This Google SERP makes no sense

[jcopley]

Can someone please help me understand this ranking? Here's the search phrase:

historic real estate

If you run the Google search (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=historic+real+estate), this site comes up #1:

www.unitedcountry.com/

and it has been at #1 for a while. Meanwhile, my site at www.oldhouses.com, which has been up for months, languishes somewhere between 500 and 800.

It is the same with most of our targeted keywords.

We've been killing ourselves trying to get our SERPs up on Google: in/out links, keyword density, TITLE, etc. I don't claim to be an SEO expert, but this is ridiculous.

Can anyone help me understand why the #1 site is at #1, and why my site seems to have been effectively exiled from Google?

Thanks for any response. I'd post my picture, but I've torn most of my hair out and look crazed at the moment.

Joe

[cbp]

They have a ~few 1000 backlinks and are listed in DMOZ; you have ~50. You need more, especially with your keywords as the anchor text of the links... and if you are new, be patient.

CBP

[Duncan Pollock]

There's also the question of just what is a relevant site?
United Country is a statewide organization with a great many offices and agents, some -- but by no means all -- of whom sell historic houses. Nevertheless, the odds are that that their sales volume is quite a lot higher than yours.
Thus you're essentially up against one of the big boys and therefore need to do something that's different enough to make you stand out head and shoulders above the competition. There isn't any obvious answer as to how you could do this, but part of it, I'm fairly certain, is some page titles that contain the appropriate keywords.
Right now, for instance, all I see is OldHouses.com and a line of linked sub pages. I'm also immediately presented with a House For Sale ad. In other words, what I don't get is a highly focused sales pitch.
In contrast, United's home page does a selling job on how good they are, their nationwide coverage, and how many different types of houses (including historic ones) they list and sell.
And you might also take a look at Google's AdWords program. One of its real advantages is that it lets you compete with the big guys no matter how small you are.

Duncan

[jcopley]

Thanks for the feedback; it is much appreciated.


They have a ~few 1000 backlinks and are listed in DMOZ; you have ~50.
cpb, we have been in the DMOZ queue for at least six months. In response to our occasional (and respectful) queries, we're just told to keep waiting.

As for backlinks, we're working on those, but have been focused on quality and relevance. Is the message that we should be focusing on quantity instead?

I also note that the #2 site has 110 backlinks, and the #3 site has 22.


United Country is a statewide organization with a great many offices and agents, some -- but by no means all -- of whom sell historic houses. Nevertheless, the odds are that that their sales volume is quite a lot higher than yours.
Duncan, I take this and your other points. But are you suggesting that Google has reached the same conclusion? Have they somehow concluded my site has sales volume so small as to deserve its abysmal rankings? How?


... but part of it, I'm fairly certain, is some page titles that contain the appropriate keywords.
Well, the title of our home page starts with 'historic real estate.' So if I want to optimize for 'historic real estate', what else should I put in the title?


...all I see is OldHouses.com and a line of linked sub pages. I'm also immediately presented with a House For Sale ad. In other words, what I don't get is a highly focused sales pitch.

This may well be true, and I assume you are suggesting the top of the home page is not search-optimized. But are you also saying that an unfocused sales pitch is a reason for the site's low rankings?


You know, the more I work on Gooogle SEO, the less I understand it:

- I need to be in DMOZ, but I am at the mercy of a single anonymous editor over whom I have zero control or influence

- I need backlinks, but hundreds of sites with fewer backlinks than my site rank higher.

- I need good page titles, but I can't get into the top 500 even when my title is a dead-on match with the search phrase

- I need to be bigger, sell more, pitch more, spend more on marketing. Well, all I can do is my best. But I sure seem to be outranked by a lot of sites that also don't fit this description.


Once again, I appreciate the advice, all of which sounds entirely sensible. But I can't help thinking I'm missing something here. It is as if Google is penalizing my site for some reason. I mean, really, is my site SEO so poorly done, my marketing so ineffective, that 800 sites should outrank it, many of whom aren't even focused on my target market?


Joe

[cbp]

I also note that the #2 site has 110 backlinks, and the #3 site has 22.

If you used Google to determine this, then ignore the number of links they show - they show a random meaningless sample.

CBP

[Duncan Pollock]

jcopley: No, I'm not saying that Google can tell the big boys from the little guys, but just compare your source code with United's and see how very much more has gone into their site. For instance, notice all the href's they have (which is part of what cbp is saying).
And again compare their sales pitch ("We're in the business of helping people ...") with yours ("Welcome to the Internet's newest resource ...")
SEO isn't a simple matter, but it does work if you take the time and trouble to do what the Top Ten listings do. I'm just a one man enterprise, but I'm lucky enough to out position my local competitors who have hundreds of agents working for them. And I've no hesitation in saying that, thanks to WPW, I've learned how to rework and rework and rework my site until it's there on the first page for most of my keywords.
You can't fight 'em. You have to join 'em. If you want to beat United at their game you have to play by the rules they've followed!

Duncan

[jcopley]

We'll be reworking our home page soon and will continue to focus on backlinks. As for DMOZ, we'll keep waiting.

cpb, can you kindly let me know a reliable way to count backlinks in Google, if not by link:url?

Notwithstanding how effective the United Country site is, I'm still stumped as to why they rate #1 for historic real estate. There is no link to historic real estate on the home page. They hardly focus any marketing on it. In fact, you cannot even use the site to find historic real estate per se.

The term 'historic' appears in their source code maybe a half-dozen times, mostly within ALT tags. On our home page the term appears in dozens of places: headers, metas, body text, ALTs, titles, file names, and link text. Do you believe we are judged by Google to be spamming the keyword? We have tried very hard to use all keywords legitimately.

[cbp]

cpb, can you kindly let me know a reliable way to count backlinks in Google, if not by link:url?


There is no way.

CBP

[jcopley]

OK, there's no reliable way. But you cited United Country's ~1000 backlinks vs. my 50 or so as part of the reason for our poor rankings.

Then you said the low backlink counts for the #2 and 3 sites were meaningless samples.

If so, why are the counts for United Country and my site not also meaningless?

My point was that the link counts for my site were on the same order of magnitude as the #2 and #3 sites. Therefore, my low link counts cannot be the only reason my site is ranked so poorly. Am I wrong to draw this conclusion? Do you believe that #2 and #3 probably have many more links than are shown by the link counts? Or do you think they have much better quality backlinks?

My designer believes that quality backlinks (as measured by PR) may be critical to the effect the links have on our rankings. Do you agree? Or should we focus on quantity (while excluding the spammiest link farms)?

Thanks,

Joe

[Duncan Pollock]

Joe, we're kind of flogging a horse here, but let me again ask you to look at the much stronger sales message that United puts forward: "This is what we do and this is how (and why) we do it." In contrast, you rather leave your visitors to think these points through on their own.
Moreover, the large number of links that United have cannot help but earn them a high results position and probably for a whole range of other real estate search phrases.

Quit trying to understand what Google does and why. Come up with a website that leaves visitors in no doubt whatsoever that if they're interested in buying an historic home you -- and only you -- are the people they should be talking to.
With all due respect, you don't come across this way at present, regardless of how much you think you do. I mean, the immediate appearance of "Here's a house for sale" doesn't really cut it, does it? Indeed, it does almost nothing in the way of getting visitors to think "Aha, now here's the people we ought to be dealing with."

Duncan

[jcopley]

Quit trying to understand what Google does and why.

With all due respect, Duncan, that was the very reason I started this thread.

I don't mean to sound ungrateful. You, and cpb, took the time to respond with helpful advice. I appreciate it, and will pay attention to it.

Except for your bit of advice quoted above. I won't do any such thing, thanks all the same.


Regards,

Joe

[Jayms]

I used to feel the same way with my site and yes, it is very very frustrating - especially when there are other cheesy sites that obviously haven't taken care to optimize, yet they show up on the first page.

While there is no cut and dried answer, the only thing you can do is beef up your website content (useful content), get incoming links with anchor tags (as cbp always says, anchor text rules and this is a never ending task by the way), do the usual title, tag, keyword optimization, and last and certainly not least...wait - the most frustrating part.

I just knocked my competitor from their spot coincidentally enough, today, and it does take waiting (an entire year for me from #35 to #4), assuming you've done all of the things mentioned above. I've my sights set on another competitor that miraculously appeared as the #1 listing for my most popular keyword just a couple of weeks ago. Another frustrating event, how can that happen? I thought the whole "internet rockstar" syndrome was dealt with, yet this is the only way I can find to explain THAT happening.

"edited for grammar"

[Jade456]

Okay, here's my two cents. Right now, you need to concentrate on your backlinks. Period. From related sites for the most part. Not only will it help raise you in the google serps, but you should get some additional traffic from them as well. The other thing, KEEP THE VISITORS YOU DO GET. Duncan was right on the money. You need to have your site practicing the ABC's, from the home page on. You need to maximize your lead capturing abilities, otherwise the extra visitors you do get are simply going to move on.

[jcopley]

Thanks again for the advice. We are focusing very hard on backlinks at the moment, and sure enough, our ranking is creeping steadily up day by day.

We're waiting a bit on the home page re-do so we can try to get a better handle on what is driving the rankings. Or should we just make all sensible changes as soon as we can, and let the rankings go where they will?

By the way, cpb, I keep adding this thread to my watch list, but it won't stay on.

Regards,

Joe

[incrediblehelp]

Also look at how much longer your competition has been established in Google. Using the Wayback Machine I see that www.unitedcountry.com has been online since 1996, www.preservationdirectory.com 2001 and www.charlestonhomelistings.com 2001!

www.oldhouses.com looks to have come online in 2003. I think the Google does put stock into this and could have some effect I rankings. Of course I am not saying that this is the sole reason but it is understood that more established sites have done better than newer ones.

[jcopley]

Thanks, guywithfunnyface.

As a matter of fact I have had this domain since 1998, and until this year had a single, not very effective page, with a few links and Amazon buy buttons, just so something would come up.

I have often wondered whether this has hurt my rankings on the updated site.

Joe