Google vs MSN differences in approach

[J2dave]

Do people have a feel (or facts!) for differences in the way MSN and Google index your sites?

I have an established site - going 18 months, good traffic levels, original content, lots of IBL and OBL but only from/to subject-relevant sites, etc. All the main bots come by at regular intervals.

But it rates much better in Google than MSN - for most but not all key phrases. The result is that around 90% of the search traffic comes from Google, with MSN and AOL being the best of the rest but a long way behind.

From the discussions here I take it this is not a typical balance!

Can anyone suggest what MSN looks for that Google doesn't?

Many thanks for any pointers.

[ctabuk]

J2Dave Welcome Brit, you won't find too many of our Colonial Cousins up just yet. Go to Profile and add your URL as your Sig, then I'll run it by my IPB I assume you want to know for Beta? And if you PM me your e-mail address you will have the full lowdown today. Cheers

[buddhu]

Well so far I have #1 results on MSN for work-in-progress sites which have very few pages and relatively few backlinks. From experience so far I'd say our #1 results on Google are mostly due to people linking to us with descriptive keywords, while MSN seems to leap at fairly high keyword density and keywords in <title>, <h1> etc.

So far I'd say it looks like MSN is very much influenced by on-page factors rather than link popularity.