Current Laughable MSN Algorithm Update

[sgsmorgan]

If there is anyone reading this post from MSN I hope they are hanging their head in shame at the present and feeling “pretty good” about themselves because as far as quite a few small site owners are concerned they have been screwed rotten by this latest algorithm update.

Let me take one case in point. We act for a small non-governmental voluntary organisation in the Health Sector. Their site was launched last January and slowly but surely they are getting where they want to be. MSN was featuring them heavily; Yahoo was just about to take notice with a couple of Page 1 slots for minor keywords. Google, well they were being just good old plain Google and though we were watching the situation we weren’t expecting much for the next few Months at least – but then that’s what you get with the “Do not do evil brigade” – shaft you for nine months and then if they feel good about you slowly throw you some scraps!

Back to the first point. Since Midnight last Friday GMT, donations and activity to this particular “Vol Org” have been down by 75% due the fact that 12 pages in their site including their Homepage do not feature at all in the new MSN.com index Their Homepage is number 1 in all MSN regional variations throughout the world except the important ones i.e. USA and Canada where they have ceased to exist. A fall of possibly 50 or 60 places followed by a corrective adjustment and a slow climb perhaps I can understand but this belies belief.

Coupled with Google’s attitude it leads me to my next point. Such is the sad world we live in today where we have to put up with the gross abuse of privilege as exercised by these three Multinational Behemoths who control the majority of Search Activity on the Internet that we can do very little if anything at all about it. If this was a domestic situation of abuse of position in any one major country then we would have questions asked at the highest level about this but because they are spread across International boundaries we can do nothing.

We have to put up with crappy, badly thought out updates that do nothing but screw the everyday lives of innocent bystanders in the name of progress.

Google, Yahoo and MSN you should be ashamed of yourselves.

[SEOforGoogle]

Now that you've finished venting, were there any changes made to the site from a technical or content aspect?

Just trying to help!

[sgsmorgan]

Sorry about that :-(

Yes, a whole new bunch of pages had been uploaded and were actually indexed and showing well then suddenly as far as MSN.com was concerned we virtually ceased to exist.

If it had been a blanket case of the site being dropped worldwide then perhaps it might have been easier to undertsand (though equally if not more so unpleasant). This particular site went from over 450 Page one slots for about 40 odd keyword terms to about 80 odd slots worldwide - the majority of the valuable slots just ceased to exist as did about 12 of the pages.

The craziness of the situation lies in the apparent dissappearance of the Index.html. One minute there and the next minute nothing.

[frogmanandy]

This is apparently a common problem ... the general opinion seems to be that none of the regional variants have been subjected to the update.

There has been quite a bit of discussion of this on webmasterworld ... http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum97/838.htm

Most people seem to believe that this is a problem that will sort itself out in a few days ... but MSN claimed it was a small prob that would be fixed by Monday, but it is Friday now and no fix yet.

We had the same experience as you we had been #1 for our main keyword : maui luau, for about 5 or 6 months and now our index page is nowhere to be found.

to add insult to injury the new #1 is a page that redirects to a golf site.

[sgsmorgan]

There's a guy at Search Engine Watch who reckons this update could be here to stay but I just don't get it. It doesn't make any sense, some of these search and results aren't even close at all. Or have I got it wrong and I really do need to look for those razor blades :-(

[sgsmorgan]

Who's this guy "MSNDude"? What does he / she have to say about this screw up?

[sgsmorgan]

The more I think about it (sorry to look as if I am being obsessive here but I have clients who really are causing grief) if there is the slightest element of doubt within MSN ranks that this is a screw up then they will want to redress the issue BUT only on their terms and under their timescale and not so that it looks as if they are going to be reactive to pressure - sets a bad precedent I suppose so perhaps the best thing after all is to go and hibernate and wait.

At least the regional variants have only been partially affected.

[simons1321]

This is exactly why no website should rely entirely upon Search Engine traffic.

Also every coin has two sides, I'm sure there's a lot of people who are extremely happy with MSN's new results.

[sgsmorgan]

Oh dear, smart alec answer time again.

If you are a small Vol Org with negligible budget (and I mean negligible) then trying to get the best bang for your buck via the Search Engines is the most cost efficient way of doing things. Obviously they have their "manual" "personal fundraisers" but the web for them is an essential awareness medium as well as fundraising tool.

Doesn't help when external factors beyond your control screw up.

I think also the general view of things is that this update is screwy so if there are two sides to the coin, it's a pretty lopsided coin.

[Inspector]

I would be one of those happy with MSN. For my area MSN BY FAR has the most relevant search returns. Totally blows away Google and beats Yahoo.

Maybe the multi national sites are suffering??

Maybe you need one page optimsed for each country?

[RollerBall]

MSN search results have been a joke (a bad joke at that) for some time. Maybe MS are trying to spread themselves too thinly, attacking on all fronts - jack of all trades and all that.

Trouble is as well that there are obviously too many nerds involved in search engines who have little or no experience of the real world and are only concerned with 'the algorithm' rather than what it throws up. Obviously from the results that several of the major search engines now come up with pure, relevant content now comes some way down the list in comparison to their real or imaginary crusades to combat their own ideas of what constutes 'bad practices'. There must also be something wrong when almost any search related to any kind of 'commercial' product comes up with a ruddy great list of price comparison sites that provide little or no information about the product being searched on.

[simons1321]

Originally Posted by sgsmorgan

If you are a small Vol Org with negligible budget (and I mean negligible) then trying to get the best bang for your buck via the Search Engines is the most cost efficient way of doing things. Obviously they have their "manual" "personal fundraisers" but the web for them is an essential awareness medium as well as fundraising tool.

There are other FREE ways of promoting a website throughout the internet. In addition, if its a non-profit Org, Google offers FREE PPC advertising to 301c Non-profits.

[jackson992]

I like seeing commercial sites near the top:)

[frogmanandy]

I was just reading Chris's comments in the newsletter about this topic.

I think in many cases he may be right. Many webmasters are quick to blame the search rnginr, not their practices. But looking at discussion on webmasterworld and here, it appears we have a different issue.

Why are index pages being dropped completely? And from 1st place to non-existing at that? Seems a little odd, sort of like a bad update. I'm sticking tight to see what unfolds.

Also, I don't think it is a matter of optimizing for regional results, I just don't think that the regional datacenters have undergone this update.

[newsblaze]

They don't tell you how to operate your business, why are you telling them how to operate theirs? I have a similar problem. A domain registration site that was #1 is now #52. So I made some improvements (not just changes) and only time will tell if it helps.

RollerBall says "Trouble is as well that there are obviously too many nerds involved in search engines"

The real trouble is there too many people like us, who know how they work and we set our sites to conform to their rules so we can be at the top of the listings. Nothing gives us the right to do that and remain number one forever. Change is good. It gives other people a chance and it gives us the chance to make improvements (or maybe just changes).

My newspaper has also dropped 150 positions for keywords I care about, but hey, that's life. CNN, ABC News, the BBC and MSNBC were always at the top too, but no more in MSN. Just think how upset those guys will be!

sgsmorgan says he had 450 top spots - so does this give him the right to hold that forever and to only increase the count? No, of course not. You may not have noticed, but there are other sites on the web and they have as much right to be seen as you do. Maybe you crossed over a threshold where they flag you for closer attention. 450 sounds a bit greedy to me. Maybe you're using dirty tricks they don't like. Are you really providing value or just gaming the system?

One thing is for sure, though, which you guys seem to have overlooked - the sites that contain the keywords, either in the domain or a page name - are at the top.

Maybe MSN wants to encourage you to buy advertising?

So stop whingeing, work out what they want - and get working. This is a game, not an entitlement.

[logodesign77]

I wouldnt consider myself a Multinational Behemoth... I work out of my home in Kentucky and of the 6 sites I have, 4 rank in the top 3 on MSN. It is just called figuring things out and working it to the top. It isn't that hard on MSN.

[jackson992]

I just checked and I'm ranking #2 for discount shopping online for my home page so the update looks good. Unless it's shifted since this thread was started.

[sgsmorgan]

Originally Posted by newsblaze

They don't tell you how to operate your business, why are you telling them how to operate theirs? .......

RollerBall says "Trouble is as well that there are obviously too many nerds involved in search engines"

.........Change is good. It gives other people a chance and it gives us the chance to make improvements (or maybe just changes).


sgsmorgan says he had 450 top spots - so does this give him the right to hold that forever and to only increase the count? No, of course not. You may not have noticed, but there are other sites on the web and they have as much right to be seen as you do. Maybe you crossed over a threshold where they flag you for closer attention. 450 sounds a bit greedy to me. Maybe you're using dirty tricks they don't like. Are you really providing value or just gaming the system?

One thing is for sure, though, which you guys seem to have overlooked - the sites that contain the keywords, either in the domain or a page name - are at the top.

Maybe MSN wants to encourage you to buy advertising?

So stop whingeing, work out what they want - and get working. This is a game, not an entitlement.

Dear Alan

If you had been a bit more knowledgeable (as you claim) then you would have read my series of posts to understand more fully my claim. I am big and ugly enough to be able to shoulder the “sling’s and arrows of outrageous fortune” that the Search Engines throw at us from time to time but this particular update is widely agreed to be flawed.

If you think a situation whereby a site that has obviously scraped content from another and now ranks higher than the original site is fine then god help us all. We might all as well crawl back under the stones from whence we all came!

I don’t believe I have any form of god given right at all to constantly maintain a grip of the top places in any Search Engine. Things change and such is life – this I can cope with in a mature manner when it is obvious that there are reasons for this. If our sites have slipped because someone has come out with a whole series of better sites, more informative, better design etc then as most mature adults, we sit down and go “OK that’s good, what can we do to make ours better?” That is the adult approach to life. If we have been supplanted at the top by better and more correct market forces then that is life.

If you had read my posts before launching into your own you would have read that I understand that variations exist. So we lost some top spots but to go from Hero to zero when you haven’t actually altered anything, you aren’t actually gaming the system and the only reason that you have 400 plus page one slots is that you have enough pages and several hundred terms that you have targeted for (I actually thought that we had performed pretty badly as I was actually targeting a four figure total of page 1 slots for our sector but hey perhaps I’m not as big a bozo as I thought ) and your replacements are scraped / Adsense sites is slightly frustrating.

I wouldn’t dream of telling most people how to run their businesses better (some I would but that’s for a different reason). If you also knew as much as you claim you would also realise that it is not just the sites that have the keywords in their name and title that are at the top. How do we know this because in several of the cases we have been monitoring, the keyword term was exactly the same as the Domain name and also included in several of the urls. This was not “gaming” the system rather we were lucky enough to be able to utilise the English language correctly. Perhaps we should try and concentrate on “illiterate scraping” next time, as this obviously is the technique that works from now on with this update.

[sgsmorgan]

Originally Posted by logodesign77

I wouldnt consider myself a Multinational Behemoth... I work out of my home in Kentucky and of the 6 sites I have, 4 rank in the top 3 on MSN. It is just called figuring things out and working it to the top. It isn't that hard on MSN.

Congratulations (seriously) if someone is doing a good job and it is for the right reasons then "good on them". I was actually referring to the Search Engines as Multinational Behemoths not us minnows!

[texxs]

MSN search results have been a joke (a bad joke at that) for some time

I'm not a big fan of MS, but I've always thought their SERP's were pretty darn releavent on any thing I've ever tested them on , including my sites, sites for clients and just general searches.

[rizzoid]

Gasp. This is why I try to stay away from deep SEO when designing websites. Too much changes after you've done the hard work.

-rizzoid

[frogmanandy]

wow, this whole thing got a bit heated ... which is funny

if you bang on google ... the whole world is behind you ... it used to be that it was fun to bash microsoft ... give a few people good serps and they will argue to death!!!

My point ... it is fine if our site loses serp ... but in what way is it right for a site to disappear after months at #1 with no real changes ...

now, i have to say that these changes that may have affected my msn serps also equals a change from unlisted to top ten at google (which is far more valuable)

my real point is that this is not a bitch session ... I honestly believe that msn made a huge mistake ... and I think that maybe ... they really do want to be the best engine out there ... I don't think placing a site at #1 that is a redirect to a non-related site helps ... see msn : maui luau




wow, i just reread this post ... i sound bad ... sorry, I really thought that msn was on the right track ... then I see this and I think ... wow you look more lost than google

[DMC_34]

Originally Posted by sgsmorgan

There's a guy at Search Engine Watch who reckons this update could be here to stay

If it does stay, MSN can kiss their measily 10% marketshare goodbye. Atleast from my niche markets and keywords I target this update is a freakin joke. For example an adsense search page on MapQuest.com ranking #2 for "Gift Baskets"??? LOL Right on baby! If any more idiots get an ich and say "that is relevant", then lets switch this topic to learning basic relevancy and SEO 101.

From that aspect is that as good as Google?....No

[DMC_34]

Its painfully obvious IBL's are not a factor MSN's current algo.

[RollerBall]

Why should IBLs be a factor in any search engine algo.

I have a (small) business to run. My time is already hard-pressed. Why should I have to spend a valuable chunk of it punting around the Net trying to find someone (anyone actually folks) who will set up a link exchange with me purely in the hope of getting enough (converted into brownie points) to satisfy some weird, unquantifiable factor in a search engine algo.

This is what I mean by the nerds being out of touch with real life. My site should stand or fall on the quality and relevance of its content compared to the search phrases used. Every other day I get emails from some weird little web site somewhere that's been created in 5 minutes in someone's back bedroom in Milwaukee (OK, so ours leaves a lot to be desired but you should see some of these brother) to set up a link exchange. They have heard that IBLs are what you need to get up there in the SEs with the big boys so away they go. Most are so far removed from our business (often by several continents as well) and the quality of their site so abysmal that we wouldn't want to touch em with a barge pole.

For goodness sake, it's so unfair on those people. They should be spending their time on the design and content of their web site, not being led up some blind alley because some geek in a back office in some SE somewhere who blinks when they come out into the daylight has thought up another mad wheeze to 'penalise' the guys who don't meet their 'criteria'.

OK, now I can expect the flak - but I'm just an honest small businessman trying to make a buck. My business is what I sell - why should I have to be a SE guru when my web site is honestly set out and full of the stuff that people want to buy, if only they could overcome all the barriers put in their way by the major SEs and find it.

[jackson992]

Originally Posted by DMC_34

Its painfully obvious IBL's are not a factor MSN's current algo.

That's a good thing:)

[jackson992]

Originally Posted by RollerBall

Why should IBLs be a factor in any search engine algo.

I have a (small) business to run. My time is already hard-pressed. Why should I have to spend a valuable chunk of it punting around the Net trying to find someone (anyone actually folks) who will set up a link exchange with me purely in the hope of getting enough (converted into brownie points) to satisfy some weird, unquantifiable factor in a search engine algo.

This is what I mean by the nerds being out of touch with real life. My site should stand or fall on the quality and relevance of its content compared to the search phrases used. Every other day I get emails from some weird little web site somewhere that's been created in 5 minutes in someone's back bedroom in Milwaukee (OK, so ours leaves a lot to be desired but you should see some of these brother) to set up a link exchange. They have heard that IBLs are what you need to get up there in the SEs with the big boys so away they go. Most are so far removed from our business (often by several continents as well) and the quality of their site so abysmal that we wouldn't want to touch em with a barge pole.

For goodness sake, it's so unfair on those people. They should be spending their time on the design and content of their web site, not being led up some blind alley because some geek in a back office in some SE somewhere who blinks when they come out into the daylight has thought up another mad wheeze to 'penalise' the guys who don't meet their 'criteria'.

OK, now I can expect the flak - but I'm just an honest small businessman trying to make a buck. My business is what I sell - why should I have to be a SE guru when my web site is honestly set out and full of the stuff that people want to buy, if only they could overcome all the barriers put in their way by the major SEs and find it.

Well said. This is why MSN is way better than Google plus the fact that they actually index pages and at a much faster rate.

[chrisJumbo]

Our site continue to rank well in MSN. OK in Yahoo. Not so good in Google. I have tried to keep our titles short and different pages use the different Key words we are looking for. Furthermore, the page text (visible) supports the key words that the title is promoting.

Also, we are a small company.

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by frogmanandy

My point ... it is fine if our site loses serp ... but in what way is it right for a site to disappear after months at #1 with no real changes ...

So once you get to the top you shouldn't do anything to make your website better or more optimized? I think not.

Also the SE's will always be tweaking their algo to try to make their website more relevant. Which is just another reason why websites wont consistently stay at the top.

Of course in this case MSN is struggling.

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by RollerBall

Why should IBLs be a factor in any search engine algo.

Before IBL abuse started it was perfectly fine and great way to just a websites importance.

[RollerBall]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Before IBL abuse started it was perfectly fine and great way to just a websites importance.

Sorry - I don't buy that. It was always just a way of keeping new young web sites out of the rankings and keeping the old, established ones in, because they're the ones who are currently paying for the champagne in the offices of Google et al through their advertising bucks. So price comparison sites are always so relevant to every search ever made against a commercial product - not.

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by RollerBall

Sorry - I don't buy that. It was always just a way of keeping new young web sites out of the rankings and keeping the old, established ones in, because they're the ones who are currently paying for the champagne in the offices of Google et al through their advertising bucks. So price comparison sites are always so relevant to every search ever made against a commercial product - not.

huh, what do you mean? I said before backlinks abuse started happening it was a good way to weight websites and that is completely true.

No one was drinking champagne at Google from fat AdWords profits in 2000. This is when they decided to start AdWords. They started to really capitalize on AdWords money in 20001. Google weighted backlinks far before this.

So they had to no reason to keep new website out and old website at the top before 2000.

Sure that may be different now, but as I have said weighting backlinks before they were abused was a good thing.

[sgsmorgan]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

So once you get to the top you shouldn't do anything to make your website better or more optimized? I think not.

Also the SE's will always be tweaking their algo to try to make their website more relevant. Which is just another reason why websites wont consistently stay at the top.

Of course in this case MSN is struggling.

Nobody is saying that once you reach the top you have a God given right to stay there. Far from it, life is process of evolution and my attitude is and has always been one of if someone else comes out with some information, a style, a layout or whatever that makes their site more influential or Search Engine friendly then the responsible thing to do is to sit down and say "OK what can we do to make ours better" (I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself here).

What I find unacceptable and bordering on a level of incompetence is "hello we're in one week, no we're not next week". Especially as far as other regional variants are concerned it appears to be business as usual. What I also find unacceptable is finding your pages indexed one week, not the next and then they're back in the following week. They are either good enough to be in or they're not.

Also when you find sites that have scraped your content ranking above you then I think you are justified in wanting to know what the hell is going on.

If the Search Engines didn't constantly play games with people by artificially holding young sites back then a large number of folks wouldn't spend all their time on the SE's backs and could get on with a proper life and concentrate on the things that matter like good content etc etc.

I know there is going to be abuse of the system - it seems that (to quote my viewpoint on another contraversial subject at the mo) that sadly there are only two certainties in life - first that we are all going to die sooner or later and that secondly, somewhere along the way that mankind will find a way of screwing things up somewhere. :-(

[dburdon]

Seems a lot of people are getting very excitable.

MSN is a source of traffic - but not a big one.

It seems to work in a fairly logical way. And is not as dependent as Google on IBLs. Given the amount of spamming going on in the world of link building, maybe MSN's middle path is the way to go.

[cz]

sgsmorgan

It's very late and I just read this thread - how about posting the site so we can take a look at it - maybe some of the members - even me - might see something you've missed.

With respects - I've been running my sites for 5 yrs and other webmasters or SEO's will pass on a thought and it was something very obvious that I'd missed but it took a quick look from a fresh eye to catch my "boo-boos".

Truth be told, this last update really kind of vaporized a lot of my good listings - and left others alone. Go figure??

[DMC_34]

Originally Posted by dburdon

MSN is a source of traffic - but not a big one.

True

Originally Posted by dburdon

It seems to work in a fairly logical way. And is not as dependent as Google on IBLs. Given the amount of spamming going on in the world of link building, maybe MSN's middle path is the way to go.

Originally Posted by jackson992

That's a good thing:)

Truth is which is easier, spamming with content or links? Content is much easier to spam than links. Links are a far better measure of popularity than content, links support content. This is why Google provides far better results than the current MSN algo does. Be careful what you wish for. If you want to talk about relevance based on content, then there are 1 million sites for any keyword which could be #1 for any given keyword. What tips the scale? An extra keyword in the header? LOL I am sorry but I will take a link from the Wall Street Journal over a keyword stuffed meta tag site any day. Without a measurable factor to guarantee top 5 results, SEO world is in for a rude awaking.

In short nothing will change for me:

I will focus on Google. A #5 on Google provides more traffic than a #1 on Yahoo and #1 on MSN combined, well atleast in my niche. The only difference is what used to work on Google worked very well on MSN. Oh well.

[DMC_34]

Relevance provides the results returned be a keyword query. The ranking of those results is best served by popularity or authority of those sites. This is where links or domain age come into it. The best sites obtain links from good sources.

Naysayers of links. Give me a good reason of why this site deserves to be #1 for Christmas cards?

Its not in the top 100 on either of the other 2 SE's. I have never heard of it before. Where is Hallmark, BlueMountain, Regards? I am sure they are in top 1000 somewhere. Is this #1 relevant? Yes, sure it is. Is it this site what the average shopper would deem as the best Christmas card source? Nope.

Another example:
Computers - #1 site Is it relevant, yes. Where is Dell or Apple( #10 and #15 respectively)? What makes this site deserve to be #1? Content? Oh please.

Back to reality everybody! This ranking algo is crappola. =)

Relevance is the overall results returned. Ranking is about quality, authority, popularity, and anything that equals "what I expect to see". Period. This is why Google dominates and Yahoo and MSN lag behind. Anything else is a serious stretch.

DMC

[RollerBall]

Gotta give you that DMC. Excellent and very thoughtful posting. Thanks a lot.

[weslinda]

Okay, can anyone here name one search engine who at one time or another has not dropped a #1 site out of the rankings and replaced it with a crap site?

Okay...thinking...waiting...hoping...still waiting.

That's right, none of them are free of guilt. Shocker, MSN, Google, Yahoo, all of these big boys are guilty of this at one time or another.

To vent in a way that Microsoft and MSN are going to go out with the bathwater is a little overboard.

As you later went on to share, changes can change rank. MSN prefers newer content, not older more stagnant content. Google on the other hand prefers sites that are established leaders, that bring new content to the table.

In the end, it's a very simple addage that will sum this all up. "Never put all of your eggs in one basket." If the search engines are the only way you get traffic, then time is limited for your company.

I would really love to know what these non-profits, and other businesses did to get business in 1995 versus 2006. Or even better, 1985.

When do we as professionals stop complaining about how much the Search Engines screwed us and start realizing how to market more efficiently.

Worst case for you, pick up a copy of "Guerilla Marketing" and maybe you can get some ideas there.

[DMC_34]

Originally Posted by weslinda

If the search engines are the only way you get traffic, then time is limited for your company.

That is funny. My oldest site has went from 30 orders its first year to 28 million in sales last year. The site and company is 5 years old. All using SE's only. I guess I should prepare for the soup line now? LOL Just kidding, but I think you mean if you are DEPENDANT ON SE ORGANIC LISTINGS not SE's in general. PPC's work just fine.

Complaining? Who is complaining? I am analyzing. Analyzing isnt always nice and friendly, just ask restaurant critics. Everybody is subject to review including MSN and Google. Besides it is what they want, otherwise you wouldnt see

Didn't get the results you expected? Help us improve.

Originally Posted by weslinda

When do we as professionals stop complaining about how much the Search Engines screwed us and start realizing how to market more efficiently.

First of all MSN drops my site from #1 I lose...ummm...10 visitors a day? LOL. Hardly a screwing. Microsft going out to the bathwater? Sorry but didnt they lose marketshare the last 2 quarters? Yes they did. Being it was only 10% to begin with that isnt up to MS standards.

All in all you are missing the point. Forget dropping a #1 with some unworthy site. As an objective visitor to MSN typing in computers what do you expect to see in the top 5? Maybe the current MSN #1 is your choice. Maybe the top 10 is good for you. The average person would probably disagree. Being a techy myself I would expect to see Dell, Apple, and maybe HP. That is what MSN, Google and Yahoo are trying to achieve. For this keyword though Google and Yahoo's results are better than MSN's. The top 5 is what I expect to see. Maybe I am one of those leary searchers who has one bad experience who needs to do a search again the next day. Do I go to MSN or Google or Yahoo. Hell, I will Google it. Do you think MSN cares about lil ol me? Nah. But try 20 million others and YES they do. =)
DMC

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by sgsmorgan

The craziness of the situation lies in the apparent dissappearance of the Index.html. One minute there and the next minute nothing.

I didn't see where you posted the URL, if you did.

If you're allowing both the root domain and the index.html to be indexed, you could be creating your own problems.

Dave

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by DMC_34

I will take a link from the Wall Street Journal over a keyword stuffed meta tag site any day.

Exactly.

[weslinda]

DMC, i think it's a given that we're speaking about organic versus PPC here. Didn't think I needed to explain that one, but I guess I need to be very specific with my words.

Regarding "missing the point", I guess I did, as I thought your rant was how poor the results in MSN were. I guess you simply wanted to see your name in writing or something, because if you are spending this amount of effort for 10 lost visitors, then you must want glory or something, because otherwise, I'd perceive this as a complete waste of time on your part.

Finally, to get back to what everyone is "expecting", can you show me a search engine that doesn't do the same thing you've posted here for MSN? Yahoo? Google? Ask? Anyone?

No. We are talking about indexing billions of pages, and for random searches, everyone screws up, and I'm not sure why you think Google, and especially Yahoo are much better. They might be for this keyword, but they may not be for others.

It seems your asking that MSN and Google and Yahoo get the same top 10 for "comedians", that we should see the same list of the best comedians out there, when it's all subjective to the user.

Now, I'd love to see your site that does 28 million in sales with no advertising, no promotions, no email marketing, no print ads, no people doing any type of promotion. I think we'd all love to see how such a success can be made.

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by weslinda

It seems your asking that MSN and Google and Yahoo get the same top 10 for "comedians", that we should see the same list of the best comedians out there, when it's all subjective to the user.

Well I am sure most all results for "comedians" would actually have comedian websites on all three SE's. In DMC's example for "gift baskets" the MQ page is simply garbage. It has no information about gift baskets other than the AdSense that has been slapped on the page. Their in lies the issues and difference between Google/Yahoo and MSN.

[DMC_34]

Originally Posted by weslinda

DMC, i think it's a given that we're speaking about organic versus PPC here. Didn't think I needed to explain that one, but I guess I need to be very specific with my words.

Yes please do as complete newbies read these forums who may not be as savvy as you.

Originally Posted by weslinda

Regarding "missing the point", I guess I did, as I thought your rant was how poor the results in MSN were.

On the money. They are poor. If you cant see that....well...that is your issue =)

Originally Posted by weslinda

I guess you simply wanted to see your name in writing or something, because if you are spending this amount of effort for 10 lost visitors, then you must want glory or something, because otherwise, I'd perceive this as a complete waste of time on your part.

I see, you can analyze me but we are not allowed analyze MSN or Google, right? Dont pretend you even know they first thing of what I have accomplished or my sites. I have 28 sites in all. Some new and some well known. Some I dont care if people know about and some I do. There are a select few here such as (Jaan and GreenEagle) who do know of this site I am referring to. I do rank very well on most of my sites. But yeah, thats right it must be a waste of time. What was I thinking? A search engine forum regarding MSN Search and analyzing their algo. Damn, what a waste of time. =)

Originally Posted by weslinda

Finally, to get back to what everyone is "expecting", can you show me a search engine that doesn't do the same thing you've posted here for MSN? Yahoo? Google? Ask? Anyone?

Yes already did. Computers. MSN sucks on it. Period. Funny how you defend it with such obscure rhetorical question.

Originally Posted by weslinda

We are talking about indexing billions of pages, and for random searches, everyone screws up, and I'm not sure why you think Google, and especially Yahoo are much better.

Bottomline for the keywords I look at it and even ones I think up Yahoo and Google are better. If you are not seeing that then good for you I guess.

Originally Posted by weslinda

Now, I'd love to see your site that does 28 million in sales with no advertising, no promotions, no email marketing, no print ads, no people doing any type of promotion. I think we'd all love to see how such a success can be made.

Sorry but I have a strict policy on who knows what sites I run. Jaan knows of this site and you dont. I guess you can put in a "request" and I might process it, that is of course, if I can stop wasting my time on this forum right? LOL

DMC

[weslinda]

Okay, I simply have to stop this conversation. Again, you've missed every point.

First, my entire point here is about no search engine is perfect. Perhaps others return better results for "computers" than MSN, but there are other poor results out of Yahoo and Google that simply don't make sense either. Not an obscure point as you'd like to point out.

I'm not suprised that you're not willing to reveal the site doing 28 million from only natural search engine results, and nothing else. We'll take it as fact that you did it, but it's a little skeptical when you don't want to name the work you've done, guess you have a non-disclosure.

And in the end, if you are spending this much effort, on this topic, for a loss in 10 visitors, then I do think you are seriously wasting your time. You simply appear that you want to rant, you want someone to see your name as you won't post the keyword phrase you are discussing, or the site's name, and you simply want to gripe, gripe, gripe about how awful the big MSN is.

I'm quite proud that you've ranted nicely, now if you'd like more help on figuring out what happened. I'm sure many of us can bring assistance.

Regarding your "28" sites. Wow. I'm sooooo impressed. I've done quite a few more than 28 sites and many have done nicely in the engines. If you want to see my most recent work, you can feel free to visit my domain, and view my portfolio, I have no shame in the people who are my customers. I have no shame in my work.

Regarding "analyzing you". It's your post, and you obviously wanted people to reply, that's what I did. I'm just amazed that so many people complain about how the search engines have killed them or the businesses. Life changes, search engines change, build good sites, with current live content, and your sites will do fine.

I'm done, feel free to rant if you'd like, it's really been fun to listen to you grip about your 10 lost visitors.

Pehaps you should take the time to check out the Yahoo and Google forums and see that this same issue is happening on all engines.

[RollerBall]

What is it about this forum where there's always gotta be someone flexing their muscles and/or throwing their toys out of their pram.

I come here to read informed debate, here about conflicting points of view and gather knowledge and information. There's always got to be some big kid making things personal and spoiling the whole debate.

Who cares a stuff if someone claims to be God Almighty Himself with a miilion web sites making 3 zillion sales. Getting involved in a childish brawl about it don't add a thing to the debate. If you can't stick to the issues and keep personalities out of it please keep quiet for the sake of us much lesser mortals who are trying to get something out of it.

[DMC_34]

Originally Posted by weslinda

you've missed every point.

Likewise.

Funny you keep mentioning "rant", "complain", and "gripe". Only ranting or complaining I see is from you. For the most part, most of us made analytical observations. You feel compelled to argue these observations with the glorious "all SE's do it". Wow, really great insight keep up the good work!

Regardless these forums are for learning, insight, exchanging ideas and views. I listen to all points of views. I dont agree with all of them but I take them in. It is what most of the regulars do here. You simply dont get it or are just to stubborn to get it. Either case, to bad for you.

[jackson992]

Originally Posted by DMC_34

Relevance provides the results returned be a keyword query. The ranking of those results is best served by popularity or authority of those sites. This is where links or domain age come into it. The best sites obtain links from good sources.

Naysayers of links. Give me a good reason of why this site deserves to be #1 for Christmas cards?

Its not in the top 100 on either of the other 2 SE's. I have never heard of it before. Where is Hallmark, BlueMountain, Regards? I am sure they are in top 1000 somewhere. Is this #1 relevant? Yes, sure it is. Is it this site what the average shopper would deem as the best Christmas card source? Nope.

Another example:
Computers - #1 site Is it relevant, yes. Where is Dell or Apple( #10 and #15 respectively)? What makes this site deserve to be #1? Content? Oh please.

Back to reality everybody! This ranking algo is crappola. =)

Relevance is the overall results returned. Ranking is about quality, authority, popularity, and anything that equals "what I expect to see". Period. This is why Google dominates and Yahoo and MSN lag behind. Anything else is a serious stretch.

DMC

Both good results but the first one deserves the link a lot more. The second one doesn't even have the keyword in their title. But they are both very relevant.

[jackson992]

I'm still seeing first page listing for my main home page term so I'm liking this update:)