Submit Your Article 
Forum Rules 
Search
|
|
||||||
|
||||||
| Index Link To US Private Messages Archive FAQ RSS | ||||||
| Search Engine Optimization Forum SEO is much easier with help from peers and experts! The WebProWorld SEO forum is for the discussion and exploration of various search engine optimization topics. Any non (engine) specific SEO or SEM topics should go here. |
Share Thread: & Tags
|
||||
|
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
03-27-2005, 04:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Yahoo Sandbox?
Just throwing this out for anyones thoughts. Has anyone experienced the "sandbox" effect on Yahoo?
Here is my reasoning: My main site was non-existent on google for 10 months on my primary keywords from what seemed to be the sandbox. During this time it ranked well on MSN but was also off the RADAR on yahoo. Then all of a sudden on Feb 5th my site starting climbing in the SERPS from what I surmise is finally being released into the real world by google. At the same time the site suddenly appeared in Yahoo as well and now this site ranks in the top 10 for my main keyphrase on both the big "g" and yahoo. To that point I hadn't gained a significant number of IBL's other than the slow progression I had been working on from day one and made no other significant changes in the past few months. I have a second site that went live around August that is currently non-existent in Google and Yahoo (other than on some non-competetive keywords on my internal pages)but again ranks well on MSN (#4) for it's main keyphrase. Is it just a coincedence or is yahoo doing something similar to Google to new sites on competitive keywords? 
|
|
03-28-2005, 07:54 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have never even witnessed the GOOGLE sandbox first hand. All our Sites take off and go. Some are designed better for one SE than another, that's all.
Ken
|
|
03-28-2005, 08:49 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
While many do not see a sandbox many more believe they do. I run 5 sites, all under 1 year old and all targeting competitive keywords. Until last month none of them ranked at all in google or yahoo for their primary keyphrase. Last month my oldest site appeared in both and ranks well in both while the other 4 newer sites still are nowhere except for MSN.
Now I've heard that google changed their algo in February which in theory could explain my oldest site ranking well but still doesn't explain why it appeared in yahoo at the same time. I am by no means an SEO expert (though I have learned quite a bit here, thank you everyone!)but I felt it was interesting that this site suddenly started ranking well in yahoo after 10 months without me doing any major changes and it just so happens it corresponded with the site also suddenly showing up in google which is why I threw out the yahoo sandbox question.
|
|
03-28-2005, 09:23 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yahoo doesn't seem to be so dependent on IBLs. I have one that has never been link promoted. In that view they don't even exist. They are a regional rural water supply company that we gave great detail to, but saw no reason to try and gain International acclaim or "gobs" of traffic for. There is just no premise for additional business there.
Yahoo SNAPPED UP the fact that we provided great water conservation information there 10-12 months after launch and are just burying everyone else! IMO - They like good content and don't diminish it under an IBL shadow. Ken
|
|
03-28-2005, 04:10 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yahoo is all about links also. If you go for a competitive keywords you will need links.
But I have never herd of any sandbox with them.
|
|
03-28-2005, 04:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
03-28-2005, 04:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
If it isn't an aging issue I would sure like to figure out what I did so I could apply it to my other sites :)
|
|
03-28-2005, 06:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Just because YAHOO took a while to pick up "main threads" doesn't necessarily mean that a "sandbox" is in effect!
Ken
|
|
03-28-2005, 06:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Janeth,
Start with this one! "How to save water" #9 out of 29 Million - Lot's of hits and traffic! There are others too. Google is plastered against the wall there! Show me the links!; www.dpwater.com Ken
|
|
03-28-2005, 07:10 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
How to save water is not a competetive search term.
You site shows 10 links but again that is not a competetive search term.
|
|
03-28-2005, 07:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Janeth,
When you come up #8 in a quest for "how to save water" out of 28,300,000 returns in YAHOO that IS COMPETITIVE, validated by the traffic I get from that specific search term! Water conservation is a growing concern for the global community. Thank goodness YAHOO recognized the fact that just 3 links don't make inportant and timely information! Where did you find 10 links?, I'd like to see them, even MSN only shows 4 (2 internal and 1 BS. Ken
|
|
03-28-2005, 07:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I ask because it depends on what you mean by "highly competitive". That keyword combo is fairly hot in terms of number of searches -- right up there with "digital camera". But not many sites are after it. At least 5 of the top 10 results in Yahoo got there not because they intentionally targetted the term "save water", but got picked up more out of the lack of competition. Five of the other Top 10 were shooting for it. If five more shoot for it in a concentrated way with good backlinks they will push the "accidental" results off of the page. Take a look at "digital camera", for instance. This is a hotly contested term. The Top 3 all have over 100,000 backlinks. In fact, pick any hotly contested term in Yahoo, and you will see tons of backlinks. You can't arrange the HTML around and get into "digital camera" or "hotel reservations" or "airline tickets". It can't be done.
__________________
Ron
|
|
03-28-2005, 07:47 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Enough to be MANY times over what local interest is, even including regional customer service and downloadable pdf service contracts and water quality documents documents pull.
Water quality and water conservation are big issues these these days and will continue to be for the forseeable future. Why doesn't GOOGLE recognize that like Yahoo does? Maybe the whole "Sandbox" theory is just an excuse. Ken
|
|
03-28-2005, 08:23 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Bob
|
|
03-28-2005, 08:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Excuse or not my site http://www.smswarehouse.com took 5 months before it showed up in Google. Normally my sites list immediately......
Showing up in Google went hand-in-hand with my approval for a listing in Dmoz. I do not think Yahoo has a sandbox though, this site also appeared in Yahoo and MSN with immediate effect. My initial enquiries and sales originated from MSN and Yahoo until my site got listed in March this year.
__________________
Online marketing South Africa Bulk SMS / streaming SMS software & gateway integration tools
|
|
03-28-2005, 08:55 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Because it took me 8-10 months for YAHOO to pick up certain trails and blow GOOGLE out doesn't mean that Yahoo has a sandbox.... Or does it mean the GOOGLE has a more severe sandbox than we want to think about?
Different algs for different Sites, not to mention the changing algs.... IMO - That's all it is. Ken
|
|
03-28-2005, 10:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yahoo Sandbox?
Quote:
Why is this important? I'm still a proponent that SERP's for new sites are boosted based upon the theme of a web site or themes within sets of pages in a web site. Once a site has been established, it is easier to SEO a single page using on-page and off-page optimization. Yahoo is also very slow (compared to G and MSN) to update their database and SERP's. Even if Y! does grab a chunk of pages for your new web site, depending upon when they grabbed your pages in the Y! cycle of ebents it could take a few months for pages to show up in the SERP's. Factor in when Y! grabs your off-page SEO efforts and it could take even longer.
|
|
03-29-2005, 12:05 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
A fellow WPW poster offered his poorly coded affiliate site up to test on. Purchaseposters.com not ranked anywhere in the top 500. No heading tags for one and almost no text content, so a mess for yahoo. I added hundreds of text links with the keywords "new release movie posters" (4,000,000 results) 48 hours later his site is #1 on yahoo. He had previously not been top 500 anywhere. I am surprised yahoo reacted like this, but this makes janeths point about IBL power for yahoo. yahoo = match you title-h1-h2- and IBL's. I am still convinced IBL's are 3rd on the list of important things for yahoo....but this is clearly evidence of the fact that links hold much more yahoo weight than I previously expected.
__________________
Charlotte newspaper
|
|
03-29-2005, 03:50 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
sandbox on yahoo.....
Well, i beleive there is some kind of sandbox for new sites. I previously posted to a topic here where sites were dropping out of yahoo. At the time two of my new sites came in at #1 & #5 for their targeted keywords......then under a week later completely dissapeared. Ive also found if you do well in google.... & yahoo picks up your site a while later, google will drop your keyword rankings by a few pages.
n e way... back to worky :-)
|
|
03-29-2005, 04:14 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Bob,
just out of curiousity... What are the sites status in the internet archive www.archive.org Are they past the hypothetical 8 month archive filter? I have never noticed anything nearly similar to Google's aggresive sandbox filter on Yahoo, but what I have seen is an incredible weight assigned to sites that occupy a Yahoo! directory listing.
__________________
Long Island's Largest Online Publication Long Island Exchange ® - by Searchen Networks Inc.
|
|
03-29-2005, 06:57 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
03-29-2005, 06:59 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It is a term no one is trying for and I also just got an email saying
Quote:
|
|
03-29-2005, 07:03 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
03-29-2005, 07:15 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think it is almost established fact that there is a google sandbox, but i see very little support for a yahoo sandbox. They would have nothing to gain from such a device, Yahoo and msn are gaining a lot of popularity from their top level users (webmasters) by not having a sandbox. They would not destroy this edge by introducing their own. I think yahoo is just a little slow at times.
|
|
03-29-2005, 07:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Enough of the sand box!!
greeneagle,
ha ha ha ha ha UNCLE!!! enough of the sand box!! The post even ran in the mailing.. geezzzzzz Do you all close your eyes then throw a dart and then the post that get stuck runs in the mailing and gets all that traffic from page views?? http://jgp-seoservices.com/seo/
|
|
03-29-2005, 08:03 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If you are talking about the wayback machine, even my oldest site which just hit the 1 year mark does not show up there and none are listed in the yahoo directory but the oldest has been listed in DMOZ since last summer.
|
|
03-29-2005, 08:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
03-29-2005, 08:17 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It sounds like the problem is not that Yahoo has a sandbox but there as slow as Google´s sandbox. (-;
|
|
03-29-2005, 11:19 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think Janeth has it exactly correct, 100 bonus points! ;)
|
|
03-29-2005, 12:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
For those who don't believe there is a sandbox, they are clearly sticking their heads in it.
|
|
03-29-2005, 01:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
No.6 out of 153M+ last time I checked.
|
|
03-29-2005, 01:48 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Lots of keyphrases would return millions of results but who cares about ranking #1 for many of these if nobody searches for them. If nobody searches for a particular term more than likely most sites listed for that phrase wouldn't be optimized for that term so ranking high would not require lots of IBL's
|
|
03-29-2005, 02:06 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
03-29-2005, 02:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
My site ranks #1 MSN #7 Yahoo #NOWHERE TO BE FOUND Google. Its 3 months old, not in DMOZ or web.archive.org yet. 30+ Backlinks from related web pages - It screams S A N D B O X !
|
|
03-29-2005, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ok, the Overture tool tells me 30k. Which you can generally triple or more for Google searches. I've never looked into how his translates to Yahoo searches.
But my point is that I have this position without backlinks. No matter what the actual search figures are the fact is 153M sites are returned that target or are related to this phrase.
|
|
03-29-2005, 03:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yahoo sandbox!?
Why? http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=38068 Yahoo and MSN are an year behind google. They have other problems. First they don't want to break down the warm feelings most webmasters share about them. If they want to get rid of the spam there are more important things to be done. They are smart enough not to repeat the mistakes google made and to fail their PR (Public Relations) campaigns. If they want the serious webmasters on their side first they would ban the serious spam going on. A new site timeout? Why? A sandbox is not the way to go. Now they are the search engine crackers promised land. Cloackers, hijackers, serp harvesters, millions of doorway pagaes, etc. They are old guns on the market and new kinds in the search engines block. The 302 hijack? As far as I know Yahoo is the only search engine counting 302 redirected links. I guess soon we'll see more things we expect from google realized in Yahoo and MSN. Martin
|
|
03-29-2005, 04:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
03-29-2005, 10:47 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think people will find sites that seem to be exceptions, but since there are so many dozens or hundreds of variables at work, an example does not establish any sort of pattern.
Take any site in any position, and then manipulate just one variable and nothing else. By isolating a variable only then can you see its effects on rankings by itself. To find something that doesnt fit and say see links dont matter, is working the problem backwards. take a poor ranking site, give it links and see what happens. Only then while manipulating just one variable and keeping each other one the same will you see its weight in the ranking algo. The power of links on yahoo was just proven in this way.
__________________
Charlotte newspaper
|
|
03-30-2005, 10:08 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yahoo
It has been my observation that Yahoo is slow to find and index new sites, or make note of any changes to a site. This problem can be solved for a nominal fee (35 cents per click) by signing up for a service that will get Yahoo to crawl your site every 48 hours www.positiontech.com . I have used this service since 1999 for new sites. The value isn't there once the site is established.
Yahoo claims that this service does not increase a site's rank, it just gets site a crawled faster. I don't believe it. Sites that I have put into the program tend to do better than expected in SERPS. Yahoo is very much a business, with no noble ideas about saving the world. They seem to be saying: "Sure you can be at the top of SERPS, but show us a small amount of money for the favor." Unlike Google Adwords or normal Overture ads, sites in this program appear in the regular SERPS and the public does not know the position was paid for. Once a site is established with good content and good links, the service has little value.
|
|
03-30-2005, 11:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I can tell you all with reasonable certainty that there is not currently, nor are there plans for, a yahoo sandbox. If it transpires that there is i will be more than willing to eat my hat and of course my words.
|
|
03-31-2005, 06:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
What are you on about jkomp??
Why do you think you know more than anyone else??? Other peoples views are equally valid, but I'm interested to know why you think you know more than anyone else? Yahoo aren't in this for fun, they are a business and will do what they can to maximize revenue. Think about that, and then eat your hat.
|
|
03-31-2005, 07:53 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
jkomp,
Nothing is for certain and unless you know the top people at Yahoo and have been going to dinner parties with them, how would you know this?
|
|
03-31-2005, 08:10 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
oops, sorry i wasnt trying to say my views were more valuable than anyone else's. I was just trying to demonstrate (in a vaguely comical 'eat my hat' kinda way) how ridiculous i believe it is that at this stage in their development (as a search engine) Yahoo would introduce a sandbox. Google's sandbox has been a major pr disaster for them. One thing i do know about Yahoo is they understand the importance of getting/keeping webmasters on side. I find it far more likely that yahoo has been slow to index the sites stated as examples or they have been excluded from listings for an altogether different reason.
However, didnt people say the same things when the possibility of a google sandbox was first mentioned? So i could still be eating my hat with a side serving of words yet. As for dining with people from Yahoo, I am far too busy entertaining google staff to be worried with them ;) Just kidding.
|
|
04-01-2005, 10:39 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
To show that "how to save water" was not a hard term to rank for, we built a site about how to save water.
With no real information. It now ranks #10 on Yahoo and #20 on Google. The site is only a couple days old so those rankings should go up. It has not shown up on MSN yet but we plan to rank it number on all three. (-;
|
|
04-01-2005, 10:44 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
site please.
|
|
04-01-2005, 10:54 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
04-01-2005, 11:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Ron
|
|
04-01-2005, 12:09 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
04-01-2005, 12:12 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
WebProWorld |
Advertise |
Contact Us |
About |
Forum Rules |
MVP's |
Archive |
Newsletter Archive |
Top |
WebProNews
WebProWorld is an iEntry, Inc. ® site - © 2010 All Rights Reserved Privacy Policy and Legal iEntry, Inc. 2549 Richmond Rd. Lexington KY, 40509 |
Linear Mode
