I've Been Hit!

[watto]

Approx 6 months ago I went from the #2 position to the #1 position for my main term 'business for sale' (after holding the #2 position for approx 3 years). I also held the #1 position for my second biggest term 'businesses for sale' for the last 3 years.

On Saturday 7th Jan 2012 my site dropped to #7 for both of these terms. Highly unusual for such a big drop. All othe sites on page 1 simply moved up 1 spot (because I went down). I haven't done anything out of the norm to my site other than launch a mobile version the day before my drop in the serps, which I have eliminated as a cause.

I am scratching my head! Could I have been penalized?

I can't believe this has happend to my site. I've seen threads like this before and always thought they must have been doing something wrong. I've been consistantly holding my top rankings for years and for Google to kick my ass like this doesn't make sense.......

[SteveGerencser]

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/1/17/129082723548414228.jpg

You have increased your problem by knee jerk reacting..

[williamc]

weekend flux is generally a sign of an engineer playing with new algo ideas. Give it a few more days before worrying watto.

[watto]

Thanks for the feedback! I have only reversed the mobile site for now, so it will be easy to re-install once my rankings come back...........fingers crossed! Other than this I haven't touched anything, so I'll sit back and wait as suggested. Your comments actually give me hope :-)

[watto]

weekend flux is generally a sign of an engineer playing with new algo ideas. Give it a few more days before worrying watto.

The weird thing is that I was the only site that moved. Could this be a manual penalty? I don't want to jump the gun and I am obviously prepared to sit and wait this out, but just trying to eliminate a few ideas.

[deepsand]

You doubly muddied the waters by stirring them twice in rapid succession - once with the addition of the mobile sub-domain; again with its being re-directed back to the main domain - without waiting for them to settle down after the first change.

At the moment, there's nothing constructive to be done other than simply wait.

[SteveGerencser]

The weird thing is that I was the only site that moved. Could this be a manual penalty? I don't want to jump the gun and I am obviously prepared to sit and wait this out, but just trying to eliminate a few ideas.

Manual penalties tend to mean out of the index, and most certainly not still on page one.. BTW, this is the stress of relying on Google for your business ;)

[deepsand]

BTW, this is the stress of relying on Google for your business ;)
AKA being had by the G-string.

[watto]

Manual penalties tend to mean out of the index, and most certainly not still on page one.. BTW, this is the stress of relying on Google for your business ;)

Ok, cool. That makes sense.

[SEOforGoogle]

Another possibility for the loss in rankings (had the same thing happen to me, #1 dropped to #4) - was loss of links pointing to the site that made it #1. Client made no changes to their site from a coding perspective, was adding content on weekly basis like they have been for over 3 years.

[chrisJumbo]

We took quite a hit recently and all I can surmise is that pages that linked to us were devalued. I have begun to try to build authority to those pages, but that is a long process. Much of the traffic was lost for more general terms, but yes, that is the pain of relying on Google. Thankfully, we have a large client base and the search traffic wasn't make or break for us.

BTW, this post was featured in the newsletter, but the links there went to a different post. Had to find this the "hard" way. :O)

[drummer4hire]

I agree with all above...... I have seen this before and when everyone panics and changes stuff I always come back up....sit back and wait....all is well.

[d marks]

Any chance you are being redirected to a different data center? Have you seen a large drop in search traffic, I normally see sites bouncing around quite a bit for most terms on the first page

[claybutler]

Approx 6 months ago I went from the #2 position to the #1 position for my main term 'business for sale' (after holding the #2 position for approx 3 years). I also held the #1 position for my second biggest term 'businesses for sale' for the last 3 years.

On Saturday 7th Jan 2012 my site dropped to #7 for both of these terms. Highly unusual for such a big drop. All othe sites on page 1 simply moved up 1 spot (because I went down). I haven't done anything out of the norm to my site other than launch a mobile version the day before my drop in the serps, which I have eliminated as a cause.



No, no penalty. A penalty is de-indexing.

To give some perspective, I lost ALL of my first and second page rankings for a period of six months a few years ago. Probably 400 pages worth of content. I didn't do anything. Only one page retained it's number one position. All the other essentially disappeared. However my site was still being crawled and new pages were being added to the index, they just didn't even rank in the top 500. So there was no penalty, which means there was nothing I could really do about as far as a re-inclusion request. Then suddenly it all came roaring back and I starting ranking better than ever. This was literally over a three day period. It was like a faucet being turned back on.

So going from #1 to #7 is hardly a crisis, nor unusual. When you get used to top rankings it's hard to remind yourself that you don't really "deserve" them. It's all a gift of the algorythmic gods and it can be obliterated at any time for any reason.

[watto]

We took quite a hit recently and all I can surmise is that pages that linked to us were devalued. I have begun to try to build authority to those pages, but that is a long process. Much of the traffic was lost for more general terms, but yes, that is the pain of relying on Google. Thankfully, we have a large client base and the search traffic wasn't make or break for us.

My link pop is looking as strong as ever and compared to my competition I still dominate.


Any chance you are being redirected to a different data center? Have you seen a large drop in search traffic, I normally see sites bouncing around quite a bit for most terms on the first page

Surprisingly my traffic hasn't had a huge drop. Not sure if I'm going to different datacenter, but I have checked with other people and they are getting the same results. My site hasn't fluctuated in years and has always been rock solid in the #1 spots.

I'll be sitting on my hands over the next couple of weeks and see how this pans put.

[deepsand]

Another possibility for the loss in rankings (had the same thing happen to me, #1 dropped to #4) - was loss of links pointing to the site that made it #1. Client made no changes to their site from a coding perspective, was adding content on weekly basis like they have been for over 3 years.
Coincidental to the two rapid changes noted? Hardly seems likely.

[Buxykay]

Such things happen, you were lucky to hold the number one positions for so long. I have been constantly experiencing similar things with my websites. As you build links and perform your SEO so do your competitors.

According to my humble knowledge there are things which may be to blame.

1. A temporary down of your site. It may be for a few seconds or one or two minutes. If it happens that when Google robot visits the site at that time and can not.

2. The installation of the mobile friendliness may have altered your sites features again temporarily.

3. You may have lost a few powerful links

4. A bug in the algorithm of Google perhaps (These bots are not humans and even humans are not perfect)

What happened with my sites is that when they come back, they come back stronger which I believe may be your case.

One of my sites was ranking #7 for a keyword on Google then vanished totally for 3 days, reappeared in #5 then after a period of time vanished again only to come back to #3.

[deepsand]

Such things happen, you were lucky to hold the number one positions for so long. I have been constantly experiencing similar things with my websites. As you build links and perform your SEO so do your competitors.

According to my humble knowledge there are things which may be to blame.

1. A temporary down of your site. It may be for a few seconds or one or two minutes. If it happens that when Google robot visits the site at that time and can not.
That isn't going to alter the data previously indexed by Google. And, Google will not give up so easily, but will make more than a few repeated requests. In the mean time, it's going to leave its indices as they are.


3. You may have lost a few powerful links

4. A bug in the algorithm of Google perhaps (These bots are not humans and even humans are not perfect)
Of what likelihood either of such happening at the time that he was making a change on top of an unsettled change?

[snakeman]

Good day Watto (and the others here), now I recognise most of the names here, it's almost like "old friends".
Anyway, I think the poster "SEOforGoogle" (and some others) are most likely on the money. While people like to blame changes in the google algorithm for everything, I have forensically looked at my sites and those of competitors in a situation that is a mirror of your situation and usually the (determined) result is the loss of links on one site or some SEO on another that accounts for the changes, rather than a change to the algorithm.
As your site took a hit and by your analysis the next six didn't, it seems to me that your site is the sole issue here, meaning it is likely one or more important (to google) backlinks has dropped off.
While someone else here mentioned SEO efforts of rivals, a constant factor, I don't think that's the case here, due to your statement that 6 rivals didn't actually move, except in relation to your site.
A few years back I had a pile of backlinks in a few places and when they got killed, so did my google rankings, so I know how you feel, especially when you put so much time and effort into getting the backlinks.
On another matter of relevance to you (Watto), over the weekend Google's rankings for our main search results changed as well, which I assume is the (roughly) monthly overhaul of the broad index.
Because our competitors are very active with SEO (backlinking) the results invariably change monthly!
Anyway Watto, I wish you all the best at getting back to the top.
All the best
Snakeman

[deepsand]

As your site took a hit and by your analysis the next six didn't, it seems to me that your site is the sole issue here, meaning it is likely one or more important (to google) backlinks has dropped off.
Why do you discount the fact that he had just made a major structural change to the site; and, then, made a second one before everything had settled from the first? :confused:

[snakeman]

Deepsand, (and Watto) my apologies, I did overlook "that" factor.
Yes, in the absence of any identifiable loss of backlinks, it would appear that you are correct in assuming that "major structural change to the site; and, then, made a second one before everything had settled from the first" is likely the cause of the problem.
If this is so, then it is probably the best possible source as it is also (I presume) the most easily fixed!
All the best
Snakeman

[watto]

My research tells me that my link pop has actually increased over the past months, so I can't put it down to a loss of links. Also, even if I had lost a few powerfull links, would it have resulted in a drop of 7 positions?

[SEOforGoogle]

My research tells me that my link pop has actually increased over the past months, so I can't put it down to a loss of links. Also, even if I had lost a few powerfull links, would it have resulted in a drop of 7 positions?

Yes! I spend more time on obtaining authority links rather than a bunch of lesser quality links. It's been in my experience that some links are that powerful.

[deepsand]

Yes!
Purely speculative.

While it theoretically could, there is no evidence to here suggest that it would have.

[watto]

Purely speculative. While it theoretically could, there is no evidence to here suggest that it would have.

I agree in this case. As I said, I have not seen a loss in high pr links to my site.

I have noticed I jumped up to #4 for my main terms (from #7) yesterday, and then this morning back to #7......

[Webnauts]

Also, even if I had lost a few powerfull links, would it have resulted in a drop of 7 positions?
Yes, that can happen, because it is not about few or many powerful links. It is about quality! If you lose only one single powerful link that was giving you the power to to rank Nr. 1 instead of Nr. 7, you are done.

Some things I would look into:

1. I checked your link profile with SEOMOZ Open Site Explorer and found that you have 729 followed and 154 nofollowed. Does that ring any bells?

2. Your competitors are not sleeping. They also try hard like you do. How did that happen overnight? Nothing unusual. It could have been just another update which after re-evaluating your site and of your competitors, they graded you for the position Nr. 7 for term "business for sale".

3. About being harmed by the mobile version story, it is absolutely ridiculous. If you dig deeper into Mobile optimization, you would give up making such assumptions. So once again: That is not the case.

4. You said that you did not experience any drop of traffic. Would you mind sharing us a screenshot of your Google Analytics?

5. As others said here already, you should wait some more days, but I would not dare to give you any hopes. Seems to me that it is final. When did it happen? 8 days ago?

Still I wish you good luck. (Valto and don't forget to Vgalto).

[watto]

About being harmed by the mobile version story, it is absolutely ridiculous. If you dig deeper into Mobile optimization, you would give up making such assumptions. So once again: That is not the case.

Yes I said I have ruled this out, but at the time it was indexed my rankings dropped, so I guess I could be forgiven for trying to conmnect the dots :-)


You said that you did not experience any drop of traffic. Would you mind sharing us a screenshot of your Google Analytics?

No man, I said I did not experience a 'huge' drop in traffic as expected, but obviously there is a decrease.


As others said here already, you should wait some more days, but I would not dare to give you any hopes. Seems to me that it is final. When did it happen? 8 days ago?

It happend last Saturday, so I need to give it at least 1 full week before I accept this is how it is going to stay (until I start working my ass off again).


Still I wish you good luck. (Valto and don't forget to Vgalto)?

Thanks and no rotton hotdogs here! (personal joke).

[watto]

So after 9 day my site has dropped to #9 for my main term (after holding the #1 spot for a long time)....... Something doesn't add up.

[Webnauts]

So after 9 day my site has dropped to #9 for my main term (after holding the #1 spot for a long time)....... Something doesn't add up.
Oh! Now #9? Well I would assume that revising your titles tags back as you had them should solve the problem. Don't you think? :lol:

You need professional SEO services Peter. There are plenty of experts around here who would be glad to offer you their services. You are in a very high competetive industry, so I cannot believe you can compete with just some free advises from forums. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

[claybutler]

So after 9 day my site has dropped to #9 for my main term (after holding the #1 spot for a long time)....... Something doesn't add up.

To put things in perspective, I had the #3 spot on Google for just the word "dieline" for about nine months. Only dieline magazine and wikipedia were ahead of me. Then I moved to #9 a couple weeks ago and now I'm #13.

I'll probably shuffle back up as I build more links (as well as all the organic ones I get because people like my dieline tutorial) or after the next update, or if the other sites ahead of me lose links or any number of other reasons.

But the bottom line is that it was kind of miraculous that I held that spot for so long as I did. Just because you hold a spot for a while doesn't mean you are entitled to it. And panicking about a rankings drop that's less than a week old, and then making changes in reaction to it, is just not the way to go about these things.

[snakeman]

Thanks all for the views as I'm following it all with interest.
Now early on here, I (assumed) thought that the issue was Watto's site because his dropped and the other sites all kept their order of positions (or so it was reported).
This position effectively refutes any notion that SEO efforts by others have affected Watto's position. (I assume the other seven could not have done identical new SEO).
If the changes to Watto's mobile phone page settings are not the cause of Watto's position drop, can anyone here yet finger exactly what did cause the (apparantly significant) drop in SERP position yet? (any specific backlink gone or added or page changes).
Obviously my interest is to make sure these things don't happen with our pages - we learn from each other.
PS Watto, I hope you get to the bottom of the problem sooner rather than later.
All the best
Snakeman

[claybutler]

Thanks all for the views as I'm following it all with interest.
Now early on here, I (assumed) thought that the issue was Watto's site because his dropped and the other sites all kept their order of positions (or so it was reported).
This position effectively refutes any notion that SEO efforts by others have affected Watto's position. (I assume the other seven could not have done identical new SEO).
If the changes to Watto's mobile phone page settings are not the cause of Watto's position drop, can anyone here yet finger exactly what did cause the (apparantly significant) drop in SERP position yet? (any specific backlink gone or added or page changes).
Obviously my interest is to make sure these things don't happen with our pages - we learn from each other.
PS Watto, I hope you get to the bottom of the problem sooner rather than later.
All the best
Snakeman

This line of thinking is flawed though. It's natural for us to think there must be an answer, and if we understood it we could fix it. But most of the time that's not the case. There is no answer and there is nothing you can do to fix it. You just do your best and where you land is where you land. His drop is not significant. I know it is to him, but let's say on a typical semi competitive exact match keyphrase you have about 1-3 million matches. To go from #1 to #9 is mathematically insignificant (about a .000003 percent fluctuation). It's just for us it's a big deal. But if you look at the math, #1 and #9 are nearly identical as far as therir relationship to the other two million plus results.

So think about that next time you drop a few places. Mathematically the drop is usually so tiny it wouldn't even be considered a drop by a someone working in statistics and someone who assesses risks. For instance, if a car saleman tried to sell you on buying these expensive all-weather tires for you car by telling you it would decrease your stopping distance by .000003 percent would buy the upgrade? Of course not.

So what can cause a .000003 percent drop in ranking? Anything. Could be a single link, the tiniest change in the algorythm....anything could case a shift that miniscule.

If you don't keep that in mind you will drive yourself crazy.

[snakeman]

claybutler, you are probably vastly more experienced than I with SEO, web design and the lot, but I must say that I strongly disagree with the logic you've put in the above post in the context of Watto's issue.
Yes, on crude statistics you are correct, BUT, in terms of a search and results, while a search engine throws up millions of potential matches, the fact is that except for a given number near the top of the results (anywhere from one to a few pages (e.g. 30), the rest have NOT done any SEO whatsover and merely turn up in the results due to a few words scattered on the page, odd backlink or whatever.
In other words Watto's issue is in terms of the other pages he is actually competing against, rather than the other 20 million that may turn up in the latter SERP's.
In terms of SEO, and in a term you have competed hard for and got to number one, a drop of a single place is in my view important and often significant AND someting that can (in theory) be dealt with.
For several of the search terms I compete in, there is "real" competition between myself and just one or two other companies (one for some searches and two for others). These are clearly identifiable and invariably the only ones we saw with at the top of google searches.
The other 10 million that come up in SERP's below us fit into the bill of being either barely optimised or not at all, and in SEO terms are so far behind us two or three that they never come on top of the results.
Based on Watto's comments, his space is clearly more competitive and I would guess there are at least 6 others who have heavily optimised for his search term. In other words he is correct to worry about the other 7, 10 or whatever and NOT the other 33 million or whatever.
All the best
Snakeman

[claybutler]

Based on Watto's comments, his space is clearly more competitive and I would guess there are at least 6 others who have heavily optimised for his search term. In other words he is correct to worry about the other 7, 10 or whatever and NOT the other 33 million or whatever.
All the best
Snakeman

But the other 33 million do matter. Google is saying there are this many millions of results and these are the top ten, which means every single one of those in the top ten are the super elite and probably only a hairs away from each other. And the next ten could be equally as close. So one less link, using plural instead of a singular, having just one more keyword instance, or the tiniest tweak to the algorythm could easily throw you off the elite list.

I stand by my advice. To start messing with things two days after a statistically minor drop in rankings is foolish. Going from number#1 to #9 is statistically minor, we only think it's a big deal because of the impact it has on us. But if you think it's statistically major then you start doing all sorts of reckless things trying to "fix" it when the shift in ranking is probably the result of something incredibly minor and quite possibly impossible to know or detect.

So there is no way to make an educated guess on what should be done under those circumstances, especially if he had number one for so long. You need to ride it out for at least a month and see how things pan out, and then only after careful consideration do you start doing incremental changes.

[watto]

It was definitely a tweak the algo or devaluation of back links. My on page is spot on compared to my competition hence the reason I held the #1 positions for so long. One thing I have noticed is my competitor "business2sell.com.au" has all of a sudden risen to the top and from my research he has thousands of nasty looking spammy back links. Google must be giving credit to volume, non related spammy links again. :-)

[williamc]

They never stopped doing that. The real difference now is that at some point a manual reviewer will catch on and then they take a hit.

[snakeman]

Watto, Williamc and claybutler, your posts are all worthwhile.
My views do dissent somewhat (and may be in error) but here goes...
I don't neccessarily believe positions 1-7 are neccessarily a hair's breadth apart.
Often at the top of SERPS are optimized pages that differ widely from positions 10 up to one. This is certainly the case in my own keyword competition spaces.
Now Watto you now talk about one rival on top of you and their backlinks, but this doesn't account for the other five or six going over you at the same time and in same order. This (assuming it to be the case) leads me to believe it is something to do with your site that has caused the issue (and your drop, as opposed to anything from the other side, or even an algorith change, which would presumably shake up all the results and order).
I guess (now) that you've eliminated your on page changes as the issue leaving it to off page.
My guess is (based on what I've seen so far) that perhaps you've lost one or more backlinks that google placed a lot of weight on (I'd be looking here intensively) and one or more you may have overlooked - noting the lost backlink may or may not be replaceable and even if replaced may be sandboxed by the search engine, keeping your site ranking down for a while.
This has happened to me a few times in a near identical situation to what you describe and so I suggest same to you.
Williamc if your theory of a manual reviewer doing something to Wattos ranking is true, it puts him in a very tough position, but I think this unlikely unless all other possibilities are eliminated.
In relation to Claybutler's post, yes, I'd also be against doing anything drastic until you get to the bottom of the cause of the drop.
Also on popular searches, (which yours obviously is), I get the impression google tends to update their results (most) only about once a month, meaning any tweaks your end, may take a month or more to show up at best, but I presume you know about this already.
All the best
Snakeman

[watto]

The real difference now is that at some point a manual reviewer will catch on and then they take a hit.

I haven't seen any evidence of that, accept when they penalize a major site like JC Penny and let the Seo world know what they did. Maybe to try and scare SEO's and webmasters alike.

Hopefully they pay a visit to my industry sooner than later and put things right again......12 days later!

[williamc]

Williamc if your theory of a manual reviewer doing something to Wattos ranking is true, it puts him in a very tough position

What? I never said any such thing. Are you having trouble comprehending posts?

[snakeman]

My apologies williamc, I interpreted your earlier post to mean such an action may have been made on Watto's site, as opposed to an unrelated action elsewhere as an example. I'm sure you'll appreciate how the error occurred at this end. Anyway, I think the consensus here is that this is NOT the problem for Watto's site.
On a vaguely related matter, looking at the various sites in question (businesses for sale space), I can now see how competitive the space is in search as best indicated by the adwords ads that come up for the various searches.
All the best
Snakeman

[Webnauts]

I asked the original poster what his CTR was for his trophy term "business for sale" the time he was rankings number 1. He presented with a screenshot of his GWT, which was showing only 16%.

That alerted me, because of the factors indicated in a patent of Google:

Document Scoring Based on Query Analysis (US Patent Application 20120016874)

This patent application looks at the frequency of selection of specific pages for specific queries.
How frequently a certain page is selected in search results over one period of time might be compared to how frequently that page might be selected in search results over a later period.
If the page is selected less, it might be lowered in search results. If it is selected more frequently, it might be increased in rankings.

################################################## #######

Then I went a step further and I saw that titles of different pages were compeeting and I advised revisions. But also those revision intention was to increase the CTR. I also recommended a revsion of the description meta tags to increase the CTR too.

If you do a search in Google, you will that only one of the first 10 for the trophy does not have "Business for Sale" as the first term in the title tag.

################################################## #######

Homepage:

Title was: Business for Sale - Buy & Sell Businesses for Sale
Description: Sell a business online at Australia's #1 ranked business for sale website and pay no commissions. Search thousands of businesses for sale at Business Trader.

Title is now: Buy or Sell a Business for Sale at Business Trader
Description is now: Sell your business and save on brokers fees! What to buy a business? Find thousands of businesses for sale! We at Business Trader can help!

################################################## #######

On the buy a business page:

Title was: Buying a Business - Buy Businesses
Description was: Buying a business for sale in Australia. Search thousands of businesses via category or state at Business Trader.

Title: is now Buying a Business in Australia
Descriiption is now: Are you looking to buy a business in Australia? Find thousands of small businesses for sale through category or state at Business Trader.

################################################## #######

On the sell a business page:

Title was: Selling a business - Sell Businesses
Description was: Sell your business online and save thousands of dollars on broker commissions. Privately sell a business fast at Business Trader.

Title is now: Selling a Business in Australia
Description is now: Do you want to sell your business? Business Trader can help! List your business for sale, and save on tremendous brokers fees now!

################################################## #######

On the Testimonials page:
The Rich snippets have been abused (not intentionally), by showing only 5 stars reviews. I kindly asked him to get rid of those RDFa rich snippets markup for the stars and dates and to make them as plain testimonials.

################################################## #######

My primary intention was to help the OP to increase of CTR and conversions, and at some point probably to get moving back up in the search results (based on the previously mentioned patent?). Needs time, but I do not see anything that can harm. I can only see benefits.

Does someone disagree? If yes, please add your juice to the above.

Thank you,

John

[weegillis]

Does this parallel bounce rate as well? Are bounces considered errant search results? If I'm wrong, then I've been opening in a new window for no reason. But assuming it is correct, the bounces will have the same downward effect on rankings. (By bounce I mean jump back to SERP with back button.)

Not only do the recommendations go to improvement of CTR, they go to improvement of site conversion, as well, meaning less bounces since the visitor is browsing and staying on the site.

[claybutler]

On the sell a business page:

Title was: Selling a business - Sell Businesses
Description was: Sell your business online and save thousands of dollars on broker commissions. Privately sell a business fast at Business Trader.

Title is now: Selling a Business in Australia
Description is now: Do you want to sale your business? Business Trader can help! List your business for sale, and save on tremendous brokers fees now!



I think these new titles and meta descriptions kick ass. Fine example of having it both ways ( great for search engines AND great for humans) My only question is shouldn't "sale" be "sell" in this instance?

Description is now: Do you want to sell your business? Business Trader can help! List your business for sale, and save on tremendous brokers fees now!

[Webnauts]

I think these new titles and meta descriptions kick ass. Fine example of having it both ways ( great for search engines AND great for humans) My only question is shouldn't "sale" be "sell" in this instance?

Description is now: Do you want to sell your business? Business Trader can help! List your business for sale, and save on tremendous brokers fees now!
I advised: "Do you want to sell your business". Good call Clay. The OP got it right. I misspelled when posting it. No wonder when I write posts in a state of a buffer overflow. I also had some syntax/grammar errors.

Dear Mods: Would you be so kind to edit my post, cleaning up those fatal issues? I would appreciate that very much. Thanks in advance.

[webpro9]

Did you by any chance make any title changes? I would suggest sitting tight and not making any sudden moves :)

Even small alternations in Title changes tells google that you might be trying to game the system, so I believe they apply a temporary penalty to this in their algorithm. They like pages that do not change titles.

I do agree fully: getting proper KW usage and what the user wants to see, should increase CTR. Increased CTR should increase rankings.

[williamc]

Dear Mods: Would you be so kind to edit my post

Done, if I missed anything just PM me any other changes.


Even small alternations in Title changes tells google that you might be trying to game the system, so I believe they apply a temporary penalty to this in their algorithm. They like pages that do not change titles.

So, how is alternate reality treating you?

[Webnauts]

Done, if I missed anything just PM me any other changes.
Thanks bro. Very much appreciated!


So, how is alternate reality treating you?
I would rather ask, how do the Alt attributes treat him. If his avatar appears number 1 for his nickname in Google Images Search. :lol:

[williamc]

I would rather ask, how do the Alt attributes treat him.

Yeh, I was actually refering to the alternate reality in which a change in title tells google that you are gaming the system. What a crock.

[webpro9]

You lost me...

However, I have seen this first hand so I'm not busting anyone's chops.

Change a title, and rankings can be affected negatively for a time. I believe this is part of their algo. Eventually things settle down, but if you are changing titles regularly, or seemingly trying to game the system they give you a slight penalty for that.

To me this actually makes sense and I would do it that way if I were writing it.

[Webnauts]

Metrics such as click through rates on search results could be set by the search engines looking at their query logs to tell whether a page was clicked or not within their search results for certain queries, and which ones were clicked.

Bounce Rate of being a ranking signal, it is if someone would click on your link in the search results and then they would return back and repeat their query and click on a link of an another web site.

For sure there may be more bounce rate metrics search engines can use, like recording user behaviour through their personalized search, IP, cookies, etc. But this is a topic that would need an own thread.

Some further interesting reading: http://www.kanungo.com/pubs/cikm09-web-summarization.pdf

[williamc]

Change a title, and rankings can be affected negatively for a time.

Yes, it changes the weighting of any keywords in the title, has absolutely nothing to do with google thinking you are gaming the system simply because you changed a title.

[webpro9]

Yes, it changes the weighting of any keywords in the title, has absolutely nothing to do with google thinking you are gaming the system simply because you changed a title.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree based on my studies.

I wasn't suggesting they are immediately thinking that, but I am suggesting that a title change isn't treated as such without a second look from google. IE why is the title changing in the first place.

Case in point: changing a title for the better you would often expect a given ranking to improve, and in the long run that may be the case, but in the short run you don't always win out.

[deepsand]

Is that not the case for just about any change?

[Webnauts]

You lost me...

However, I have seen this first hand so I'm not busting anyone's chops.


No one lost you buddy. You just brought to my attention that I most probably did again the same mistake as usual, coming to WebProWorld, wasting my time, getting my chops busted from guys who are fully confident that if improving titles tags can kill rankings.

But if you really had the experience, why don't you present the old and new title tags so we can tell if the title improved or was screwed up. Otherwise your claims can pump thousands of balloons.

So my advise is, if you cannot do that, then let the thread flow in peace, or I will have to remove my subscription to this thread.

Don't get me wrong, but the admins, mods, senior members know who I am, and they also know that I have no time for just hanging out here.

Thank you.

[webpro9]

Is that not the case for just about any change?

I was specifically referring to page titles. For on page, it's one of the heavier weighting factors, so I can't speak for other elements as a lot of variables come into play and I don't believe they would have near the same impact.

[webpro9]

No one lost you buddy. You just brought to my attention that I most probably did again the same mistake as usual, coming to WebProWorld, wasting my time, getting my chops busted from guys who are fully confident that if improving titles tags can kill rankings.

But if you really had the experience, why don't you present the old and new title tags so we can tell if the title improved or was screwed up. Otherwise your claims can pump thousands of balloons.

So my advise is, if you cannot do that, then let the thread flow in peace, or I will have to remove my subscription to this thread.

Don't get me wrong, but the admins, mods, senior members know who I am, and they also know that I have no time for just hanging out here.

Thank you.

I think you mis-read my comments. I'm not suggesting improving title tags is a bad thing - quite the opposite. I'm suggesting that it most certainly has short term and long term consequences, particularly if you do it more regularly than most.

[williamc]

I think you mis-read my comments. I'm not suggesting improving title tags is a bad thing - quite the opposite


Even small alternations in Title changes tells google that you might be trying to game the system, so I believe they apply a temporary penalty to this in their algorithm. They like pages that do not change titles.

No, I would say he read your comments just fine. You plainly stated that you think google penalizes people for changing a title.

Then you stated the opposite. Let us know when you make up your mind.

[webpro9]

No, I would say he read your comments just fine. You plainly stated that you think google penalizes people for changing a title.

Then you stated the opposite. Let us know when you make up your mind.

This was my quote, which you quoted:

"Change a title, and rankings can be affected negatively for a time."

Keyword: for a time

Time indeterminate.

[jhannawin]

Let me get this straight webpro9, your experience is that Google is keeping a change history of page title tags? That would be the only way they could work out if you do it more regularly than most. On top of that, your experience is that ANY change is treated negatively at first, but that may change once they have chewed it over?

I certainly haven't experienced that, and given that Google seems to be off loading as much effort as possible (canonicalisation etc.) I find it difficult to believe. Can you post more detail or evidence?

[williamc]

This was my quote, which you quoted:

"Change a title, and rankings can be affected negatively for a time."

No actually this was the quote I quoted:


Even small alternations in Title changes tells google that you might be trying to game the system, so I believe they apply a temporary penalty to this in their algorithm. They like pages that do not change titles.

Notice 2 things here:

1: you blindly state you think google penalizes title changes.
2: You state that google does not like title changes.

The only question that now matters is: Do you work for google?

If not then your assumptions are merely that. Assumptions, and will be diseminated as such. That you do not like them being so diseminated is of no matter.

[Webnauts]

Hey guys, should we move the discussion to my private group here? I would like to keep the discussion going, but without title tags changes affects or effects BS which is only spoiling the whole thread, wasting the time I do not have and pissing me off.

[webpro9]

Let me get this straight webpro9, your experience is that Google is keeping a change history of page title tags?

That is my belief.


On top of that, your experience that ANY change is treated negatively at first, but that may change once they have chewed it over?

In a nutshell, I'm saying it can be treated negatively for a time and not to be surprised if a title change actually has the oposite _initial_ SERP effect. The higher the authority a site has, I'm sure the less bearing it has.


Can you post more detail or evidence?

Not at this time. These are my empirical observations. I have come to this general conclusion as a result.

[williamc]

Hey guys, should we move the discussion to my private group here? I would like to keep the discussion going, but without title tags changes affects or effects BS which is only spoiling the whole thread, wasting the time I do not have and pissing me off.

I would say just keep going, and ignore remarks that have nothing to do with the discussion in the real world. You raised some valid points to the OP, and I think we should simply keep going from there.

[Webnauts]

I would say just keep going, and ignore remarks that have nothing to do with the discussion in the real world. You raised some valid points to the OP, and I think we should simply keep going from there.
OK William. I guess we can move on and see if we can find some other issues we did not identify yet.

[snakeman]

Thanks gents for the interesting take on the last page.
I've seen these issues raised before, namely that google ranks pages better that hold views longer, and we found this corroroborated on our pages that had next to no text versus those with more, and scrolling images that also tend to hold the view of the viewer.
I think an added take on all this is that if the user goes from your "googled" page to another on your site (such as the booking page), it pumps your results further.
One of our competitors and a hot shot for seo has a load of "book now" buttons on every page of their site.
All the best

[williamc]

I think an added take on all this is that if the user goes from your "googled" page to another on your site (such as the booking page), it pumps your results further.


Since when did Google get psychic? How in the heck do you think Google is going to know if a user clicks from my page A to my page B?

[Webnauts]

Since when did Google get psychic? How in the heck do you think Google is going to know if a user clicks from my page A to my page B?
Can't Google rent space on page A to be able to monitor the clicks?

[williamc]

Can't Google rent space on page A to be able to monitor the clicks?

Nope. I don't have adsense on any of my sites.

[webpro9]

Since when did Google get psychic? How in the heck do you think Google is going to know if a user clicks from my page A to my page B?

From a pure search engine perspective, they can't. However, measuring relative search bounce rate can be done by watching when the user moves on to the next search (perhaps as if he did not find what he was looking for). Bounce between web pages would require deeper insight of course as you suggest, such as analytics if it is there.

I don't know if there is a publicly stated policy on how analytics data is treated but I do wonder.


It was definitely a tweak the algo or devaluation of back links. My on page is spot on compared to my competition hence the reason I held the #1 positions for so long. One thing I have noticed is my competitor "business2sell.com.au" has all of a sudden risen to the top and from my research he has thousands of nasty looking spammy back links. Google must be giving credit to volume, non related spammy links again. :-)

Suggestion: you can report this specific site to google. G gives manual weighting about 4x the impact factor I've read, and these are taken seriously.

[snakeman]

Gents, where I was alluding to is seen below:


Since when did Google get psychic? How in the heck do you think Google is going to know if a user clicks from my page A to my page B?
From a pure search engine perspective, they can't. However, measuring relative search bounce rate can be done by watching when the user moves on to the next search (perhaps as if he did not find what he was looking for)."

Yes this was where I was heading - as in working on the theory to keep people on your page longer once there, and the belief that google measures bounce back to the search engine page.
All the best

[jhannawin]

There's quite a lot of conjecture and empirical observation here now. Watto, the OP was 3 weeks ago, how have things gone since then?

[watto]

There's quite a lot of conjecture and empirical observation here now. Watto, the OP was 3 weeks ago, how have things gone since then?

Not a lot has changed. Rankings have not bounced back at this point. I have made some tweaks as seen in this thread and now its just a waiting game.

[jhannawin]

Not a lot has changed. Rankings have not bounced back at this point. I have made some tweaks as seen in this thread and now its just a waiting game.
So looking for a positive, things haven't got worse? Have you re-instated the mobile site now? If that was strategic for you, I think I would give it another go. Easy to say when it is not my business :-).

Also when you are confident with things again, some analysis of keyphrase vs. loss of serp vs. total loss of traffic vs. change in conversion rate etc. would be educational for us all. One of the things that often comes up in these posts is the fact that 'traffic' and 'position' are vanity numbers whereas 'conversion' is the sanity number. Sorry if that sounds like picking over the bones of your discomfort, I just think it would be interesting to see some broad % changes.

[qdb]

stop making tweaks.
I would invest in some high quality links, maybe a 100$ worth of a few good links, just to see if that bumps me up a little bit.

[watto]

So looking for a positive, things haven't got worse?

Actually, today I went from #8 to #10 for my main term 'business for sale'. Once again, the sites below me simply moved up. So in a matter of 3-4 weeks I have sunk from #1 to #10.



Have you re-instated the mobile site now? If that was strategic for you, I think I would give it another go. Easy to say when it is not my business.

Not yet. I am thinking about doing it soon. I have nothing to lose.


Also when you are confident with things again, some analysis of keyphrase vs. loss of serp vs. total loss of traffic vs. change in conversion rate etc. would be educational for us all. One of the things that often comes up in these posts is the fact that 'traffic' and 'position' are vanity numbers whereas 'conversion' is the sanity number. Sorry if that sounds like picking over the bones of your discomfort, I just think it would be interesting to see some broad % changes.

Absoloutely! But for now I am busy scratching my head! :-) I have actually received some great advice in this thread which I have taken on board, so I'll remain patient, sit back and hopefully figure out exactly what it was Google all of a sudden didn't like about my #1 ranked site.......

[watto]

UPDATE:

Today I have jumped up to #7 for 'business for sale' (i was sitting at #8 for a couple of days). I have made some changes to the site which can only benefit. At this point it is still a waiting game and I will update accordingly.

[williamc]

I'm seeing you at #6 here now.

[snakeman]

Here in Melbourne Australia on google Australia as of today (4 feb) you are at no. 7.
All the best

[watto]

There is still some fluctuations going on with my site, so hopefully the end result be back to #1! I'll be happy if I can claw my way back within 2-3 months.

[raj kumar]

There is still some fluctuations going on with my site, so hopefully the end result be back to #1! I'll be happy if I can claw my way back within 2-3 months.
That is always there, did you check may be Google has de valuated some of your links, like in squidoo.

[LD]

... do link wheel and again get top position.

I'm sorry - which decade did you say you beamed in from?? Seriously Noozie, this is just not good advice and as such, makes it looks like you are just posting for count, which you probably are. Have you not read the forum rules (http://www.webproworld.com/rules.html)for posting?

[chrisJumbo]

Unfortunately, what they also count on is a forum that isn't well moderated. This one is thankfully. :O)

[LD]

Unfortunately, what they also count on is a forum that isn't well moderated. This one is thankfully. :O)

Roger that!

[deepsand]

That is always there, did you check may be Google has de valuated some of your links, like in squidoo.
Just how would one go about determining that? :confused:

Where does Google reveal what metrics are used for such valuation, and what values it currently has ascribed to them?

[raj kumar]

Just how would one go about determining that? :confused:

Where does Google reveal what metrics are used for such valuation, and what values it currently has ascribed to them?

Google by itself doesn’t, but when i manually checked a url on which i posted back link in my article was, indexed by Google. That article i started giving back links to. It came to page 3 and suddenly deleted from Google index.
What can we conclude from this?

[watto]

I noticed I had approx 75-80 articles at my site with Google adsense at the top of the page with content wrapped around it. As suggested here http://searchengineland.com/too-many-ads-above-the-fold-now-penalized-by-googles-page-layout-algo-108613 this might be another reason my site's ass was kicked!

I have sinced cleaned up. Lets see what happens.......

[deepsand]

Google by itself doesn’t, but when i manually checked a url on which i posted back link in my article was, indexed by Google. That article i started giving back links to. It came to page 3 and suddenly deleted from Google index.
What can we conclude from this?
What vanished? The URL of the article, a URL linking to the article, or a URL contained within the article?

And, vanished from index or from SERP display?

[watto]

Ok, I have just gone from #7 to #10. This is the lowest my site has fluctuated to. I am seeing a lot of movement for this particular term.

[watto]

I have cleaned up rich snippets (unintentional spammy post), removed adsense from above the fold (75+ articles), increased page speed (http://www.webpagetest.org/result/120207_6Q_34XQE/), modified titles and descriptions and have a highly regarded SEO working on my link profile. If Google doesn't show me some love now, they never will!

Dropping from #1 to #10 for my main term hurts after all of the work I have put in over the past month (my rankings dropped on the 5th Jan).

Pandarized?

[raj kumar]

What vanished? The URL of the article, a URL linking to the article, or a URL contained within the article?

And, vanished from index or from SERP display?
url of the article from Google index

[deepsand]

url of the article from Google index
So, not found via a direct search for the URL?

[Webnauts]

Pandarized?
If that was the case, you still can rank well. but your traffic would drop dramatically. Is that your case?

[Webnauts]

I have cleaned up rich snippets (unintentional spammy post), removed adsense from above the fold (75+ articles)
Excellent job!


increased page speed (http://www.webpagetest.org/result/120207_6Q_34XQE/)
1. I cannot not see any significant speed improvement. You images are not compressed, so you have 97.8 KB more than you should.

2. Google does not only look at the speed of the homepage. The look at every page of the site.


modified titles and descriptions
Make sure they call for action and the call is accurate and not misleading.


and have a highly regarded SEO working on my link profile.
I hope you are experienced enough to tell if a regarded SEO is good enough.


If Google doesn't show me some love now, they never will!
I do not think after all the issues you had that Google will show you love now or ever.

It can take up to a year or a bit longer (so long you had position 1) to see Google's love again if you are at that time better than all others above you. If happens sooner, then you had great luck. Depends how your competitors will do the next time.


Dropping from #1 to #10 for my main term hurts after all of the work I have put in over the past month (my rankings dropped on the 5th Jan).
There are millions of site owners out there claiming the same. So you are not alone.


Pandarized?
I replied to this in my previous post above.

[williamc]

I do not think after all the issues you had that Google will show you love now or ever.

Google doesn't show any of us love, as you well know John :)

In Peters case tho, the issues were not bad enough to worry about a long term flux.

[watto]

If that was the case, you still can rank well. but your traffic would drop dramatically. Is that your case?

My site still ranks well, but dropped for my main terms.

'businesses for sale' - went from #1 to #4
'business for sale' - went from #1 to #7

Traffic has dropped approx 30% which reflects my rankings.

[watto]

Excellent job!

Thanks!


I cannot not see any significant speed improvement. You images are not compressed, so you[B] have 97.8 KB more than you should.

I reduced the home page featured listing from approx 30 to 6.....This increased the home page speed considerably!


Make sure they call for action and the call is accurate and not misleading.

Got it!


I hope you are experienced enough to tell if a regarded SEO is good enough.

Absolutely!


I do not think after all the issues you had that Google will show you love now or ever.

John, don't be so negative man.......Think positive thoughts!


It can take up to a year or a bit longer (so long you had position 1) to see Google's love again if you are at that time better than all others above you. If happens sooner, then you had great luck. Depends how your competitors will do the next time.

I agree with Williamc, I do not see a long term flux either.


There are millions of site owners out there claiming the same. So you are not alone.

Can't argue with that!

[Crimson Penguin]

Just thought I'd add that for 'business for sale' on Google.com in the UK, you are currently ranking #7.

Am I missing something here though?

I've had a bit of experience in this industry (business for sale), not as an SEO, but as a potential customer. I know many people who have used online business sale sites, given me recommendations for online business sale sites and I have even used a few in my time. Can I ask, are you a professional SEO working on these sites for someone else or are these your sites that your're working on?

If you're not a professional SEO then I really have to commend you for getting your sites to number one for such a competitive term, in a competitive industry. I'm not sure you've been given the amount of credit you deserve for that because it really is an achievement (speaking as an SEO). However, I can't help feeling we've missed a vital point here. Now, as a user when I've looked for or been recommended to a business sale site, there has only been two names ever mentioned - Daltons and Businessesforsale.com. These are the major players in your market and without meaning to be disrespectful, I'd never even seen your site before. Now I know these companies are the big players and almost certainly have larger budgets than you for their marketing. What I'm saying is that I don't think it's a question of what you've done wrong to drop in the rankings but more what have they done to improve? Don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing with the valuable advice you've been given by some here and I'm sure it will help in the long run but I can't help feeling that these other companies may have seen that you are number one in Google for the key term and decided to invest more in professional SEO services in an attempt to overthrow you, so to speak.

[williamc]

I can't help feeling that these other companies may have seen that you are number one in Google for the key term and decided to invest more in professional SEO services in an attempt to overthrow you, so to speak.

That would only explain them rising above his site, not his site dropping so far. At any rate, his site is fighting its way back up, and I have to agree with you that he did an extraordinary job getting it up there in the first place, as he is not a professional SEO, simply a site owner learning everything he can and putting the time and effort into it that it needed.

[watto]

These are the major players in your market and without meaning to be disrespectful, I'd never even seen your site before.

That's because the two sites you are talking about are not targeting Australia. The site in question is www.Business-Trader.COM.AU.

But just for the record I also own the #5 ranked site in the USA for the same term (the last link in my signature).

[watto]

UPDATE:

I have jumped up another position for my two main terms.......So far so good!

'business for sale' - #6
'businesses for sale' - #3

[williamc]

Good to hear. Your site is excellant and should be shown as the most relevent for those searches in .au, IMO.

[watto]

I obviously agree! lol

I think this is definitely on the cards in the near future.

[Webnauts]

UPDATE:

I have jumped up another position for my two main terms.......So far so good!

'business for sale' - #6
'businesses for sale' - #3
I noticed that because as you know I am monitoring your rankings and changes. Would you please be so kind and explain us what you did since you started the thread so we can tell what probably have helped you to see these improvements?

[watto]

I have only increased 1 position, so it could be a fluctuation. The last time my site had ranked this low for my main 2 keywords was 4 - 5 years ago, so I'm not getting excited yet!

If my rankings go back to normal (#1 for both terms), it will be at this point that I will disclose measures taken. Then people can decide whether my changes helped, or Google pressed a button again and my rankings came back. I look forward to giving you guys that update! :-)

[snakeman]

Dear all, I’m not trying to take Watto’s site from the limelight, but I shall make a few comments relevant to myself and how it may assist Watto.
I am newish to SEO and first came upon the concept in about March 2009, when I saw another company had usurped our long standing primacy on a swag of searches.
In fact I still wouldn’t have known about SEO, were it not for the fact that this new company had engaged the services of an SEO professional to beat us on the google searches.
The mistake they made was placing a link to this company on their site, leading me there and getting me familiar with the SEO concept.
Knowing nothing of SEO I reverse engineered the new player’s site and took all this and used it on my own webpages. That was the relevant metatags, keywords used and so on.
I simply added a few extra to put my site above the opposition.
I wasn’t familiar with backlinks and their importance, but later became aware of this and so have been engaged in a “tit-for-tat” battle with them for the last three years.
I have several advantages over the other players in my business, in that I own (went and bought) exact match domains (they don’t have these) and also the relevant trademarks for the said phrases, including for example the trademark words reptile parties, which is an exact match for a domain we also own and what we in fact do.
So in summary, two key points emerge. Don’t ever put an SEO’s link on your own webpage as it may help competitors get to be aware of the dark side of SEO and also, it pays to reverse engineer competitor’s sites to see how they are beating you.
I hope this helps.
All the best
Snakeman

[Webnauts]

Hey Snake man,

can you explain us please what are the KEY POINTS relevant to yourself that can assist Watto?

To be specific:

1. Did you find anywhere on Wattos wedsite a link pointing to an SEO company?

2. Do you think Watto is so stupid that he would pick up meta tags of his competitors and add them to his web site?

3. If you really looked at Wattos site you will see he is not using the keywords meta tags at all, because he knows that they are no value at all.

4. Aren't Wattos meta description tags fully relevant?

5. Do you really believe that Watto is not aware about the importance and value of backlinks?

6. Can you explain us were are your advantages over other players in you business buying exact match domains and also relevant trademarks for the said phrases? Did you setup web sites on those domains?

So in summary, two point keys to emerge. You most probably posted in the wrong thread and you were talking about someone else from another thread. Or you simply attempted to drop a link for self promotion purposes which unfortunately for you did not work.

All above said, did I miss any keypoint(s)?

[snakeman]

Webnauts, yes, I got busted for posting a link in my last post.
Please accept my humblest apologies.
In terms of the rest of the post, not all was specifically relevant to Watto, with some, relevant to my own case, being what I thought was helpful advice to others, including for example, the hazards of putting a link to an SEO firm on your website.
Now I know this advice would not please SEO people on this forum (I hadn’t thought of this when I posted and in hindsight should have) and I apologise for the post on that basis, but please understand my posting the comment was based from a different perspective and that of a relatively inexperienced web page maker who as recently as early 2009, had never heard of SEO and only was made aware of it via a link on a webpage on a Search engine optimized site.
Also for what it’s worth, that company now has no links to SEO firms on their site.

Now your questions directed at me, seemed more argumentative than constructive and I would rather be nice than otherwise.
However for the purpose of “completeness” I’ll answer the questions you posted as best I can and thank you for your time.

1. Did you find anywhere on Wattos wedsite a link pointing to an SEO company?
A/ I did not look.

2. Do you think Watto is so stupid that he would pick up meta tags of his competitors and add them to his web site?
A/ I hadn’t considered the question.

3. If you really looked at Wattos site you will see he is not using the keywords meta tags at all, because he knows that they are no value at all.
A/ Apologies again, I never looked this close.

4. Aren't Wattos meta description tags fully relevant?
A/ Apologies again, I never looked this close.

5. Do you really believe that Watto is not aware about the importance and value of backlinks?
A/ No, Watto is obviously very good at what he does and I saw that was obvious, even with a cursory glance at his site and from reading his posts here, where he comments about backlinks.

6. Can you explain us were are your advantages over other players in you business buying exact match domains and also relevant trademarks for the said phrases?

A/ These are some of our many advantages, others being recognised experience and a superior business model.

Did you setup web sites on those domains?
A/ Yes.

So in summary, two point keys to emerge. You most probably posted in the wrong thread and you were talking about someone else from another thread.
A/ Not from where I stand.
Or you simply attempted to drop a link for self promotion purposes which unfortunately for you did not work.
A/ I didn’t think so, but you and a moderator obviously did, and for that I humbly apologise.
What more can I do?

All the best
Snake man

[deepsand]

Looking forward to hear that update!
Looking forward to seeing all of your many junk posts having been deleted.

[morestar]

Watto, I'm not sure where your rankings are today, but if they still are lower than what you're expecting, have you considered off-page SEO strategies to bring your website back up? Sure there could be a number of on-page tactics you can try here and there, and wait and wait, but have you been writing articles, sharing your content on social media sites, bookmarking and so forth?

Even with my dating site, I've gone through hundreds of ranking fluctuations (on Google.com and Google.ca) for high search volume keywords and found that off-page SEO brings me back to the top for a time especially if I don't stop. And when I do stop, I presume my competitors are making changes or doing off-page SEO and advertising, rather than deciding to change my whole site up.

From my perspective, your subtle weekly ranking drops are more related to how active and alive your site is rather than something you did wrong especially if you've set the mobile version of your site to only be a presentation change and not a whole new site with a link to it from your main site (PR drain).

Write a few awesome articles, try to get a lot of people to share it, link back to it in other off-site articles. Get yourself back up there. Do some real mental work. You know what to do. Why change your site up. It was properly SEO'd in the first place correct?

And based on everyone's suggestions that you "wait", well, that did nothing for you. While you were waiting you could have built a buzz about yourself. I'd try this out if you already haven't but I wouldn't settle for any less.

[Webnauts]

Morestar, the OP have already hired an SEO to do some link building which is going on since the hit took place and no results seen yet. For sure it takes time. But he already has major on-page issues which needed to be sorted out and he is in progress getting that stuff done. If all issuess found will not get fixed, he could build as many links he wants. He will not get there where he wants to. Makes sense?

And I do not know where you got that "everyone tells him to wait". I did the opposite. So how did you come to that?

[weegillis]

Butting in...


everyone's suggestions that you "wait"

It's a north american thing, John. Everyone here speaks in superlatives. I seem to remember a phrase that went something like this

Always, never and should are three words we should always remember to never include in the same sentence.

'Everyone' could be added to that list. I wouldn't take it literally, in its present usage.

[watto]

Watto, I'm not sure where your rankings are today, but if they still are lower than what you're expecting, have you considered off-page SEO strategies to bring your website back up?

Yes I have been working on off site strategies. I am seeing some great improvements with my link profile, but rankings are still the same. Actually while replying this post I noticed a little improvement.


Even with my dating site, I've gone through hundreds of ranking fluctuations (on Google.com and Google.ca) for high search volume keywords and found that off-page SEO brings me back to the top for a time especially if I don't stop. And when I do stop, I presume my competitors are making changes or doing off-page SEO and advertising, rather than deciding to change my whole site up.

Around the exact time my rankings dropped I discover that I had lost of whole bunch of links, hence the reason I started working on my link profile. Prior to this my rankings were solid and never fluctuated from the #1 position. I have made some nice improvements to on page issues which will only help.


From my perspective, your subtle weekly ranking drops are more related to how active and alive your site is rather than something you did wrong especially if you've set the mobile version of your site to only be a presentation change and not a whole new site with a link to it from your main site (PR drain).

I removed the mobile version the same day my rankings dropped because at the time I thought it was connected. I never linked to it from my main site.


Write a few awesome articles, try to get a lot of people to share it, link back to it in other off-site articles. Get yourself back up there. Do some real mental work. You know what to do. Why change your site up. It was properly SEO'd in the first place correct?

It was definitely properly SEO'd other wise I would never have acheived the top spots, but Google keeps moving the goal post and I just need to continue working on the points you have highlighted in your post....much appreciated!

[weegillis]

The apparent evidence would show that if you're going to go mobile, go mobile in a viral way to start, and then clean up the mess after. Otherwise, if you are relying on your in place audience, you might be disappointed with the results as only a few are going to be connecting via mobile, and then only because they can.

There is a lesson in here somewhere...


... but Google keeps moving the goal post ...

That's nothing new. Where you been for that last 15 years? They've been moving it from the start. The stance post Panda is focusing on very tightly keyed content that no one will have but you. They've been able to find grouped content for years. Are you adding brandy to your French Toast so that it stands out?

[ashlynnjem]

Hi watto, I've also been hit out in the same scenario and my keyword went to 116th position from 4th position for which my site was ranked since last one year. I've researched a lot and found that Google recently rolled out new algorithm changes in which they penalized overly optimized sites no matter whether its on page or off page. So I removed all extra external links and keywords from my home page and also started to rectify my submissions. Currently I am on 79th position and waiting for the change so may be it could be the case for your site also..

[deepsand]

I've researched a lot and found that Google recently rolled out new algorithm changes in which they penalized overly optimized sites no matter whether its on page or off page.
To quote Matt Cutts' statement of last week,


What about the people optimizing really hard and doing a lot of SEO. We don’t normally pre-announce changes but there is something we are working in the last few months and hope to release it in the next months or few weeks. We are trying to level the playing field a bit. All those people doing, for lack of a better word, over optimization or overly SEO – versus those making great content and great site. We are trying to make GoogleBot smarter, make our relevance better, and we are also looking for those who abuse it, like too many keywords on a page, or exchange way too many links or go well beyond what you normally expect. We have several engineers on my team working on this right now.

Unless you are from the future, such pending changes could not have already affected you, let alone the OP.