View Full Version : Post Jagger - A good case for study.
harish318
11-12-2005, 01:02 AM
I run a B2B portal. The url is www.allindiaclub.com/asps/business_index.asp. It has 31 sub categories like Agriculture, Automobile etc. All these 31 pages are static html pages.
PRE JAGGER RANKING
All these 31 pages were on 1st page of google search for keywords (category name + indian directory) like
Agriculture Indian Directory
(url www.allindiaclub.com/asps/agriculture-directory.htm)
Automobile Indian Directory
(url www.allindiaclub.com/asps/automobile-directory.htm)
Chemicals Indian Directory
(url www.allindiaclub.com/asps/chemicals-directory.htm)
Industrial Supplies Indian Directory
(url www.allindiaclub.com/asps/industrial-supplies-directory.htm)
....and so on
More than 15 pages had RANK 1
POST JAGGER RANKING
All pages have lost their ranking. Some pages are on positions between 60 - 70 and most are not their at all.
I think its a very good case for study. Can anyone put light on possible reasons for this drastic change ?
Harish
texxs
11-12-2005, 06:45 AM
Ok, I'm ew to S.E.O. but aren't these sites classic examples of a link farm?
Or is a "directory"?
I quess maybe google is thinking it's a link farm.
The meta tags say directory though. There is a fine line between directory and link farm and I think you are on the directory side.
Try contacting google and asking them to reconsider. They do sometimes.
cspelts
11-13-2005, 03:37 AM
Honestly, I think you were lucky to rank well before. The pages you mention above, appear to be just a list of links - there's no real content. If you really want to rank well for "Indian Automobiles" then maybe you should add some content on Indian automobiles?
harish318
11-13-2005, 09:53 AM
Ok, I'm ew to S.E.O. but aren't these sites classic examples of a link farm?
texxs, this is not at all a link farm. The links are internal links linking to internal pages of the site.
Harish
harish318
11-13-2005, 10:03 AM
Honestly, I think you were lucky to rank well before. The pages you mention above, appear to be just a list of links - there's no real content.
cspelts, Post Jagger the site that currently tops for the keywords I mentioned too is just a list of links with no content. Its a similar type of B2B directory site.
If you really want to rank well for "Indian Automobiles" then maybe you should add some content on Indian automobiles?
My keyword is "Automobile Indian Directory" and not "Indian Automobile" and the site is a B2B Directory so there should be no reason for Google to get confused.
Thus there seems to be some other reason than mentioned by you and texxs
Harish
freehits
11-13-2005, 01:15 PM
The arguments here agaisnt a link site are irrelevent since he said the search is for
"KEYWORD + Indian directory".
Since the search is for a directory, how could that be a problem.
Where i agree the changes may be anti directory....
so I should say. It SHOULD not be a problem for that search, though it may be related still.
cspelts
11-14-2005, 05:18 AM
The arguments here agaisnt a link site are irrelevent since he said the search is for
"KEYWORD + Indian directory".
In theory, yeah, okay. But in reality, Google tends to prefer pages with content. If you want to rank well for "KEYWORD + Indian directory," a good way to do that is to create a page with content about that keyword in India.
harish318, you say you have thirty-one categories like Agriculture, Automobile, etc., so why not write a couple of paragraphs of text for each of those pages. It's a fairly small job, and would make Google happy!
ADAM Web Design
11-14-2005, 11:02 AM
Extremely high percentage of link anchor text vs. regular text.
No header tags.
Bloated code.
Javascript not in its own directory.
That's just for starters.
You lost your ranking because you deserved to.
LinkMaster
11-14-2005, 01:53 PM
Extremely high percentage of link anchor text vs. regular text.
No header tags.
Bloated code.
Javascript not in its own directory.
That's just for starters.
You lost your ranking because you deserved to.
Dude, you are WAY off base with those kind of comments. Your website only has a PR1. Who are you to talk like that? Telling someone they deserved to lose their ranking is a very rude and arrogant comment. Show me your #1 ranking under a phrase that has 100,000,000 sites competing for it - then you can toot your horn and act like an authority.
CNN has more anchor text vs. regular text than his website does. The rest of the "problems" that you sited don't hold any water. His website actually looks better than yours. The only real problem that I can see with the pages he asked about is a lack of inbound links.
I don't know why I even come to these forums (which I rarely do anymore). It's like the blind leading the blind.
;
glengara
11-14-2005, 02:08 PM
*Can anyone put light on possible reasons for this drastic change?*
All pages from www.allindiaclub.com seem to be supplemental..
KeithO
11-14-2005, 03:52 PM
Extremely high percentage of link anchor text vs. regular text.
No header tags.
Bloated code.
Javascript not in its own directory.
That's just for starters.
You lost your ranking because you deserved to.
Dude, you are WAY off base with those kind of comments. Your website only has a PR1. Who are you to talk like that? Telling someone they deserved to lose their ranking is a very rude and arrogant comment. Show me your #1 ranking under a phrase that has 100,000,000 sites competing for it - then you can toot your horn and act like an authority.
CNN has more anchor text vs. regular text than his website does. The rest of the "problems" that you sited don't hold any water. His website actually looks better than yours. The only real problem that I can see with the pages he asked about is a lack of inbound links.
I don't know why I even come to these forums (which I rarely do anymore). It's like the blind leading the blind.
;Adam has been a valuble contributer to this site for a while, hence his MVP status. He was being totally blunt and honest about his assesment of the Web site. And he is also 100% correct.
greeneagle
11-14-2005, 04:02 PM
Both of you have points (point/counter point) and I concurr that both are right to some degree. This is a "HARD" topic and in the interest of brevity, "point blunt" happens... I don't see a personal attack though...
Let's stay away from there!
Ken
aaron2005
11-14-2005, 04:04 PM
Do I run a linkfarm?
http://www.rain-barrel.net
ALL my articles were on page #1 pre-jagger and pretty much all but three articles returned. This also happened on my other sites as well. Sux.
"Old McDonald had a farm.... and on that farm ...
http://www.multifinansit.no/ehandel/nedlastninger.htm
blocked for SE's if the Adobe encryption algorithm is good enough.
Made my own http://www.multifinansit.no/news/microsoft/ms.php
AdSense for RSS.
But we in Norway do not have access to http://www.internet2.edu/
So you always win.
But what is content?
ADAM Web Design
11-15-2005, 03:33 AM
Adam has been a valuble contributer to this site for a while, hence his MVP status. He was being totally blunt and honest about his assesment of the Web site. And he is also 100% correct.
Thank you for understanding, kind sir. Glad to see someone gets it. :)
harish318
11-15-2005, 05:05 AM
ADAM Web Design wrote:
Extremely high percentage of link anchor text vs. regular text.
No header tags.
Bloated code.
Javascript not in its own directory.
That's just for starters.
You lost your ranking because you deserved to.
ADAM do you want to say that Pre Jagger Google did not give importance to points you have mentioned? The page code Pre-Jagger and Post-Jagger is the same.
Further, these are pretty much common issues and Pre Jagger Google must have taken these into consideration. Still I had Rank No. 1 for almost more than 50% of those 31 pages.
Harish
harish318
11-15-2005, 05:21 AM
harish318, you say you have thirty-one categories like Agriculture, Automobile, etc., so why not write a couple of paragraphs of text for each of those pages. It's a fairly small job, and would make Google happy!
cspeltsthe point here is to find why the ranking was lost. I appreciate and agree with your siggestion about adding content on each page but thats the solution you are offering and here we are trying to find the reasons for losing the rank. Also the site which currently Ranks No. 1 ie. Post Jagger also
1. Does not have contents on their pages. 2. They also have Extremely high percentage of link anchor text vs. regular text
aaron2005
11-15-2005, 08:16 AM
I don't agree with Adam and I do not care about anyones "status" in here either. My website that is doing the best is an absolute mess, flash, .js, bloat, no headers, you name it, so to say that a site is failing because of old outdated seo beliefs like, code, bloat, headers, flash is incorrect.
I believe there is more too it than this, yes the above example is a mess but it is not the complete picture.