data refresh on Penguin somewhere in there as well)

    Do you think this might be some sort of implementation of transition rank, or perhaps a different iteration of it assuming it already exists somewhere in the algo?
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9336986].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Terry Kyle
      Originally Posted by twilightofidols View Post

      Hi Terry I'm one of the BHWers who has been experiencing this as well.

      I've got a 1 page parasite using nothing but auto-gen spun content on site and off that ranked after the Payday update, it ranked at around 180 after 2 days of SER spam for it's main KW, disappeared for two weeks, then debuted on page 1 and has only increased in ranking since.

      My other parasites have all failed. My long-term projects with powerful PBN links, manual Web 2's boosted with contextual links have all failed to crack page 4 for anything competitive. I've even bought an expired domain with good quality niche relevant backlinks, hasn't cracked the top 1000 though admittedly I haven't built more than 2-3 PBN links to it on top of it's existing link profile.

      My Penguin hit site that I'm trying to recover saw ranking increases after Panda (I'm thinking there was a data refresh on Penguin somewhere in there as well)

      Do you think this might be some sort of implementation of transition rank, or perhaps a different iteration of it assuming it already exists somewhere in the algo?
      Hi T,

      When you say "long-term projects with powerful PBN links, manual Web 2's boosted with contextual links" do you mean sites created and SEOd before the May updates?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9337040].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author twilightofidols
        Originally Posted by Terry Kyle View Post

        Hi T,

        When you say "long-term projects with powerful PBN links, manual Web 2's boosted with contextual links" do you mean sites created and SEOd before the May updates?
        Yes, all of them were created in early April. Three affiliate niche sites, and only two that I've built links to

        1. A repurposed expired domain (10 years old) that I scraped with niche relevant backlinks, and added 2-3 PBN links (my private network)

        2. A new domain with PBN links, manually built Web 2.0s with tiered links. All Web 2 content is hand written, the Tier 2 is manually spun multi-level content written by yours truly

        For site 1., it could just be the case that the existing link profile is weaker than I thought. I was almost certain it would rank on it's existing backlinks alone and it's an extremely uncompetitive niche and the on page is well taken care of. It probably just needs a lot more juice than I anticipated it randomly pops up for it's main KW around 180 and disappears every few days.

        For site 2., it's basically ranking in the top 100 for every keyword I've targeted except for the home page (primary) keyword, but it's in purgatory around page 3-4 for most of the KWs even extremely low comp ones in spite of my efforts since April. I've recently stepped up my backlinking campaign a bit, but I'm a bit surprised that there's so little movement with the amount of juice I'm pointing at it.

        The ONLY big positive SERP jumps I've seen since the May updates is my crappy parasite page which I built on April 20th and has been doing well since.

        I'm trying to discern why this particular parasite has ranked and none of the other parasite pages built before the May updates have shown any movement.

        I've started a few more parasites to test since Payday so far no movement on any of them, but it might be too soon to tell.

        Haven't built any niche sites since I'm finding it's harder to scale these days and I don't have a team behind me.

        I normally compete in embarrassing health niches so I'm no stranger to competition, there's definitely something funky going on.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9337088].message }}
        • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9337503].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author nik0
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Terry Kyle View Post

            Thanks T, understood.

            SERoundtable picked it up here and "Rich's" comment near the end is interesting:

            A New Google Sandbox? Taking Longer To Rank Well In Google?
            He says it takes 5 months, he also says it's a new filter that has been added 20th of May.

            That's 1.5 month ago, still he claims it takes 5 months.

            Guess he can look into the future
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9339292].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
              I have my doubts this is anything new. Perhaps even the kind of niches that do churn and burn affecting things. However it does make perfect sense to me. The whole concept of churn and burn is that you can rank for awhile before the algo slaps you.If you are kept off the first page before you get slapped then churn and burn would take a huge hit

              Now obviously some of the sites are still ranking. With some tweaks or even extending the time to more than a month they would have found a simple low programming cost way to slap a segment of IM which they of course hate.

              and thanks Terry. Finally one thread in this SEO section that was actually of any interest. Took an old timer to post it.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9340033].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author nik0
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                I have my doubts this is anything new. Perhaps even the kind of niches that do churn and burn affecting things. However it does make perfect sense to me. The whole concept of churn and burn is that you can rank for awhile before the algo slaps you.If you are kept off the first page before you get slapped then churn and burn would take a huge hit

                Now obviously some of the sites are still ranking. With some tweaks or even extending the time to more than a month they would have found a simple low programming cost way to slap a segment of IM which they of course hate.

                and thanks Terry. Finally one thread in this SEO section that was actually of any interest. Took an old timer to post it.
                Churn & Burn has many shapes, the 301 redirects that many use still kick in within days so it just takes a little more preparation time I guess.

                Also heard a story from a friend that ranked for a competitive term with just 3 private blog posts and a 3 page site that jumped up at #14 within days, definitely quite exceptional but at the same time it kind of proofs that there's not such filter.

                But yeah who knows there is for people who build 100.000's of links in a matter of days.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9340989].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mkgg
    Originally Posted by Terry Kyle View Post

    As reported over on BHW, it looks like Google have secretly embedded a new anti-SEO weapon into the Panda 4/Payday Loan update (around May 15-18).

    You can read the relevant BHW threads here:

    Google "waiting period" after May 14 payday update?

    Anyone Noticing Rankings Taking Much Longer Than Usual?

    To summarise, it looks like trying to a rank a new site after the last update will hit a filter that stops it from ranking on Page 1 for a month - regardless of the quality, quantity or type of links thrown at that new site.

    One BHWer reported the same with aged domains.

    If that filter is running now (my ongoing testing suggests that it is active), it raises a bunch of interesting questions:

    1. Are Parasite Pages affected by the filter, given that they are new pages but on long established sites? Early reports say that Parasite Pages have the same problem.

    2. Is Google willing to ignore genuinely viral new pages (less likely) and sites (more likely) for at least a month in its search results?

    3. What happens after the 4 week filter period expires - is it business as usual then or not?

    4. Is this filter more about psychological mind games against SEOs to drive them out (like the painful process of link disavowal and recon requests)?

    5. Is it a permanent change or just a temporary experiment?

    It may just be that more patience will need to be factored into our future SEO work - report your experiences with this possible new filter below.
    1. No idea. I don't do parasite pages.

    2. Hell no, i have a genuine authority website and it takes weeks or sometime days to see serp movements. I don't think it takes a month.

    3. I don't think there is a 4 week filter, it does take somewhat longer to rank but not that long if your links are genuinely high authority.

    4. Disavow and recon requests are slow because there has to be a real human reviewing your request and that takes time for a company like Google.

    5. How do we know ?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9337534].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    I've seen these threads popping up recently and have been following them.

    Here's my question though... If it is as simple as a one-month delay of ranking, what is Google really accomplishing and getting out of it? What's the payoff for them? Is it just the hope that Penguin catches the site before it ever has a chance to rank, and thus defeating the flash in a pan sites that rank for a week or two?

    And if all it does is basically sandbox a site for a month or so, then all black hatters are going to do is build new sites, let them sit for 6-8 weeks, and then do what they normally do with them.

    It just does not seem very creative or effective.
    Signature
    Get the TIPS and STRATEGIES I use to HELP businesses GROW through SEO delivered to you each week!

    >>> Sign Up Now <<<
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9337541].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
      Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

      I've seen these threads popping up recently and have been following them.

      Here's my question though... If it is as simple as a one-month delay of ranking, what is Google really accomplishing and getting out of it? What's the payoff for them? Is it just the hope that Penguin catches the site before it ever has a chance to rank, and thus defeating the flash in a pan sites that rank for a week or two?

      And if all it does is basically sandbox a site for a month or so, then all black hatters are going to do is build new sites, let them sit for 6-8 weeks, and then do what they normally do with them.

      It just does not seem very creative or effective.
      I think it's more a case of the "Flash in the Pan SEO'er" working with ever weakening expired domain pools.

      Who keeps buying all the uggboot*, louisvoutton* and cheapjersey* domains from the expired pool?

      Things getting real desperate for some.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9337623].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author nik0
        Banned
        It has been like this for ages already, it's just some random thing in their algorithm, 9 out of 10 times you see a ranking boost within 1 week max, but sometimes it can take as long as 6 weeks.

        Nothing new at all.

        Last year I had an affliate site that kept on climbing 3 months after the last link was build, nowadays it's exactly the same.

        Out of 100's of sites that I track I had only 1 site that didn't rank for 3 months and then popped up at the first page, he didn't use any exact anchors and very few money keywords as anchor so I suspect that had something to do with it.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9337676].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author paulgl
    There is no new filter. Just crapola from people who must continue to explain things that go with their views. Those views being just more crapola. You can't get rid of them. As people misquote google, and some guru takes off on that misquote, strange things happen. First it doesn't work, or may seem to "work" but not in the real world. Like the crapola people spout about "fresh and unique."

    Those guys in the caves keep touting fresh and unique, although google never said shinola about ranking such garbage. But they think they can outwit google once again, so they make fresh and unique. When that doesn't work, they must explain it. Oh. New filter. You can't rank fresh content for a month....sure. And I got a bridge in Brooklyn for sale cheap.

    It's not about fresh or unique.

    If the IM business that pairs up with wannabe SEO gurus ever goes away, this crap will die.

    But that's not going to happen.

    Here's another wrinkle. As time goes on, why would it not make sense that you can't just make
    a new page and have it rank? That always made no sense, especially to those sandbox believers.
    After all, if your new site makes it to #1, and many others make new sites, then #1 goes in the
    dumpster, and cries about being in some sandbox.

    What about hard work? What about someone just coming up with something better?

    As the internet grows and reaches epic proportions, as far as web pages go, of course it
    will become harder. 20 years ago you had a handful of real pages to compete against.

    How many pages do you think you have in your competition now? How many of those are
    authoritative pages? The internet grows each day. Even 10 years ago your odds were 1
    in hundreds. Now it's more like 1 in millions.

    Before amazon, wikipedia, etc., the internet world was open range. Now, who really needs
    yet another amazon review site? Oh dear, I can't rank it NOW so there must be an algo!

    Logic takes a backseat. No wise man has the power to reason away what a fool believes.

    That's another thing that keeps increasing. The number of foolish prophets and their
    followers. Just peruse this forum. So many threads on Oh I made a new website, I followed
    the list, but it just won't rank. Why am I being penalized?

    GAG!

    People keep making google out to be fools. Google is no fool.

    Paul
    Signature

    If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9337856].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ryanjm
      Originally Posted by paulgl View Post

      There is no new filter. Just crapola from people who must continue to explain things that go with their views. Those views being just more crapola. You can't get rid of them. As people misquote google, and some guru takes off on that misquote, strange things happen. First it doesn't work, or may seem to "work" but not in the real world. Like the crapola people spout about "fresh and unique."

      Those guys in the caves keep touting fresh and unique, although google never said shinola about ranking such garbage. But they think they can outwit google once again, so they make fresh and unique. When that doesn't work, they must explain it. Oh. New filter. You can't rank fresh content for a month....sure. And I got a bridge in Brooklyn for sale cheap.

      It's not about fresh or unique.

      If the IM business that pairs up with wannabe SEO gurus ever goes away, this crap will die.

      But that's not going to happen.

      Here's another wrinkle. As time goes on, why would it not make sense that you can't just make
      a new page and have it rank? That always made no sense, especially to those sandbox believers.
      After all, if your new site makes it to #1, and many others make new sites, then #1 goes in the
      dumpster, and cries about being in some sandbox.

      What about hard work? What about someone just coming up with something better?

      As the internet grows and reaches epic proportions, as far as web pages go, of course it
      will become harder. 20 years ago you had a handful of real pages to compete against.

      How many pages do you think you have in your competition now? How many of those are
      authoritative pages? The internet grows each day. Even 10 years ago your odds were 1
      in hundreds. Now it's more like 1 in millions.

      Before amazon, wikipedia, etc., the internet world was open range. Now, who really needs
      yet another amazon review site? Oh dear, I can't rank it NOW so there must be an algo!

      Logic takes a backseat. No wise man has the power to reason away what a fool believes.

      That's another thing that keeps increasing. The number of foolish prophets and their
      followers. Just peruse this forum. So many threads on Oh I made a new website, I followed
      the list, but it just won't rank. Why am I being penalized?

      GAG!

      People keep making google out to be fools. Google is no fool.

      Paul
      This is pure nonsense. You're making it out as though Google is some omnipotent God that cannot be fathomed by mere mortals. People have been making money by manipulating rankings forever...people that figured out how Google ranked sites, manipulated that system, and made money.

      If you've got Lawyer Site A, and Lawyer Site B, and they both offer the same services, what determines which is ranked 1st and which is 2nd? The lawyer that does a better job? No, it's a simple formula. And it's a formula that can be figured out and manipulated, just like it has been since day 1.

      Many times you may legitimately have a site which is better and offers better content/value to the user than what is currently ranked #1. What do you do with that site? Sit and wait for Google's omnipotent engine to recognize that? Or do you go out and find a way to bring this site in front of more eyeballs? You manipulate their system, but it's for the benefit of the end-user. Granted, many sites are not worthy of their ranking and SEO contributes to bad sites ranking ahead of better ones, but at least the people that want to rank are putting _effort_ into their site. They think they have something of value to offer and want people to look at it, versus old crappy sites that have sat in the same spots, never updated, never cared for. Why shouldn't those get pushed aside? Why should it take a year to push junk out of the way?

      Long story short, I don't think you really have any idea what is possible with SEO, or have ever even tried to outsmart Google's engine.

      When the Kindle Fire first came out, I had a review site ranked #1 above even Amazon's own results for "Kindle Fire" and "Kindle Fire review." It was there for months, including through the holiday season. I used every trick in the book to get it ranked there, and the content was better than what Amazon had on their own page---I had videos for every function, detailed write-ups, etc... all personally done. It was making 100+ sales a day of those things, and I would never have been ranked there if I just created the content and let it sit there. Or tried to share it on social media sites and make it go "viral" amongst the other 100 reviews of it out there. I had to manipulate Google's search engine. I "outsmarted" this omnipotent entity, and made huge money through the holidays and beyond. It can be done, and it works.

      Now, let's get back to discussing the topic at hand with people who know sht about SEO, because there is a legit change in how they rank sites, and it started with that May update. Thank you.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9349613].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
    This is an interesting topic. Didn't spot it until this thread here, but I've been kind of busy... Thanks for all who've weighed in.

    I'm not sure if I still believe that there's a new filter specifically for new sites. If it's the black hatters that complain perhaps there's been a change in that front. Google might have made their algo more sensitive to "bad" signals or something like that... But I'm watching this discussion.

    It seems to me that there have been changes that affect some sites. The changes are fairly recent, but not necessarily this new. I've seen sites drop 1-3 pages and stick there.
    Signature
    Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
    Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

    What's your excuse?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9338460].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ryan3
    Whoa. whats going on? Seriously all you need is a higher velocity. Boom Done. What has BHW come to these days?
    Signature
    "Start"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9338493].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Blaine Smitley
    I don't know anything about it other than what I've read here.

    When I launch a new site I never throw anything at it the first month accept content along with local google and bing ads. I would be shocked to see one on the first page, and would see it as nothing more than a G honeymoon thing.

    This is an interesting thread though and I'm curious to see what others have to say. And now I will go read Terry Kyles case study about a parasite page...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9338531].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jezter6
    I don't have an opinion on this either way as of yet, but I will share my anecdotal evidence.

    1) My weebly site didn't get indexed for over a week, even after pinging it and first post with free ping tools like pingler. After getting bored, I made a blog post on my wife's blog which is a PR2 very low traffic blog. It was indexed within an hour of that post.

    Not sure if web2.0 isn't indexing as fast anymore or not, just an observation.

    2) In spite of a couple pinterest pages (high DA, no PA, no links) being in the top 5 spots, my Weebly blog hasn't been above 40 yet. One would think that with ~10 posts, all with pictures and text linking out to various other niche blogs or youtube vids, more optimized at least than a pinterest folder would assume to be...that I could at least get to page 2 or so for a keyword under 2000 searches/mo.

    3) For my money site blog, I've been doing some recent posts that would target 3-4 keywords that combined were about 1500-2000 searches with no individual keyword more than about 800 searches...not in the top 100 for any of them.

    My site isn't perfect. But, I've ranked on page 2 for an specific product name before with no links at all to the page and less than 5 overall on the domain. It's odd that I don't rank with ANY of this.

    4) Yet still, any of the "niche sites" that I see in the top 5, all ranking with ~1500 links of comments and forum sigs from under 10 total referring domains. So crappy backlinks DO work, so long as it's a niche/keyword nobody seems to care about from Google's eyes.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9340187].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
    Haven't you heard?

    No sites are allowed to rank until Matt gets back from vacation.
    Signature

    BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9340498].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Janice Sperry
    It is pretty easy to bust this myth. Do a random keyword search and see if anything on page one is less then a month old. It may take a few tries but you WILL get rankings less then a month old.

    I entered a very competitive 5 word keyword phrase and the #1 position was published on June 23, 2014.

    Do popular searches like Justin Beiber and you still get results that are just hours old.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9341609].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author boxoun
      Originally Posted by Janice Sperry View Post

      It is pretty easy to bust this myth. Do a random keyword search and see if anything on page one is less then a month old. It may take a few tries but you WILL get rankings less then a month old.

      I entered a very competitive 5 word keyword phrase and the #1 position was published on June 23, 2014.

      Do popular searches like Justin Beiber and you still get results that are just hours old.
      You can't be serious. You're going to not mention your "very competitive 5 word keyword" but then mention a non commercial d bag query term as evidence?

      Because of that we have to assume your competive keyword is imaginary since your example is so horrible.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9341864].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Janice Sperry
        Originally Posted by boxoun View Post

        You can't be serious. You're going to not mention your "very competitive 5 word keyword" but then mention a non commercial d bag query term as evidence?

        Because of that we have to assume your competive keyword is imaginary since your example is so horrible.
        Yes I am serious. It is true I did not present a detailed, specific, full-blown analytical study to prove my point. (I am not going to post the keyword because it is in a niche I promote.) I have not seen any serious proof about a 30-day sandbox either.

        If there are ANY posts/pages less than 30 days old that are already page 1 ranking for specific keywords then it shoots down the whole theory correct? Is it taking longer for NEW sites to rank - I don't know, I don't have any.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9343995].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author smiles8103
    I have ranked several new sites without issues. I have made it to page 1......

    I will say that content is important! I never write for Google, I always write for people FIRST. I provide value to the reader, and for this, I believe Google leaves me alone. LOL

    I hope I am not speaking too soon, but I have not been hit by the Google filter, but if something changes, I will definitely update this thread!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9344008].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author godoveryou
    Well, that fell apart...
    Signature
    Don't Know Me? - Read my interview at Matthewwoodward.co.uk
    http://www.godoveryou.com/
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9344465].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by godoveryou View Post

      Well, that fell apart...
      I'll still take this thread over most. What a wasteland. The rest make my mind turn to jello.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9344497].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author godoveryou
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        I'll still take this thread over most. What a wasteland. The rest make my mind turn to jello.
        That's pretty much why I've been MIA....
        Signature
        Don't Know Me? - Read my interview at Matthewwoodward.co.uk
        http://www.godoveryou.com/
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9344538].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author RobinInTexas
    I would have to conclude that if you are trying to game the system, which is what BHW is mostly about and this thread is trying to figure out, G is going to screw around with you. Larry & Sergey are laughing at you.
    Signature

    Robin



    ...Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just set there.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9344541].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dgui123451
    This is the first time I’m hearing about this, thanks for sharing.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9348124].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ryanjm
      People denying this is something new or that they don't see anything happening, aren't really in the SEO game. They're the "content content content" drummers that don't really know how links work beyond what they've been told, or beyond the one directory they once submitted a site to. They don't run SEO companies, they don't have hundreds of sites being tracked, they don't have active SEO link-building going on.

      This is why reading the WF sometimes hurts my brain. There are so many "gurus" that have no clue what they are talking about here, but have to pretend they do because they have a horde of followers waiting to hear what they have to say.

      BHW is where people who actually _do_ SEO talk, and that's why it was one of the first places you heard about this.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9349560].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Ryan3
        Originally Posted by ryanjm View Post

        People denying this is something new or that they don't see anything happening, aren't really in the SEO game. They're the "content content content" drummers that don't really know how links work beyond what they've been told, or beyond the one directory they once submitted a site to. They don't run SEO companies, they don't have hundreds of sites being tracked, they don't have active SEO link-building going on.

        This is why reading the WF sometimes hurts my brain. There are so many "gurus" that have no clue what they are talking about here, but have to pretend they do because they have a horde of followers waiting to hear what they have to say.

        BHW is where people who actually _do_ SEO talk, and that's why it was one of the first places you heard about this.
        Just rehashed propaganda
        Signature
        "Start"
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9349583].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by ryanjm View Post

        BHW is where people who actually _do_ SEO talk, and that's why it was one of the first places you heard about this.
        Then go back over there. Find a senukex thread and kid yourself you are a real SEO
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9349963].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Ryan3
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Then go back over there. Find a senukex thread and kid yourself you are a real SEO
          I have to somewhat agree with Ryan. Some people post the next big rumor they heard from one source or another and try and convince you its the truth.

          They don't bother to go out and test it. They just continue to soak up the propaganda. At least over at BHW they test it (most of the time)
          Signature
          "Start"
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9349974].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by Ryan3 View Post

            They don't bother to go out and test it. They just continue to soak up the propaganda. At least over at BHW they test it (most of the time)
            BHW is good for some things and junk for others. let me give you three tips

            1) No one with any senses is sharing their top SEO tactics in public forums.
            2) What works in SEO is highly Niche dependent and spam SEO is a lot different than professional business SEO
            3) If you like another forum better then go there. Discussing how much you like another forum here makes little sense.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9349993].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author synaptium
              Lets hope this is over soon.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9351385].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author nik0
        Banned
        Originally Posted by ryanjm View Post

        People denying this is something new or that they don't see anything happening, aren't really in the SEO game. They're the "content content content" drummers that don't really know how links work beyond what they've been told, or beyond the one directory they once submitted a site to. They don't run SEO companies, they don't have hundreds of sites being tracked, they don't have active SEO link-building going on.

        This is why reading the WF sometimes hurts my brain. There are so many "gurus" that have no clue what they are talking about here, but have to pretend they do because they have a horde of followers waiting to hear what they have to say.

        BHW is where people who actually _do_ SEO talk, and that's why it was one of the first places you heard about this.
        So SEO is launching up X-rumer and spamming thousands or perhaps millions of links?

        I track 200 websites in Serpfox + 40 of my own sites and I haven't noticed any changes at all.

        Maybe cause I refrain from building spammy links?

        Besides, I'm absolutely no content drummer at all, I purely use private blog networks to rank sites and that works the exact same way as a year ago, yes sometimes it does appear to take a bit longer to see the full effect of the links but the initial boost is 9 out of 10 times seen within 3-7 days, nowhere near a month like the OP claims.

        Perhaps it's time for you to admit that pure spam doesn't work that well anymore, and no idea on earth why you would compare real SEO companies to the spammy practices that you're into.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9353594].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TZ
    So who cares? To actually make any domain SAFELY succeed it's takes at least 6 months before your 100% original content is indexed and getting it's first trickles of traffic. So waiting a little longer doesn't matter. I don't even bother watching stats until 8 months has gone by.

    We started in 2003 and the pure white hat sites with 100% original content (long winded posts 2000 words or more) have survived every change Google has made - sure there has been ups and downs because of the Panda, Penguin, etc. - but it the end the pure white hat sites all rebounded and are still making the vast majority of our income. We've been full time since 2005.

    For fun we have dabbled with some PHP programming to create auto generated posts, and sometimes in the short term they have worked quite well. But in the long run the traffic slowly dwindles.

    And once again to annoy all the link-queens on the WF we never created links - just wrote content. Just wrote content and waited for indexing.
    Signature

    $php_coding = "consistent cash";

    echo ("Give me" . " " . $php_coding . "!");

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9351448].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mkgg
      Originally Posted by TZ View Post

      So who cares? To actually make any domain SAFELY succeed it's takes at least 6 months before your 100% original content is indexed and getting it's first trickles of traffic. So waiting a little longer doesn't matter. I don't even bother watching stats until 8 months has gone by.

      We started in 2003 and the pure white hat sites with 100% original content (long winded posts 2000 words or more) have survived every change Google has made - sure there has been ups and downs because of the Panda, Penguin, etc. - but it the end the pure white hat sites all rebounded and are still making the vast majority of our income. We've been full time since 2005.

      For fun we have dabbled with some PHP programming to create auto generated posts, and sometimes in the short term they have worked quite well. But in the long run the traffic slowly dwindles.

      And once again to annoy all the link-queens on the WF we never created links - just wrote content. Just wrote content and waited for indexing.
      What is your niche ?. If your site was 100% white-hat why would panda/penguin affect you and gives you ups and downs and your site would need to rebound ?. Also sure you didn't create links but a site that is online that long gets natural links if it produces anything that is worth something.

      Your post also doesn't mention what position you are ranking for, are you in the top 3 for your keywords or you think you are a success because you are getting traffic ?. Surprise, the site that is sitting at #1 is getting far more traffic and is a bigger success than you are and that is the ultimate goal of what people are trying to do here.

      You would be surprised at what people are accomplishing in a week, month and 6 months, perhaps you should care instead of waiting 8 months for traffic to trickle, holy F thats a long time and i think google releases two updates on average in that much time.

      On the topic:
      I also find it hard to believe there is a filter of some sort, maybe for new sites but that doesn't make sense. What is google going to accomplish by doing that, if anything it will make the results worse because there are time-dependant keywords where an information is required at the time and not a month later.

      It is taking longer to rank thats correct but there is no set time. Sometimes, it takes a few days, sometimes weeks and sometimes it happens instantly. If anything, its gotten weirder. Again, i haven't tried on new sites so i don't know if its happening to new sites. But i agree with paulgl and doubt any filter is in place.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9351615].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lyanna
    A Teckler that I made 13 days ago is now ranked 10, which is good enough for a very short article with absolutely no link building. So I would say "parasite" pages are alive and not being given a 1 month filter.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9352768].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TheAdsenseGuy
    Hey Terry Kyle,

    Does launch jacking new IM products still work using parasite pages? Or does this filter apply to that too?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9353176].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 1nsan3
    Originally Posted by Terry Kyle View Post

    As reported over on BHW, it looks like Google have secretly embedded a new anti-SEO weapon into the Panda 4/Payday Loan update (around May 15-18).

    You can read the relevant BHW threads here:

    Google "waiting period" after May 14 payday update?

    Anyone Noticing Rankings Taking Much Longer Than Usual?

    To summarise, it looks like trying to a rank a new site after the last update will hit a filter that stops it from ranking on Page 1 for a month - regardless of the quality, quantity or type of links thrown at that new site.

    One BHWer reported the same with aged domains.

    If that filter is running now (my ongoing testing suggests that it is active), it raises a bunch of interesting questions:

    1. Are Parasite Pages affected by the filter, given that they are new pages but on long established sites? Early reports say that Parasite Pages have the same problem.

    2. Is Google willing to ignore genuinely viral new pages (less likely) and sites (more likely) for at least a month in its search results?

    3. What happens after the 4 week filter period expires - is it business as usual then or not?

    4. Is this filter more about psychological mind games against SEOs to drive them out (like the painful process of link disavowal and recon requests)?

    5. Is it a permanent change or just a temporary experiment?

    It may just be that more patience will need to be factored into our future SEO work - report your experiences with this possible new filter below.
    Hi

    I notice you call this the random factor, I call it the qualifying period and it does look as though Google are taking a more acute look into each individual web property.

    The difference between one site making it and another not could have something to do with how Google collects historical data, almost like a prediction model.

    They could be using similar models as day traders like Stochastic or the Liner Prediction models, there are others too which, seem more likely.

    If you think about it, when Google refreshes their data, it's the perfect time for Blackhats to do comparative research but it's also a good time for Google too. If the definition of comparative research is: measured or judged by estimating the similarity or dissimilarity between one thing and another; relative.

    Then Google can easily refine their data over and over again. They pump 12% of sites then, they discover over 100 search results they have 4% spam remaining, they make adjustments and pump 5% of the remaining results and rinsing over and over until there is no spam left. Then they simply take behaviour models and limit the results.

    To give you my opinion:

    1 - I had no experience of pages on old domains but I've ranked a 4,000,000 monthly search volume using an existing page in 2 weeks.

    2- Google could be able to tell the difference between a spam page and a viral page. Social elements play a key role here.

    3- Providing your site is updated often I guess so, until we get there we won't know.

    4 - No but that's the way it looks. Real web developers don't care about rankings because they believe in what they do and are passionate about their business. An entrepreneur doesn't care about psychological games.

    5 - Looks like it's going to be longer term and every time Google update their algo they crush spam, either adapt or die.

    DMT
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9354135].message }}

Trending Topics