Is "Jagger" a Major Google Marketing Error?

[greeneagle]

"Jagger" seems to be a mystery everywhere, including SEO Forums. Even webmasterworld is down hard. They chose to move hosting in the middle of this mess and crashed, till Monday according to their Site.

I don't think anyone knows: How to "Google" right now. This kind of alienation directed toward Site Owners, Entrepreneurs, Business Owners, Webmasters, Web Development Companies and SEO/SEM Companies can't bode well in the future, especially in primary seasons. They made the same timing error last year and didn't change their ways this year.

The recent earnings revelations revealing 7x profit in same quarter over last year looks like substantiation for Adword weighting schemes in the algs. Whether any monopolistic claims can be substantiated, is another story.

Whether it needs to be legally substantiated, is another story yet. Is there a gap between "Relevancy" and GOOGLE PPC?, If so, then user popularity will migrate elsewhere.

So far this update (Jagger) seems to have very little deducible logic behind it. IMO – That is a major marketing error on their part!

Companies, and livelihoods are at stake and they seem to be more and more tarnished by corporate earnings to some, especially the many Sites that fell completely out of the SERPs for no apparent reason.

IMO - Communication from GOOGLE to the public is becoming increasingly poor, which will inevitably breed more contempt by users at many levels.

IMO - It would be a serious Marketing Error to not act, and turn this one around now!

It's past time for GOOGLE to improve public communication.

You are laging way behind there, Google. Public Relations is the key to your future and that subset doesn't only consist of paying "Advertisers".

Ken

[aaron2005]

I found Matt's blog this week from someone who linked it here, I was a little interested in finding out "who is Matt" so I spent some time reading his stuff and even whined about a couple of my failing sites in his reinclusion blog post here: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/reincl...request-howto/

Matt has shown interest in building a relationship with webmasters and his blog posts are very active with comments BUT it will soon be more than he can handle yes? This is a great opportunity for Google to start to focus on this and I believe this "reinclusion" is an indicator that they already have.

Matt has this somewhat niave way about him that I find refreshing, he is like a smart kid who built a machine but is yet to learn what the machine has done. He looks to the us and even listens to spammers while he drinks sprite and they get loose lipped from the hard stuff at parties ;)

As I always say, I am no expert but I believe that these search engines are still very primative and making drastic changes really hurts in ways they are not even aware of yet?

[s_clay]

I have heard that many top spots are now being occupied by large corporate entities, etc. I've heard complaints of spam and made for adsense scraper
sites dominating results.

I hear this, but haven't seen it. When I surf for general fun or info, the results I see are good. For my niche, a fairly competitive retail sector, I would not have noticed that there was an update except for the "noise" across the various forums starting from 9/22 and getting increaingly louder.

Traffic for my site is up, rankings are as good or better than they've ever been. In fact, for one new item I've added in the last week, I see page 1 results for a specific term with 22 million results. I nod to the gods here... I know that luck may have something to do with this.

Scrapers and spammers have never been a significant issue in my niche, at least for page one results. A little different for Yahoo and MSN, which let some of these sites in.

For those of you who have been hit hard by this update, take heart from this post on Matt Cutts blog, dated 10/19/05:

"Finally, GoogleGuy posted yesterday or so that a new binary is also wending its way from data centers like 66.102.7.x. And I wouldn’t be surprised if a second stage of the index rolls out around this time next week. I also wouldn’t be surprised if a third stage of the index rolls out the week after that. I just wanted to let people know that there’s still flux to come."

So, it appears that it is much too early to draw conclusions or throw stones.

For the record, WMW did not go down because they moved. Their host had a major hardware failure affecting many websites, not just WMW. After two days of promises with no results, WMW decided to move, resulting in the extended downtime. Just imagine what you would do if your site was down for more than 2 days... Well, maybe it's not so hard to imagine for some of you with Jager still playing.

It's going to be a couple of weeks at least before the dust settle on this. Until then hang tight, listen, watch and make your plans.

[s_clay]

I have heard that many top spots are now being occupied by large corporate entities, spammers and made for adsense scrapers.

I hear this, but haven't seen it. When I surf for general fun or info, the results I see are good. For my niche, a fairly competitive retail sector, I would not have noticed that there was an update except for the "noise" across the various forums starting from 9/22 and getting increaingly louder.

Traffic for my site is up, rankings are as good or better than they've ever been. In fact, for one new item I've added in the last week, I see page 1 results for a specific term with 22 million results. I nod to the gods here... I know that luck may have something to do with this.

Scrapers and spammers have never been a significant issue in my niche, at least for page one results. A little different for Yahoo and MSN, which let some of these sites in.

For those of you who have been hit hard by this update, take heart from this post on Matt Cutts blog, dated 10/19/05:

"Finally, GoogleGuy posted yesterday or so that a new binary is also wending its way from data centers like 66.102.7.x. And I wouldn’t be surprised if a second stage of the index rolls out around this time next week. I also wouldn’t be surprised if a third stage of the index rolls out the week after that. I just wanted to let people know that there’s still flux to come."

So, it appears that it is much too early to draw conclusions or throw stones.

For the record, WMW did not go down because they moved. Their host had a major hardware/infrastructure failure affecting their DNS server and many websites, not just WMW. After two days of promises with no results, WMW decided to move, resulting in the extended downtime. Just imagine what you would do if your site was down for more than 2 days... Well, maybe it's not so hard to imagine for some of you with Jager still playing.

It's going to be a couple of weeks at least before the dust settle on this. Until then hang tight, listen, watch and make your plans.

[greeneagle]

These kind of major changes just do not need to occur right in prime season before Christmas, breaking many businesses and livelihoods without warning, real reason and time to react.

IMO - That is just flat "HEARTLESS" and without reason! - This has happened 2 years in a row now!!! Move it to the 1st quarter, instead of the 4th!

If Google Policy "Does No Evil" ... Prove it and move it!!! It just can't go on breaking companies and livelihoods without discernable reason at the most critical time of the year!!!

Ken

[aaron2005]

Yeah I here that Mr. greeneagle, thank God this is a hobby/learning thing for me, if I had to support my family with this up and down roller coaster ride it would be insane.

It's also funny that the 301/302 redirect thing is coming up now, 2 years ago when I didn't even know how to send email, I was extremely bothered about why Google was getting the godaddy 302 redirect all f'd up on my first website. I visited all the forums, contacted google and nobody was interested in the issue so after much search I found the answer. The site needed a 301 redirect, my host (Godaddy) refused to put it in place so I moved the site. After googlebot was pointed at WWW my fortune changed and the website got noticed.

I guess my point is that this stuff still can all get hosed with just a few changes in Google. In Matt's blog they have just started to discuss and look into "redirects" which makes me believe this whole thing is still in it's infancy. Google shouldn't have to invite spammers to parties to get to know how they manipulate them, they should hire a few who would like to grow the hell up and work for a cool company.

WMW? Isn't that the lame forum you have to pay to get into? It is a bit tempting but I refuse to pay to chat and blah blah blah about this stuff, in fact it's getting too painful and I might disappear for another year or two. How about you?

[s_clay]

Google, like any good business, is constantly trying to improve their product.

Are they supposed to just stop work for a quarter because it's going to change search results?

Are you kidding? For every site that goes down in flames, another rises to the top. Someone is always going to be unhappy. Unsound business models will fail.

No warning? LOL. Read your own posts Ken.

Heartless? Google is not a character Dickens novel, and pity Bob Cratchit if he bet Tiny Tim's future solely on the free organic returns that can be had in Google. Google is a business, with clear responsibilities to only one group, it's shareholders.

[greeneagle]

"No warning? LOL. Read your own posts Ken. "

As you know, I agree there were many warnings about certain issues...

But in any forum I visit no one anywhere can figure out what GOOGLE is doing in this update. Dramatic SERP falls as many have experienced, myself included with www.huntandhunt.com , just don't hold water.

That is the only Site we saw fall that dramatically.

The only difference from the others that I manage is:

1) Very few OBLs - The owner doesn't want to link to Sites outside his when not necessary - we slid just a few in.

2) Not listed in DMOZ - Most of the others are.. Been trying for over 2 years now.. Haven't resubmitted in over a year - no violations there

They are reciprocally linked to all my other clients too. They all express "Sitewide" IBLs to my Site and haven't taken a hit. I return the favor on a mature "Relevant" PR4 portfolio page - Not causing a problem anywhere else.

There is just no soluble deductive reasoning for the hit here... I am empathetic for the other Sites, business owners and webmasters suffering the same lack of communication from GOOGLE here.

You bet I am!

In a Marketing World - That kind of non-communication is just pretty much inexcusable!

We can speculate on entrenched and "relevancy" Factors for both IBLs and OBLS or divert to imaginary previous updates, but none of them hold the only key... The site I mentioned above has been in the top few for "laser machining Houston" and "perforating guns" since launch, over 2 years ago - never even a "sandbox" issue.....but they are gone now!!!

This same phenomenon has affected a large percentage of Sites this time in their prime marketing period just before Christmas), (not that it matters to my sites) and there seems to be absolutely no clue anywhere, why!

That - IS VERY POOR MARKETING!, by GOOGLE, at best!

I have tolerated their "irrelevant" alg BS since inception on this Site: www.dpwater.com for almost 2 years now too.

They just don't like the long pages and sub-menus at the top of several of the pages. I guess they think it is spam, but MSN and YAHOO lap it up like honey and beat them to the pulp, relentlessly.

But, visitors save it as a favorite all day long and it was recently exemplified at a major Independent Texas Water Supplier Site at an extremely important Regional Industry Convention.... so who really gives a rat's ass if GOOGLE sees it as a significant site?..

I surely don't!

Ken

[s_clay]

I think that Google does a much better job compared to MSN and Yahoo when communicating with the webmaster community, via Matt Cutts, GoogleGuy and the contact links they provide. Do the others even try? No. MSN Dude is probably too busy dodging chairs.

Read: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/ especially the 10/19/05 entry. Use the feedback links.

Again, this update is apparently still in the early stages. I've seen sites in my niche dissapear for months, then reappear, for no known reason. For all I know I could be next. Easilly.

I use sub menu's at the top of my pages along with side bar navigation menu's. Anchor text is keyword rich, but not spammy. You're right, MSN and Yahoo love it. Google... If not love, indulgence? It is interesting to play jester for three kings.

I also feel for the people that are suffering with this update, but do not think that the timing is a problem. Changes have been happening all along; perhaps people are just more sensitive to them at this time of year.

To say Google is not trying to communicate is not correct. Read Cutts blog, use the feedback links - especially if you can help with clearly documented examples of errors/problems.

[ADAM Web Design]

This is not directly related to the topic at hand, but since these two behaviours are Google-related and may be an effect of the update, I noticed them and felt it appropriate to share:

1) I recently created two articles for clients, both of which I published on my own website on Wednesday. While they were crawled on Thursday, they didn't show up in SERPs until Friday. They used to show up within 24 hours of my having published them on my site.

I'm not bitching about the extra 24 hours. What didn't make complete sense to me was the crawl taking place the day before the SERP listing, when it used to be on the same day. But again, it's not something I'm losing a great deal of sleep over.

2) I recently finished (other than SEO, which I'm starting this weekend) a site for company called Award Kitchen Refacers.

About the time of the update, my client called me excited because he'd already gotten #1 ranking in the term "Kitchen Refacers". Having not so much as lifted a finger to start promoting his site before it was ready (he had 0 IBLs at this point), I had no idea what the hell he was talking about.

Having looked a little further into it, I discovered the reason. I have two domains on my server with stopped sites belonging to former clients of mine (not stopped because of anything I did wrong with the sites, but for other confidential-type reasons.) Neither are redirecting to the new site and both have a "No website is configured at this address." message because they're stopped.

Google has indexed the Award Kitchen Refacers content under both of these domains and hasn't yet removed either from the index.

So...my thoughts are that it may not totally be a marketing error (although I do agree with Ken in that their customer service is rather lacking), but at least partly a technical error.

[greeneagle]

"To say Google is not trying to communicate is not correct. Read Cutts blog..."

What does Cutt's blog say besides they are cutting out more SPAM? - There is nothiing for the fallout there!

Old history and nothing more! What about the incidentals here? - This is "bloody" for many (a very large number) innocent at a very bad time!

Every update is about cutting out more SPAM - What revelation does Cutt's blog really provide here?

I thought we were talking beyond normal spam filtering advancements here...weren't we?

Cutt's blog provides no clue for the problems being discussed here!

Ken

[s_clay]

OK - So I imagined that my site suddenly fell into oblivion on Goog.

What do I do? After getting over the sheer panic...

Read posts like yours and go f***ing A right!

Then thank my stars that I still rank on Y & M.

Then realize that this is the game I signed up for. I have no lease, or any right beyond the subjective value that my content offers, to the real estate on Google's site.

Then I would have to evaluate my business model. Do I believe in it? Will it work? How can I make it work? Once I had the answers, I'd get busy with the plan. Once again.

One thing I have learned in business is that change happens. There is always something - suppliers get sold, key people move on, clients move on; sh*t happens and the internet world is just like the brick and morter world. It's business.

Maybe they should have called this update "Heartbreak Ridge".

Improvise, Adapt, Overcome.

[greeneagle]

"...Once I had the answers, I'd get busy with the plan. Once again.

One thing I have learned in business is that change happens. There is always something - suppliers get sold, key people move on, clients move on; sh*t happens and the internet world is just like the brick and morter world. It's business.

Maybe they should have called this update "Heartbreak Ridge".

Improvise, Adapt, Overcome."

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah... We all agree with that, but where, how and why? - We can all be as esoteric as we want.. but I and others, especially those that were depending on GOOGLE SERPS to feed families and kids through the Christmas season really need something a little more "concrete" regarding this update, and we are all having trouble finding out what happened this time around!

A Major Marketing Error - This one is serious - IMO! A large contengent are not happy this time... Probably a larger contengent than in any previous update, judging by the input in our Forums here!

IMHO - There was absolutely no reason for some of the sites that fell completely out of the SERPs this time to take that kind of hit!!! Mine and several others I have reviewed, didn't even have a detectable known "Gray Hat" practice going on!!

VERY, VERY POOR MARKETING on the GOOGs part, and I'll stand by that position!

Ken

[greeneagle]

Come on GOOG.. You were bad boys this time... At this point you have wiped out millions in projected revenue over the Christmas Season and wasted thousands of companies in the "Jagger" update, and the best of us just can't figure out why.

What's the deal with that?

We need a little help here.

How about some communication?

Get your Marketing Department and Public Relations Departments working together... IMO - There is something really serious lacking there!

Thanks,

Ken

[aaron2005]

Originally Posted by greeneagle

Come on GOOG.. You were bad boys this time... At this point you have wiped out millions in projected revenue over the Christmas Season and wasted thousands of companies in the "Jagger" update, and the best of us just can't figure out why.

What's the deal with that?

We need a little help here.

How about some communication?

Get your Marketing Department and Public Relations Departments working together... IMO - There is something really serious lacking there!

Thanks,

Ken

Yep, I tend to agree, Google is so removed from the actual results that they know less than you folks do.

Is it a fact that new sites have to wait a year or more just to get a single result from google? No let me correct myself, you wait 6 months then your site appears and stays at #600 for your keyword, so you go to the forums and find out how the so called "experts" do it, you get some backlinks and maybe even sign up for LinkmarketHell.com and dig your hole deeper...LOL!

God I hate this stuff! ;-(

[nipplecharms1]

Maybe what we are really looking at is the beginning of 4th QTR 05 and 1st QRT ‘06 income statements.

Bare (no pun intended) with me on this for a second.

Gizizzle is at an all time high in the market. What’s next? They do not have Gizizzle v2.1 to release but they do have a food stream, if I am not wrong, and I don’t think I am, in ADWORDS.

Stay with me here.... All you cats (my site included) that took a hit, you are thinking to yourself... Christmas time, holiday, EOY and ROI projections. Dang, let my buy some adword space just until the dusts settles. But the dust on this "Mick and the boys" thing wont really settle. And you start to like some of the Adwords results. You start to understand it...

Ok, I am almost finished here.... You keep doing the SERP $hit but you keep the adwords cause some of them do pull traffic (like I would pay a buck for a click, not likely) and some of you will stick with it.

Ok, the finish. This impacts Gizizzles bottom line for the street. They do yet another major update say July '06. Another round of poor schmucks like me (ok not me but small time Charlie's) that will fork over $5-$10 bucks a day, everyday... and the next thing you know.. Gizizzle is staying the 800-lb. gorilla.

Bill, Gates, what F? You need another 45BUSD! When is Redmond going to step up to the plate and bring their mediocre brilliance to the table. I would rather have consistent search engine platforms than what Gizizzle is plying us with now.

Sour Grapes? Maybe; maybe not. Just an old time marketing guy trying to make sense of it all.

Is it too early for my second Martini?

Your comments are most welcome. Ciao!

Michael

[google junky]

nipplecharms1,

That was probably the most entertaning post I have read in a long time. It actually kept my attention. Even if I don't get very much relevent information out of most posts I read other than reading the same response over and over. Keep giving me a reason to read Michael.


Good luck in all you do,
Google Junky

[greeneagle]

No "Sour Grapes" here... They need to be more communicative and move major updates from the beginning of the 4th quarter to the 1st quarter, so businesses, webmasters and everyone else have time to react without so much devistation to online livlihoods.

This has happened 2 years in a row now. If I were at the helm there, I would seriously consider replacing my "Marketing" and "Public Relations" Directors, without hesitation!

Evidently, they are not doing their job and communicating with Engineering. There seems to be a harsh (marked) miscommunication (or lack there of) problem in their corporate structure.

Ken

[greeneagle]

With all due respect....

I hope others will join me in the call for GOOGLE to move major updates out of the 4th quarter, where everyone has time to react so that it isn't so detrimental to online livlihoods.

Ken

[DMC_34]

Originally Posted by greeneagle

They need to be more communicative and move major updates from the beginning of the 4th quarter to the 1st quarter, so businesses, webmasters and everyone else have time to react without so much devistation to online livlihoods.

The affected sites do have time to react, and Google knows this. Its called Adwords. This is why Google loves to do it in the 4th quarter, holiday season.

DMC

[aaron2005]

It is true that Google doesn't owe us anything. Maybe the small "mom and pops" and "adsense bloggers" should not expect a thing? I think I made the mistake of believing that Google wants to keep us safe and above those who can afford to pay Adwords.

I am not angry at myself or Google and trully believe if you just keep doing what you do (while remaining honest to yourself and your "niche") you will prevail. Foolish, maybe this is true, but I do not lose any sleep over this stuff anymore.

Those of you who rely on the Free SERPS for results for clients must be hurting today but are these clients big enough to afford an Awords campaign? It does make some sense how Google might be tweaking this.

Heck, I put Adsense on all my sites yesterday and a few visits here and there made $22, pocket change to you but enough for me to continue my work on writing free, focused, informational blogs when I am not with family.

[nipplecharms1]

Originally Posted by google junky

nipplecharms1,

That was probably the most entertaning post I have read in a long time. It actually kept my attention. Even if I don't get very much relevent information out of most posts I read other than reading the same response over and over. Keep giving me a reason to read Michael.


Good luck in all you do,
Google Junky

Dear Junky,

If you can't beat them, make 'em laugh! Thanks for the kind words and I will try to entertain if I cannot contribute in other ways! :)

Dear Ken,

I meant sour grapes on my part. I would never presume to say you had sour grapes!

All that said I firmly believe Gizizzle owes us nothing and their investment community EVERTHING. If the end user benefits in a capitalist enterprise, great. But if the guy (no offense to the chicks in the audience (a la Frank Sinatra)) that "buy" the product (adwords) stop buying, then and only then will Gizizzle take notice. And then, and only then, will they have a right/reason to fire the Marketing and R&D guys (no offence to the women again. see I am getting better)

DMC is right. If I were running the marketing at The G, I would do all this the beginning of every 4th QTR!

Just my buck three and a nickel.

Comments always welcome here!

Michael

[whipnet]

Originally Posted by greeneagle

With all due respect....

I hope others will join me in the call for GOOGLE to move major updates out of the 4th quarter, where everyone has time to react so that it isn't so detrimental to online livlihoods.

Ken

I agree. I sell nothing online, but I can see them making their changes in the 4th quarter as being unnecessary on Google's behalf.

Everyone says, don't build your business around Google's freebie traffic, but if you have it and you are selling a lot, and Christmas is coming up and your product tends to sell more this time of year, you are going to order appropriately for the season... probably by now.

Then you disappear... doesn't seem right.

*

[Andilinks]

Everyone says, don't build your business around Google's freebie traffic, but if you have it and you are selling a lot, and Christmas is coming up and your product tends to sell more this time of year, you are going to order appropriately for the season... probably by now.

Then you disappear... doesn't seem right.

I've been trying to make similar arguments since July and I got very little sympathy from this crowd and the others at WMW et al. Well the tables have turned, and I don't want to gloat because I know how it feels, but I do feel vindicated. All too many were defending G back then and telling me I must have done something wrong to get banned.

I'm happy to be back in the index and don't want to defend G too vigorously, 'cause the tables could turn again. But I am pleased that others can finally see what I've been saying since 7/28.

[aaron2005]

Originally Posted by Andilinks

I've been trying to make similar arguments since July and I got very little sympathy from this crowd and the others at WMW et al. Well the tables have turned, and I don't want to gloat because I know how it feels, but I do feel vindicated. All too many were defending G back then and telling me I must have done something wrong to get banned.

I'm happy to be back in the index and don't want to defend G too vigorously, 'cause the tables could turn again. But I am pleased that others can finally see what I've been saying since 7/28.

I know how you feel, I tried to wave a flag about several things including the 301/302 redirect issues for years, but because I do not know how to speak the language of the admin. I am often ignored or seen as not getting it. It does feel a little bitter sweet in a kind of silly way. ;)

[virtualtraveller]

Whether they like it or not Google needs us. We pay money to their adwords, we keep them alive with plenty of sites for their SERPS - 955 of which are carefully adhered to Google's criteria for a 'good site', if we didn't put the effort in to produce and market good sites then the searchers would never find what they are looking for. Nothing is free on the web, those who can produce the most relevant and useful sites need to make a living off them, and that includes travel affiliate sites, some of which are actually damn good by the way. Webmasters should form an important lobby and it's a pity we have no power to influence this sort of thing other than to moan on forums in the hope that a callous giant takes note.

Sure, you can argue that for every one of us that has fallen off the radar, there is another site moving up (or one site falling into the abyss and lots of sites making slight gains), but it looks to me that some sites stand to gain an unfair and undesearved windfall out of this, such as the directory sites which will do quite nicely for themselves over the next few critical pre-christmas travel weeks when traffic is particularly frenetic. So, they wipe a few nasty spam sites off the radar and enrich a bunch more.

I agree with Greeneagle about making lots of noise, and if the Mike Cutts of the world who (if they were even half decent at their jobs) would be reading these important forums and taking our comments onboard, we might at least influence their 'board room decision-making beneath their big 'do no evil' banner.

Ethical considerations when making decisions as important as, 'when to effect a majoy algo update' and 'how radically to change it', are paramount when you are as large and influencial as Google.

It's unfortunate that the public at large are in the lazy habit of using Google. They are a victim of their own success. As it stands, I'm quite sure that most Google users now know that they have to open the top 10 sites on the list to actually find the one that suits them. All this jumping through hoops to try and discourage spamming is understandable but it's really become quite ridiculous and I look forward to the day when the percentage of the 'search pie' shifts to a more equitable balance between the big 3 or 4.

[damarzee]

My experience with this latest Jagger1 update has been a decrease in traffic by about 75%, so I dropped from over 4000 visitors a day to about 1000.

After the panic and disbelief of seeing two years of intense effort just blown away, It dawned on me that I had no idea how Google dependant I had become and so I immediately started taking steps to resolve this issue.

Because my sites had become so popular and self feeding, I had previously stopped persuing new links and listings and just let them come to me, but now I am out there again, looking to get listed in as many directories and indexes as possible and I have even made it easier for people to request a free link to our primary website.

A few observations... even though I lost 75% of my traffic, I only lost about 33% of my revenue. This basically concludes that even though google may be supplying a lot of traffic, it is of much lower quality as compared to Yahoo or MSN.

I also observed that I am getting less than half as many clicks on adsense links placed on the website. Again, since i don't have all the lower quality visits normally provided by Google, I don't have as many people just chewing up bandwidth and happily clicking away their day. It's obvious that Googles adsense can be self feeding in that their link results make it necessary or desireable for their users to use adsense to find what they are really searching for.

Then finally, since my traffic is so much easier to view now, I noticed that from all the PPC programs I use, whether it be Adsense, Overture or GoClick, Adsense is now providing the lowest level of clicks that lead to sales, which again is due to them having a very large, but lower quality...less targeted, audience as compared to Yahoo and other search engines, so i placed my Adsense campaigns on hold for now.

Bottom line, I am not looking to live without Google, but I believe it is a dangerous thing when a single decision by one company has the power to so severely affect my business. I didn't realize how dependant I was and I guarantee you that I will not remain so. I advise you all do the same. Network, reach out, link exchange and build as many Google Free methods of obtaining traffic as possible. Doing so may have very little effect on the losses this Christmas season, but we will all be so much better prepared when Google does this again next September or October....just when we all thought we were set to go.

[aaron2005]

Originally Posted by damarzee

A few observations... even though I lost 75% of my traffic, I only lost about 33% of my revenue. This basically concludes that even though google may be supplying a lot of traffic, it is of much lower quality as compared to Yahoo or MSN.

Very keen observation, though my sites only get a couple dollars a day in visits I am also noticing this. Loss of at least 75% Google traffic but increased quality hits from the other two. I am starting to appreciate MSN and Yahoo now, hmm pretty cool! :-)

[sysop9999]

Not sure if any of you guys and gals have read this, so I'll post it here .... looks like it's getting some attention now.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/10/prweb301671.htm

[roam_dx]

s_clay, you are aware that msn.com is still a PR2.

In previous updates, most of the sites I saw complaining, usually had tons that could be done on them to make them "better websites".

And the respected members of WPW and other forums --- who made those ethically optimised, well designed websites gave people such as those advice when they came looking for answers as to why their rankings dropped.

This time there are so many established pros and ethical webmasters who's sites got dumped - we could call this the "Dagger Update"

[SEOforGoogle]

While I also agree that Google lacks good Public Relations, Google owes no one anything - the fact that in the past you were able to rely on them for traffic, doesn't mean they can't change the results they deliver

- There are many, many ways of getting your site found by interested buyers, (besides PPC), and to rely on Google for the majority of your business simply isn't good business.

Fortunately, I've only had 1 client impacted and it was only for one major keyphrase - but since I've always told my clients to not focus on Google and build multiple streams of traffic from various places on the Internet, whenever Google has a crushing update like this, their sites simply lose one stream of traffic as opposed to a river.

Point is, the Internet existed WAY before Google, and as an SEO/SEM it's your responsibility to get targeted traffic to your clients site through various channels, and not just the "easy" traffic that Google brings.

<end of rant>

[aaron2005]

The name SEOforGoogle reminds me of the little weenie who stands behind the tough guy screaming insults at you just before the bar fight. Guess who I would hit first? KO ;O

Sorry, couldn't resist, just a little bored with this all today..heh heh

[s_clay]

"s_clay, you are aware that msn.com is still a PR2."

Yes, at least the non www version. The www is reflecting a more "reasonable" PR. lol. :)

Back to topic. The supposition here is that google needs to "market" to webmasters/seo's. They don't imho, but they do make an effort - at least compared to the others.

They do a great job marketing adwords and promoting their search to the general public, which is where the money is.

Seems like people want Google say, OK - It's 4th Quarter - No one is going to drop, and no one is going to rise, until January 1st.

Maybe January is too soon. I mean, you get a whole quarter of stable rankings and then the carpet is yanked out from under you, without warning? Better wait until March. Or better yet, June. But wait...

I hear Neil Young singing in my mind... "Oh to live on Suger Mountain, with the barkers and the colored balloons. You can't be twenty on Sugar Mountain. Though you think that you're leaving there too soon. You're leaving there too soon."

Peace and Love :)

[damarzee]

Originally Posted by sysop9999

Not sure if any of you guys and gals have read this, so I'll post it here .... looks like it's getting some attention now.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/10/prweb301671.htm

This article provided some good insight and has stated that this update is not over yet, so there still may be hope...and maybe not.

The press release concludes by saying:
"It may be more than a coincidence that this major update occurred right before the holiday season. It is highly probable that companies who recently lost their rankings and resulting traffic will bite the bullet and invest heavily in Pay Per Click advertising this holiday season in order to make up for their lost organic search engine traffic."

Now, I'm not looking to be spiteful, but not only am I not going to increase my Adsense PPC campaigns, but I have placed current campaigns on hold and have increased PPC with Overture (Yahoo), GoClick and others.

I have also increased the volume of paid monthly or lifetime directory listings that we are budgeted for by using funds previously earmarked for Google Adsense. Actually, even without the current situation, these are better traffic decisions in the long term anyway.

Overall, I'm not liking the current traffic situation, but my eyes have been opened to see that I should have been more aggressively pursuing other forms of traffic all along. Google traffic is fine, but just as with a welfare system, it's not good to become dependant upon it.

[randy776]

Originally Posted by greeneagle

I hope others will join me in the call for GOOGLE to move major updates out of the 4th quarter, where everyone has time to react so that it isn't so detrimental to online livlihoods.

And we, of course, expect Google to say "ok, no problem".

Why could we possibly expect them to listen. Are they more attentive to the webmaster than I have found in my experience?

I would like to believe that the Google Gods are symapthetic to our plight...

I would like to believe that they are sitting back now and re-examining Jagger to determine the overall impact on us, the people who drive their business....

I would like to believe all of that, but what I really believe is that they are finding humor in our complaining and relishing the power they have over all of us lowly webmasters.

Personally, I gained some ground, I lost some ground across my various sites. The overall effect was a drop in sales. Not sure why but the full effect didn;t hit me until a wekk or more after the update. My positions changed around 9PM a week ago Sunday. I can pinpoint that almost to the minute, but my sales didn't drop significantly until this past Thursday or Friday.

At any rate, as most people here have indicated I am going to drop back and regroup and try to figure out what to do to fix it. It's tough when my methods from one site to another are essentially the same, some sites gained, other lost.

Ironically due to the similarity between my sites - some of those that fell in the results were replaced by other sites that I own. But some of my best keywords are gone - I have literally hundreds of terms that fell from #1 or #2 to below #500. The site that lost the most ground is really new to positioning.

I don't know if it is pertinent or not, but for those of you who are looking for patterns. My site that fell the most has been around for 4 years. It jumped up in Google in May of this year. When it appeared it appeared BIG. Lots of #1's on great keywords in the education field - My traffic went up 10 times overnight. If you searched for a college related term or a degree name I was on the first page in almost every case......

I stayed there from May until last Sunday....now I am gone and traffic has fallen below where it was initially.

[MarcGrobman]

I have a lot of mixed feelings about this update. I know I have not been hit hard personally.

I don't think Google is intentionally malicious. And, while I'm sure they are making lots of money with AdWords, I somehow trust that they dont' make their search engine decisions based on that.

Google is a big ship that is hard to stear. They have to keep updating or stay stagnant. Any changes will result in ups and downs.

And a big reason they have to keep updating is because of SEO. A lot of our supposedly white hat techniques are not exactly natural search rankings. Greeneagle -- do you think it is really natural to link between all of your sites? This is not an accusation -- we are all doing our best here. I just mean, in terms of Google finding quality results, why should people who play the SEO game be more relevant? What about other good solid business that are spending their time on quality content and quality products, but are overlooked just because they don't put irrelevant link exchanges all over their site?

The real success of Google will depend on whether they keep returning good search results. I use it cause it gets me what I want. The moment I can't find something I try a different engine. And if is consistant I'll start searching somewhere else.

They don't know us search engine gamers anything.

[kerer99]

Originally Posted by sysop9999

Not sure if any of you guys and gals have read this, so I'll post it here .... looks like it's getting some attention now.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/10/prweb301671.htm

Thanks for the link - great article.

Based on this, and what others are saying, I think it's too early to cry "wolf". Let Google work its magic, and then judge.

No, updates like this do not make webmaster's lives easier, but they are simply a reality that we must all live with. Diversify, and you should be okay.

The power lies in the web surfer's hands - if you don't like how Google is ranking your website, use a different search engine when searching the internet. Google is not the only player out there - we should all remember this.

Cheers.

[nashville]

This has been very interesting for sure. After this Google mess we did look at our world of marketing and the first thing we did was CANCEL our adwords account and added more to Yahoo.

The second thing we did was look more at other forms of marketing that were more dependable.

Third, we canceled 80% of our SEO budget for 2006.

There is no need for the stress this causes.

[mktplace]

Originally Posted by Andilinks

I've been trying to make similar arguments since July and I got very little sympathy from this crowd and the others at WMW et al. Well the tables have turned, and I don't want to gloat because I know how it feels, but I do feel vindicated. All too many were defending G back then and telling me I must have done something wrong to get banned.

I'm happy to be back in the index and don't want to defend G too vigorously, 'cause the tables could turn again. But I am pleased that others can finally see what I've been saying since 7/28.

Here! Here! I was another "loser" in the July update, and all I got for responses from here and other places was that I "must have done something blackhat". So I guess I will tell you what I felt you all told me: get over it!

If you want guaranteed traffic, pay for it like the rest of us. . . if you want a hand-out, go down to the local charity office. If you don't like what Google is doing, spend a couple of billion $, buy their stock, and then gripe as any good majority shareholder has a right to do.

[DrTandem1]

Look, this update is a no-brainer. The so-called "update" is a scam and serves two related purposes:
1) It motivates people to buy into their PPC scam.

2) Since the organic SERPs in Google are no longer as relevant, it motivates searchers to click on the PPC ads.

Now, you may think I'm being harsh by calling PPC a scam. Think about it. Google has stated that it wants to provide relevant results, we just didn't know that they now mean relevant to their bottom line, not to the searchers' requests. I would be less harsh, if Google went after fraudulent clicks, but they don't.

Lastly, before you buy into PPC, have you as a searcher ever clicked on any of those sponsored sites? I have clicked on very few of them. Why? because we know they are ads positioned solely by the amount of money the advertiser is willing to spend. The more they need to spend, the higher their price will be to make up for the overhead.

Prediction: There will be a stampede to sell Google stock. If you have it now, don't be greedy, sell while you have a chance.

Opinion: Google produces nothing and you're stupid for buying into it.

[golferboy]

If I were Google, Yahoo, MSN, Ask Jeeves, or any other Search Engine, I would eliminate all of the "organic" listings and show nothing but paid listings!

This would take care of the majority of the problems associated with "relevant" search results.

Spam sites would be totally eliminated unless they were willing to "pay" which they would not because without profits you can't last long without relevant products or information, that people are searching for.

There would be no need for spiders to eat up a gazillion gigabytes of totally useless information that nobody is interested in or will ever see.

If you are not listed in the first two or three pages of a search engine, you might as well be on the last page.

If you have a commercial website that is selling something, including ad space whether it be individual ads, Google Adsense, or something similar, there is absolutely no reason why you should be listed any higher than someone else who is PAYING NOTHING for the space.

The search engines don't owe you anything, UNLESS YOU HAVE PAID FOR A POSITION!

If you were fortunate to have a top position, and lost it, which I have, it's tough sh_t! If your "income" is derived from your website, then you have a business and you should operate it as one.

That means that you need to pay for your search engine listings. If you have a good website, a good product, and good customer service, you will be successful, even with the additional cost of paying for your listings on a search engine, which happens to be some of the cheapest targeted advertising availably anywhere on earth.

I could go on and on as I get worked up whenever I read these crybaby posts from people who freak out when their "free" or "organic" listings disappear to the sandbox, or the outer edge, for no apparent reason.

More than likely there was no apparent reason that you ranked ahead of other sites which quite likely were more relevant to the search terms involved.

The main focus of search engines is to provide a quick listing of relevant web sites that will provide the product or information that a person is searching for.

Most people are willng to pay for that product or information and are comfortable ordering online. If one is able to provide an easy solution to a problem which can be delivered instantly or conveniently, they will be successful...........

.....however there is no free lunch and you shouldn't expect one!

Most people here will probably totally disagree with my opinion as they are looking for a "free ride".

But, if the search listings were 100% paid for you would have the absolute best targeted results available for the searcher, and a fair and level playing field for the internet marketer.

Jim Longnecker
http://www.niche-rich.com

[ChrisBowd]

I have not logged in to WPW for a year; back then saying anything anti-Google in this forum was pretty much asking to be slaughtered; times are a changing for the better.

I guess this is what happens when any one company winds up dominating a single media channel. Google has zero original content, is the ultimate copyright infringer (everything on their servers is copied from our sites) and uses that content to make profits. If they did the same thing by freely streaming movies illicitly videoed in theaters they would be sued out of existence by the MPAA.

How does Google get away with what they do? Because they provide a free (at least at present) global channel to consumers and we are all falling over ourselves to try to get one of those free front-page positions.

In its early days Google was able to proliferate a "friendly giant" image because it was: i) private, ii) it probably genuinely wanted to be a friendly giant, and, iii) it was a convenient way to achieve critical mass. Today's Google is a different thing though: its a public entity and must show consistent growth in profits. Google's shareholders neither know nor care whether your online store loses position immediately before Christmas - why should they? Your profits do not contribute to Google's profits. Google's shareholders, just like a newspaper or TV channel's shareholders, want the high-paying ads on the front page, not charitable freebies for NPOs (which from their prospective is what free search results are).

And don't rely on Google changing its ways because of user pressure. The popularity of AdWords says that users just click on the results at the top of the page whether paid or free. Very few users have any understanding or interest in how Google works, how often (or even if) Google updates or whether the results they click are free or paid-for. To most users Google is just a convenient online alternative to the old paper classifieds. And thats the real point of what;s happening to Google: if you want front page results then you are eventually going to have to buy them.

[DrTandem1]

Originally Posted by golferboy

But, if the search listings were 100% paid for you would have the absolute best targeted results available for the searcher, and a fair and level playing field for the internet marketer.

Jim Longnecker

Jim, they already have that. It's called the Yellow Pages. Yes, they would be the best results that money could buy. Would they be the better than the organic SERPs? No, not even close.

Not everyone pays to be found and not everyone who pays to be found is worth finding. Now, go buy some more Google stock;)

[espectations]

Maybe it is still too early but I ran some checks on my clients' sites as well as my own and nothing much happened.

Oh, pagerank improved. Am I one of the lucky ones or is the hours of writing and publishing original content paying off???

Regardless, as I always say there is not just one search engine out there.

Golferboy, well note taken about your opinion but here is the point which I think is upsetting everybody else.

If you are a paid-for search engine, then the search engine should market itself as that. Maybe this changed after they went public and I think the point everybody is trying to make is that the marketing people should communicate that with the world.

One thing I did notice yesterday is that the directories seems to be listed first and then individual sites. Let me explain - I have a cleaning equipment customer. Searching for Cleaning equipment South Africa, the results first listed all the directories (where my customer is listed anyway) and then started to list individual sites.

Anybody else noticed this?

I still maintain that if you have content you will maintain listings for specific keywords. Maybe we should do more analysis of what differentiate us in the market place from our competitors and concentrate on that....

[aaron2005]

Think of the future if what you folks say is true, only big business would be able to pay, there would be no free organic listings, and it would trully suck. Who would want to use an internet full of websites with lame smiley faces and flashing corporate banners? I believe the internet is the great equalizer and without access to it many rebels would arise. You think people hated Microsoft? You want to play that? You haven;t seen anything yet!

But in the real world I believe all is well, wait a few weeks and see, I also was rewarded higher pr and some of my original articles still get hits. If you are not sandboxed you are not out of the game right? It's just time to get back to doing what you do...if you don;t have staying power well maybe this isn't for you.

[MarcGrobman]

Jim are you serious or just tring to stir the pot?

An all paid search engine is nothing I'd use. In fact that is why Google has prospered. Many other SE's were charging for most of the top spots. I hated those results!

Then Google came up with this AdWords thing where they are tucked away so you don't have to use them if you don't want. And lucky for them, they figured out a way to make them really relevant so that people actually use them.

But I certainly still want to search all kinds of sites. The content I'm usually after is not commercial in nature.

Nice try Jim, but no one is going to want to use your search engine.

[ADAM Web Design]

Originally Posted by DrTandem1

Jim, they already have that. It's called the Yellow Pages. Yes, they would be the best results that money could buy. Would they be the better than the organic SERPs? No, not even close.

Yellow Pages?!?!?! You have got to be kidding.

Or YP in the States must be VERY different from YP in Canada. Because up here, you have to have a business phone line with Bell Canada before you're even allowed a basic YP listing (which starts at around $100/month).

Bell is nothing more than a bunch of corporate sellouts who remind me a lot of Vince McMahon's "patient" on tonight's edition of WWE Raw.

[ADAM Web Design]

Originally Posted by golferboy

If I were Google, Yahoo, MSN, Ask Jeeves, or any other Search Engine, I would eliminate all of the "organic" listings and show nothing but paid listings!

This would take care of the majority of the problems associated with "relevant" search results.

Spam sites would be totally eliminated unless they were willing to "pay" which they would not because without profits you can't last long without relevant products or information, that people are searching for.

There are about 55,000-60,000 members on WPW. And some of them have said some things that I disagree with. Some of them have said some things that I have found lnane.

And then there's this one. Wow. This has to be the single dumbest idea anyone's ever presented on this board. I think we've all managed to lose 20 IQ points just by reading this.

Now...since I know that by coming up with this idea, you won't have any idea how stupid it really is, I'm going to make a mistake of my own by attempting to give you some examples of just how drastic a negative impact your idea would have:

1. The non-profit sector, primarily organizations that are volunteer-operated. How do these people get to compete? They generally don't receive a lot of funding, nor can they afford to compete for a paid listing with the larger non-profs.
2. The web design/development sector. Many of us out there have discovered that error codes, CSS, Javascript, and other web design and development information can be queried via a major search engine and a solution can be found. Quite often, the solution is someone's personal site, or a free discussion board, or something similar where the content owner doesn't have anyhing to gain by having his/her site found.
3. The arts/entertainment sector. Ever looked up a bowling alley or a movie on MSN, or tried to find something to do on a Saturday night using Yahoo? I know I have, and I know quite a few others that have as well.
4. The small business sector. If the owner of a store that sells women's dresses wants to promote its online presence and sell to women across North America, should he/she be denied that right just because Wal-Mart or Sears slides more money into the back pocket of an engine and forces the little guy out, even though the little guy may have dresses of a better value?
5. The web design/development sector, part II. If your idea was put into place, then the sites that could afford to buy SERP placement would then be able to design their sites pretty much the way that they pleased, with little or no regard to competition.
   
   And with the little issue of competition out of the way, in comes every liberal arts student with a Macromedia Developer certification to design some abomination in Flash that takes forever to load, doesn't resize to fit most people's screens, whizzes, pops, whirs, and in general annoys the hell out of everyone.
   
   Not only that, there would be less of an impetus to design anything progressive or advanced, since there would be no one to raise the bar.
   
   And can you imagine how many badly-coded sites would emerge? One of the major reasons to ensure valid code is to help ensure search engine visibility, and with that out of the picture, helloooooooooo sites that are optimized for one browser or the other.

I'm not looking for a "free ride" from any engine. I've never asked for anything from anyone, and I don't expect it. All I want from the engines is what I believe everyone else wants: a fair, level playing field with some reasonable anti-spam measures to ensure that results are relevant for what myself and any potential customers for my clients.

In other words, I want to be sure that if I've played nicely and by the rules of a level playing field against everyone out there, that I receive an equal shot and that I'm not going to get shot down by spammers and other idiots. On this, I think we all can agree.

Does Google provide this? I think they're for the most part okay on the former, but the latter leaves a lot to be desired. And in solving the latter (or at least minimizing it), they'll solve the former.

But solving it by resorting to a paid engine? It won't work, and it has been shown that it doesn't work.

Remember MSN about 2-3 years ago, before it had its own database? I'm guessing you probably don't (or chose to forget) so let me be a really nice guy and remind you.

Way back in the dark days of 2002, MSN relied on two sources for its results. The primary results came from Looksmart, a human-edited directory which had an associated varying cost. In the US, it was a PPC model; in Canada, it was a one-time fee.

The secondary results came from Inktomi, who charged a $39 US/year fee for spidering within 48 hours of the index page, and repeat spidering every 48 hours after that. Yes, there were ways to get into the Inktomi engine for free, but they quite often took 4-6 weeks or much longer due to the slow speed of the crawler. This is time that businesses simply couldn't afford to wait for if they wanted any kind of search engine visibility, so many opted to pay for it.

And MSN, despite being the default home page associated with IE and therefore the only search anyone with a Windows-based PC had, crumbled in popularity while the organic, free, and at the time vastly superior Google skyrocketed.

Oh, and all of those other wonderful paid search engines out there...let's see...Overture, I've never seen anyone I know of in the GTA that has even heard of it, never mind uses it. eSpotting, FindWhat, Mamma.com...same thing. All the rest are low-tier engines.

Have you got a PPC engine that you use that continually finds relevant results? I'm sure we'd all like to see it in action.

Now, we find ourselves at a unique situation. Google's relevancy and popularity is diminishing, while MSN's and to a lesser extent Yahoo!'s rises. Do they all have issues? Yeah, but with billions of sites and billions of people manipulating the engines at every opportunity, they're bound to.

And therein lies the key to getting this thing solved: the competition factor. Google has more problems with MSN and Yahoo! than they did 2-3 years ago, and they're going to continue to mount. And there is where, I believe, the problem will eventually begin to fix itself. Google will have to in order to avoid losing market share.

So your idea...you can take your idea and put it in the same closet as the New Coke, that gigantic bronze statue Michael Jackson floated down the Thames River, and My Big Fat Obnoxious Fiance; close the door tightly; lock it; throw away the key; and never speak of it again.

[roam_dx]

s_clay
Yes, at least the non www version. The www is reflecting a more "reasonable" PR. lol. :)

as far as I can see, the www is a pr2 as well, and has been that way for over a week now.

I don't say Google owes me anything, and I have been working constantly on my business model so that it relies less and less on anything Google.

But, I also see that inspite of all the fancy talk and billions of $, zero innovation and real world ideas have come out the company to make their search engine better??


The last one was analyzing links to rank websites, that was, let's see...how long ago...5 years??

Just like microsoft, most of Googles new work is all ripoffs from open source or other places, I really fail to see any useful changes they've made to their core search engine or the way the web is analyzed since they started out. Applying stupid filters is not going the make a good search engine, changing technology to adapt to a web that has grown from 4 million pages when they started out to 8 billion is what is required.

Have you seen how a video cam loses focus and gets all shaky when you zoom too far, that's the best analogy I can offer to what's happened to Google search.

Can you imagine searching a web of 100 billion pages with Googles current technology? Only way you can is if you think everything beyond the first three pages is irrelevant or spam...then I have no argument.

Also, a lot of their current success is because a lot of websites have changed way they are designed and how they communicate with their customers to suit Googles ranking requirements. Why shouldn't I use a flash navigation? or why does every website on the internet also have to compulsorily operate a directory. Coz google analyses links, right?

But, once 80% of the webmaster community spends 80% of its time gathering links, how objective a representation is that of a good website? For how long?

How much better or worse would I make my website and user experience if that was removed?

Why must I add pages and pages of useless content if I am an online store and I see that no one really reads that content, even if it ranks great and brings lots of visitors who aren't really looking for the content but the product.

The internet before Google had retailers, publishers, search tools (directories etc.) and services. Retailer sold, publishers published etc. And they were successful for what they did. Now everyone is everything and no one is anything.

All webmasters are writing and rewriting more of the same inane content, spending millions of man-hours building useless directories that no one uses (except Google?). So my rant is pretty broadbased and not very jagger specific and has been going on the same theme for close to two years now.

Update Jagger specifically as all other updates has been neither good nor bad for me except for a little meaningless movement here and there in the green bar. But I see no improvement or new technology intorduced reflected in their results to warrant such a major update so close to christmas --- therefore, I can only suspect there being an ulterior motive.

golferboy

If I were Google, Yahoo, MSN, Ask Jeeves, or any other Search Engine, I would eliminate all of the "organic" listings and show nothing but paid listings!

And you would be eliminated just as soon. Your idea is not as unique as you think it is.

ADAM Web Design
And then there's this one. Wow. This has to be the single dumbest idea anyone's ever presented on this board. I think we've all managed to lose 20 IQ points just by reading this.

KA-BOOM. LOL.

[dburdon]

There's an old Public Relations dictum relating to bad news:

In the event of the absence of definitive information, the public (your customers) will fear the worst.

It seems to be that the Jagger 1 Google update can only be perceived as bad news for many in the SEO community. Many are not only fearing the worst, they are articulating their fears to many others. Particularly in forums such as this one.

Google has grown to be a monster global corporation in just a few short years. Its impact on the global business community is perhaps unmatched by anyone other than by the largest financial, auto or oil corporations. However, unlike these other corporations Google is allowed to operate an effective monopoly - certainly 50+% market share - unfettered by any form of regulation. Google dominates the market for both free (organic) search and paid (Pay per click) search. The strength of Google's market position in these two categories is not unrelated. Google only developed Adwords on the back of its credibility as a provider of free search.

Yet with all this monopoly power, Google is allowed to act unbridled by any form of regulation.

Now I'm not suggesting that Google should be regulated by some supranational body. But it seems to me, that if some of the sentiments expressed in this forum are correct, that is that Jagger 1 is a deliberate attempt to force the SEO community to ramp up Adwords expenditure, then Google could easily be construed as abusing a dominant market position. Would a TV or Newspaper corporation be allowed such a potential stranglehold the flow of information?

Is anyone at the EU or Federal Trade Commission listening? If not maybe as Ken and a few others have suggested, some concerted action by the SEO community is required.