why did my rankings drop from Top 10 to never never land

kelleymaresca · #1 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007, 02:16 PM

Hi My site is www.kelleyfurniture.com. We have been in business for 6 years and always did well in the search engines until recently.

I see numerous changes in our rankings . For example, we used to rank well for our products, Now we seem to rank better off the home page, now that has been reduced as well. Our Page rank which was PR8 2 years ago is now PR6.

Many of our popular search terms such as bedroom furniture and bedroom sets have been moved to the 12th page or beyond.
Can anyone offer me insite as to why our rankings had such a huge drop, not just a fluctuation but a drastic drop. I am unsure wether or not there is a penalty imposed or if it becuase my site uses asp?
Should I switch shopping carts to a solution that offers search engine friendly urls? Or is there a penalty? its hard to tell. Thank You

activeco · #2 (**permalink**) 03-29-2007, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kelleymaresca

I am unsure wether or not there is a penalty imposed or if it becuase my site uses asp?

Php, ASP, html, whatever... it doesn't matter. You ranked well for years using ASP.
However, Google lists only seven pages from your site, instead of thousands. All those 'index.asp?PageAction=VIEWCATS&Category=', etc. pages are nowhere to find.
Looks like duplicate content issue, although very strange if it came out of the blue, unless Google changed something again.
Consider SE friendly url's.

Quote:

Or is there a penalty? its hard to tell.

Do you know of any reason why you should get a penalty?

Webnauts · #3 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 12:06 AM

You seriously check your markup. I had a client that had the same markup problems and was penalized. We recently had to redesign his site, but his rankings did not recover yet.

Webnauts · #4 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

You seriously check your markup. I had a client that had the same markup problems and was penalized. We recently had to redesign his site, but his rankings did not recover yet.

Also see what SE see on the page: http://www.gritechnologies.com/tools...furniture.com/

kelleymaresca · #5 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

You seriously check your markup. I had a client that had the same markup problems and was penalized. We recently had to redesign his site, but his rankings did not recover yet.

Webnauts:
what do You mean by check my markup? I do not see what my markup has to do with anything? Sorry but I am a bit confused.
Thanks

Webnauts · #6 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kelleymaresca

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

You seriously check your markup. I had a client that had the same markup problems and was penalized. We recently had to redesign his site, but his rankings did not recover yet.

Webnauts:
what do You mean by check my markup? I do not see what my markup has to do with anything? Sorry but I am a bit confused.
Thanks

If you want to tell me that your markup cannot trigger problems, then sorry for giving this tip.

If I got you wrong, then click here: http://validator.w3.org/check?verbos...rniture.com%2F

kelleymaresca · #7 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Quote:

Originally Posted by kelleymaresca

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

You seriously check your markup. I had a client that had the same markup problems and was penalized. We recently had to redesign his site, but his rankings did not recover yet.

Webnauts:
what do You mean by check my markup? I do not see what my markup has to do with anything? Sorry but I am a bit confused.
Thanks

Okay I see, I thought that you meant our markup as far as cost that we are selling our products. I agree, I actually used this tool yesturday. The problem is that I do not know how to fix my HTMl code properly and the guy who is supposed to take care of it says that its right so I don't know how to fix it.
If you want to tell me that your markup cannot trigger problems, then sorry for giving this tip.

If I got you wrong, then click here: http://validator.w3.org/check?verbos...rniture.com%2F

nexternal · #8 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 02:42 PM

I did a Google site search site:www.kelleyfurniture.com and it returned more than 7000 pages. So they're all there. There have been some large Algo shakeups recently and everyone is guessing. Just look around on this forum and others. If you think you've been penalized you can fill out a reinclusion request, but I doubt that's the issue.

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/reincl...request-howto/

Most of the speculation is swirling around two-way vs. one-way linking and evaluating sites based on "themes".

Good Luck!

Webnauts · #9 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 02:45 PM

If someone told you that your markup is ok, he has absolutely no idea about web design. He does not even know the basic of HTML, which is the very basic pre-requisite for designing sites.

Anyway, I can only tell you an example:

Since when can we use <head> tags within the <body> of a document? LOL

About getting help with your markup (code) issues, you must start a new thread in the Design or Site Reviews Forums, where probably some members can give you a hand.

But as I see your code, and the 225 errors, it is almost helpless. It will be more time/cost efficient to consider a redesign.

But you can give a try. Who knows. :)

Webnauts · #10 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nexternal

I did a Google site search site:www.kelleyfurniture.com and it returned more than 7000 pages. So they're all there. There have been some large Algo shakeups recently and everyone is guessing. Just look around on this forum and others.

Don't get me wrong nextexternal, but the member said his rankings got lost. There are some tweaks going on at Google, but having a closer look to the site, it is just obvious that if the site have not been penalized it will be soon. Lets sit back and wait.

And about re-inclusion, I think many did not get the point here. Before you request a re-inclusion, you must first fix all that stuff which triggered the filters.

kelleymaresca · #11 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Quote:

Originally Posted by nexternal

I did a Google site search site:www.kelleyfurniture.com and it returned more than 7000 pages. So they're all there. There have been some large Algo shakeups recently and everyone is guessing. Just look around on this forum and others.

Don't get me wrong nextexternal, but the member said his rankings got lost. There are some tweaks going on at Google, but having a closer look to the site, it is just obvious that if the site have not been penalized it will be soon. Lets sit back and wait.

And about re-inclusion, I think many did not get the point here. Before you request a re-inclusion, you must first fix all that stuff which triggered the filters.

I am a she not a he, not that it matters but anyhow,
Posted: March 30 2007 Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

kelleymaresca wrote:
I may have figured out one of the problems. ALthough I do agree that the text on my Home Page can be revised I think it is user friendly as well. I will tweat it some though. Thanks for the input.

If you go to site:www.kelleyfurniture.com and click Omitted results.
You will see that about every other or at least 1 out of 3 pages has a snippet listing many of our manufacturers. For some reason Google Was pulling the description from our Manufacturer search which was in the header so It seemed as if many of our pages were duplicate or were not relevant to the titles or what the page was really about. I have removed the MFR search from the website and am working on removing it from the .html pages. Hopefully that will fix the problem.

I see that there are many errors and I agree the webmaster is wrong to say the errors do not matter.
I checked ebay.com and google.com and several other sites and The minimum errors I could find on ecommerce sites were 50 all the way up to 260 for ebay using the same html validator. So my question is since all of the sites have errors is there a range that you should fall between and is there a reason why ebay.com has 260 errors on their Home Page and it is alright for them to have errors but not me. For example Maybe my errors are bad ones and theres are not? Thanks for the input everyone. I do appreciate it. Also why do You say its obvious I will be penalized if I am not already? Because of Failing the validation. Google.com and Ebay.com do not pass validation either.

nexternal · #12 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 03:08 PM

I get it but...if the original poster isn't practicing black-hat and if she didn't change anything, that only leaves one conclusion right? Algo change. Especially with all the talk these last few weeks.

So why not appeal directly instead of changing things willy-nilly and *HOPING* it works, when it may actually hurt you in the long run. Google will usually reply and tell you whether there are penalties accessed.

Code Validity is always a good thing regardless of SEO and I wouldn't rule it out.

But how can you make this assumption.

Quote:

it is just obvious that if the site have not been penalized it will be soon

I haven't looked at the code for black hat but....

Webnauts · #13 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 03:08 PM

I am not talking about the number of errors. I am talking about the kind of errors and what they can produce.

We redesigned recently a site for a client who had similar errors as yours, who have been penalized last November, but thanks God not banned, and we have setup the new site middle of January this year, and we are still fighting to recover from the damages.

Have a look here to see who I am talking about: http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=68504

kelleymaresca · #14 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I am not talking about the number of errors. I am talking about the kind of errors and what they can produce.

We redesigned recently a site for a client who had similar errors as yours, who have been penalized last November, but thanks God not banned, and we have setup the new site middle of January this year, and we are still fighting to recover from the damages.

Have a look here to see who I am talking about: http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=68504

Oh Okay, Now I understand. Thats what I thought you meant . When I look at the errors, I get it and I have emailed Monster Commerce about this already today because they are the ones who did my design, so hopefully they can help me. Thank You

Webnauts · #15 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nexternal

I haven't looked at the code for black hat but....

You better examine the code. I did not say that the member here does something like black hat SEO or something else with intention. But that code can trigger problems as I mentioned above.

I am not trying to start preachings about valid code here. But I would sure say: Well formed HTML semantical structure!

Even if Google says:
Check for broken links and correct HTML.

After all, I guess you better look once at the code. I am very sure you will understand what my point was.

Webnauts · #16 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kelleymaresca

because they are the ones who did my design, so hopefully they can help me.

I hope for you too. Good luck! :)

activeco · #17 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nexternal

I did a Google site search site:www.kelleyfurniture.com and it returned more than 7000 pages.

It could be I have been hitting wrong DC, but this query returns only 7 results from Netherlands.
When I checked it with an US IP, it indeed returned 7,420 results.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kelleymaresca

Also why do You say its obvious I will be penalized if I am not already? Because of Failing the validation. Google.com and Ebay.com do not pass validation either.

Kelleymaresca, there is an ongoing debate here about influence of validation to search results. While some put a strong emphasize on it, many others don't consider it as much important factor, unless the page/site has serious accessibility problems.

kelleymaresca · #18 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by activeco

Quote:

Originally Posted by nexternal

I did a Google site search site:www.kelleyfurniture.com and it returned more than 7000 pages.

It could be I have been hitting wrong DC, but this query returns only 7 results from Netherlands.
When I checked it with an US IP, it indeed returned 7,420 results.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kelleymaresca

Also why do You say its obvious I will be penalized if I am not already? Because of Failing the validation. Google.com and Ebay.com do not pass validation either.

Kelleymaresca, there is an ongoing debate here about influence of validation to search results. While some put a strong emphasize on it, many others don't consider it as much important factor, unless the page/site has serious accessibility problems.

True: At my DC yesturday I only showed 7 results, it seems as if the Data Canters are updating or something.

Also, I have had the same messed up code for 5 years. Although I am going to correct it, I think What may have been the problem was the location of my MFR SEARCH. I removed it yesturday, however Google was grabbing decriptions to over 50% of my site from the MFR search so it appeared to be duplicate content. Which is a Direct Result of Improper coding I am sure. I do not know how to recode myself so I just removed it alltogether until I could straighten things out. If you look at the cache of my site you will see the MFR Search at the top left of the Nav Bar.

activeco · #19 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 04:14 PM

Yes, it looks like you have some more serious html problems which could prevent bots from normal spidering. Strange that everything was OK for so long.
Or maybe something messed up your code? Do you maintain backup?

Also be sure not to be engaged into this (anymore):

Quote:

Email Us and we will insure a reciprocal link on our site. If you would like to add our link to your site it should look like this:

This is a thing of the past. Today it has mostly negative consequences if used too often.

kelleymaresca · #20 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by activeco

Yes, it looks like you have some more serious html problems which could prevent bots from normal spidering. Strange that everything was OK for so long.
Or maybe something messed up your code? Do you maintain backup?

Also be sure not to be engaged into this (anymore):

Quote:

Email Us and we will insure a reciprocal link on our site. If you would like to add our link to your site it should look like this:

This is a thing of the past. Today it has mostly negative consequences if used too often.

I never did reciprocal linking until recently. I do not, I just saw that it says that on our site. I will remove that right away. I am adding reciprocal links now though is that bad to do reciprocals? All of my links were 1 way links previously and I have been trying to obtain new ones and that is why I decided to do some reciprocals.

Webnauts · #21 (**permalink**) 03-31-2007, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kelleymaresca

All of my links were 1 way links previously and I have been trying to obtain new ones and that is why I decided to do some reciprocals.

Both Google and Yahoo have begun to recognize such link exchanges, and have used this information to reduce the ranking of reciprocally linked sites in search engine results.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode