Is Google Blocking Traffic to Competitors' Sites?

[danno]

I was contracted to do SEO for iMapia.com

Summary
It seems that Google doesn't mind anything on their search engine unless it directly threatens any of their core applications.

After considerable efforts at optimizing iMapia.com for several different keyword phrases and aspects of the mobile mapping software, it seemed that it was time to target the market for "driving directions and maps".

Several on-page and off-page SEO techniques were used and hand-submission to many directories was done. At a certain point, one would think that a keyword phrase that receives 55,000 to 100,000+ searches per month according to overture, would deliver a fair amount of traffic if you were placed at position #14/15 on page 2 of Google "above the fold". Top 20 results are usually a good bet for traffic, with a large number of searches per month as with this keyword phrase.

However, since I began SEO on iMapia in August of 2006, it has been a steady 150-200 visits per day. Yes, you read that correctly. No increase.

In addition, an adwords campaign is constantly running for the same keyword phrase "driving directions and maps", so you would think that at least that would pull some traffic.

It seems that since iMapia's software is 90% cheaper data cost than Google Mobile Maps when the cell phone bill arrives and because it is 95% more efficient than Google maps, it is a threatening contender in this field.

This is with only a skeleton crew and very limited resources. What if it were to take off and have more resources. Obviously, iMapia would become a problem for Google.

This is where it becomes advantageous to own Google. Not only can they spot sites that are getting a lot of traffic for possible buy-out, but they can also control the flow of traffic to explosive "up-starts" that they see as potentially threatening.

Here is the site: http://www.imapia.com

So not only do we have the problem of small business ideas being stolen on the Internet (large businesses are too smart to steal your technology, they steal your ideas), now whenever you enter an area that Google has a particular interest in owning, you can forget about many people finding out about it, at least through Google. This I find amazing. The site has also dropped from a PR8 to a PR6, however, I have noticed that lower PR scores may be universal at this time across the web.

What do you think?
Is Google blocking or throttling down traffic to competitors' sites?

[wige]

I have several terms on page two of Google's SERPs, and have no appreciable traffic from these listings, as opposed to listings on page 1, which do get decent traffic. I notice that your site is now on page one, in the bottom spot. You probably would see some increase now.

It is hard to imagine Google being able to "throttle traffic" as you suggest.. the only way to do so would be to give users that click on the link an error message, and if searchers start getting error messages when clicking on results, Google would start losing credibility.

Also, if you do searches for something even more "core" for Google, such as the term "video downloads" Google and YouTube aren't even on the first page.

[danno]

thanks, it just seemed odd how the amount of traffic never varied. it was like being in the sandbox
on page 2 :) I also just checked and I'm at position #23 for driving directions and maps all of the
sudden. What search term did you use?

Dan

[tacimala]

A quick search on Google for the keyphrase 'search engine' will reveal that Google considers the MSN Live search more relevant than their own. Maybe that helps disspell any thoughts of Google edging you out of their target market.

[corporateface]

How are you doing on your other phrases and terms?

If I am looking for driving directions and maps, I won't go to page 2. In my opinion "Top 10" is "above the fold". I have never experience "noticable" results for anything on the 2nd page of any search engine unless the results in front of mine were not relevant.

At least that has been my experience.

[danno]

It was not the SERP (search engine results page) position alone that I was referring to. It was primarily the amount of traffic that I was wondering about and if Google could selectively decide how much traffic went through, or if it could be selective, as with Adwords. Sometimes your ad shows on Adwords, sometimes it doesn't.

Also, there are ways of redirecting traffic.

That's more what I meant.

I also dropped to page 3 for that same search term after my post here today, a funny coincidence, no?
Maybe it's not good to post a link here at WebProWorld.com :) Maybe it is a bad neighborhood.

[corporateface]

Also, I looked at your site.
I think that "Driving Directions and Maps" falls short in scope. "Driving Directions and Maps for Your Cell Phone or Mobile Device".

How about looking at the viability of including mobile or cell phone etc... in your key phrases.

This is a niche market and should be included in your SEO data.

You are at 23 in Google for Mobile Maps. Similar for Cell Phone Maps. Not bad, you might want to focus on the niche market.

[aviator67]

...it just seemed odd how the amount of traffic never varied.


Googlebot indexes my databases at a feverish pace for 2-3 months (a new search term every few seconds) and then allows the pages to be searched after a short week or two delay. It then steadily drops the pages from its index over time. I've yet to determine why, but it's not popularity. I've had several high traffic producing pages simply stop bringing in traffic suddenly. It's very frustrating. In November '06 I had 265,000 pages indexed (site:sync2it.com) and it's now reporting just over 80,000 pages. It has leveled out at that number for the past two weeks. On the other hand, site:bookmarksync.com is being assimilated now by the Googlebot and has gone from 4,000 to 44,000+ pages indexed in just over 6 week, updated every day or so.

It's interesting to watch but I'd hate to have to pay the bills with the fluctuating AdSense revenue this causes!

[incrediblehelp]

Well to be honest when your trying to rank for "driving directions (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=driving+directions&btnG=Google+Search)" your comepting with websites that will ALWAYS be more popular than your own website. Do you honestly think you will get rankings above these websites:

"driving directions" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=driving+directions&btnG=Google+Search)

http://www.mapquest.com/
http://maps.yahoo.com/
http://www.randmcnally.com/
http://www.yellowpages.com/
http://maps.google.com/
http://mappoint.msn.com/

????

[carlos_p]

A search for "driving directions and maps" churns out mapquest, yahoo and msn even before google's own...
Maybe you should try to get more specific because that site's core business is mobile phone map downloads, or isn't it?
Some good news: you site comes up 2nd on "mobile phone driving directions"

[corporateface]

Looking at the website from a conversion standpoint.
The picture on the home page (although there is a small map on the phone) looks like taking a picture of the scene in the background. How bout stressing the point that you are putting MAPS on CELL PHONES. Put a map in the background. Just some suggestions.

[LinksAndTraffic]

A quick search on Google for the keyphrase 'search engine' will reveal that Google considers the MSN Live search more relevant than their own. Maybe that helps disspell any thoughts of Google edging you out of their target market.

Agreed. My first thought was that you were overly paranoid about the big dogs. But, rather than just throw that out there, I did a quick analysis of your inbound linking with a tool that I have made for my own private use.

The Google Mobile Maps you speak of does not even rank in the top 20 results at Google. Even if Google was pushing you down, they are not pushing themselves up the list.

In order to get on page one of Google's search results for the term "driving directions and maps", you will need a minimum of 81 "google recognized" inbound links to your website, and it helps if those inbound links are optimized for your keywords "driving directions and maps".

You only have 14 "google recognized" inbound links to your website - total.

According to my tool, the best you can expect to achieve with 14 "google recognized" inbound links for "driving directions and maps" would be position #20 in the search results.


One final note. I would not expect to get many results from a page three placement. By my own rudimentary calculations, 95% of all Google users will type in a new set of search terms before they click to see the page three search results on a specific keyword set.

[LinksAndTraffic]

p.s. The Google Map listing that appears on page one of the search results is not the same as what you mentioned in your post.

Bill

[danno]

Well to be honest when your trying to rank for "driving directions (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=driving+directions&btnG=Google+Search)" your comepting with websites that will ALWAYS be more popular than your own website. Do you honestly think you will get rankings above these websites:


You didn't read the post properly:
The search term in question was

"driving directions and maps"
not
"driving directions"

Of course I know it would take longer to compete for that search term. But, as I said, that's not what we are talking about here.

[danno]

A quick search on Google for the keyphrase 'search engine' will reveal that Google considers the MSN Live search more relevant than their own. Maybe that helps disspell any thoughts of Google edging you out of their target market.

Agreed. My first thought was that you were overly paranoid about the big dogs. But, rather than just throw that out there, I did a quick analysis of your inbound linking with a tool that I have made for my own private use.

The Google Mobile Maps you speak of does not even rank in the top 20 results at Google. Even if Google was pushing you down, they are not pushing themselves up the list.

In order to get on page one of Google's search results for the term "driving directions and maps", you will need a minimum of 81 "google recognized" inbound links to your website, and it helps if those inbound links are optimized for your keywords "driving directions and maps".

You only have 14 "google recognized" inbound links to your website - total.

According to my tool, the best you can expect to achieve with 14 "google recognized" inbound links for "driving directions and maps" would be position #20 in the search results.


One final note. I would not expect to get many results from a page three placement. By my own rudimentary calculations, 95% of all Google users will type in a new set of search terms before they click to see the page three search results on a specific keyword set.

Well I know I will have more than I do now for the April Google update, but again, that is not the topic. It's about how much traffic gets through,
NOT serps positions.

[danno]

A search for "driving directions and maps" churns out mapquest, yahoo and msn even before google's own...
Maybe you should try to get more specific because that site's core business is mobile phone map downloads, or isn't it?
Some good news: you site comes up 2nd on "mobile phone driving directions"

Thanks for the info :)

[danno]

Also, I looked at your site.
I think that "Driving Directions and Maps" falls short in scope. "Driving Directions and Maps for Your Cell Phone or Mobile Device".

How about looking at the viability of including mobile or cell phone etc... in your key phrases.

This is a niche market and should be included in your SEO data.

You are at 23 in Google for Mobile Maps. Similar for Cell Phone Maps. Not bad, you might want to focus on the niche market.

If you look at the title of the site it actually is Driving Directions and Maps on Your Cell Phone,

"Driving Directions and Maps" just happens to be one of the keyword phrases that gets picked up.

[danno]

A quick search on Google for the keyphrase 'search engine' will reveal that Google considers the MSN Live search more relevant than their own. Maybe that helps disspell any thoughts of Google edging you out of their target market.

Agreed. My first thought was that you were overly paranoid about the big dogs. But, rather than just throw that out there, I did a quick analysis of your inbound linking with a tool that I have made for my own private use.

The Google Mobile Maps you speak of does not even rank in the top 20 results at Google. Even if Google was pushing you down, they are not pushing themselves up the list.

In order to get on page one of Google's search results for the term "driving directions and maps", you will need a minimum of 81 "google recognized" inbound links to your website, and it helps if those inbound links are optimized for your keywords "driving directions and maps".

You only have 14 "google recognized" inbound links to your website - total.

According to my tool, the best you can expect to achieve with 14 "google recognized" inbound links for "driving directions and maps" would be position #20 in the search results.


One final note. I would not expect to get many results from a page three placement. By my own rudimentary calculations, 95% of all Google users will type in a new set of search terms before they click to see the page three search results on a specific keyword set.

Well that's close, but not entirely correct.
Until today it was as high as #14 and #15 position on page two of Google, and that's higher than #20, but I understand what you mean. You are good at "ballparking" the figure. However, I achieved higher than what that calculation would indicate.
The new third page position only happened today by some wild and crazy coincidence!

[LinksAndTraffic]

Well I know I will have more than I do now for the April Google update, but again, that is not the topic. It's about how much traffic gets through,
NOT serps positions.

The original thread seemed to have been about whether google was preventing traffic from getting to you because you were one of their competitors. I think that has pretty much been eliminated as a possibility.

But actually, I do believe traffic is relevent to where you are placed in the serps. Other factors may also work into your traffic equation such as what visitors see when they look at your listing:

Link: Driving Directions and Maps on Your Cell Phone

Description: Driving Directions and Maps on Your Cell Phone or Mobile Device. Free Software. Data charges 90% less on your cell bill.

You have got to ask yourself: Does your description offer your Google's users a compelling reason to visit your website?? Or have you simply offered too much information??

Personally, I think I have seen enough info in your description to know what your site has to offer to me. I have always felt that the role of the link in the serps was to bring people to my website, and the role of my website was to convert the traffic to sales. Your description is trying to close the sale, before the searcher even visits your website.

That is just my two cents.

Bill

[LinksAndTraffic]

Well that's close, but not entirely correct.
Until today it was as high as #14 and #15 position on page two of Google, and that's higher than #20, but I understand what you mean. You are good at "ballparking" the figure. However, I achieved higher than what that calculation would indicate.
The new third page position only happened today by some wild and crazy coincidence!

Yes, it was just a ballpark. The ballpark tool is short one calculation to make it completely accurate.

[danno]

Personally, I think I have seen enough info in your description to know what your site has to offer to me. I have always felt that the role of the link in the serps was to bring people to my website, and the role of my website was to convert the traffic to sales. Your description is trying to close the sale, before the searcher even visits your website.

That is just my two cents.

Bill

That is an interesting point Bill and something I had not considered. I'm trying to make it as "relevant" as possible because that is what Google is all about.

Maybe I will have to look at it again from a sales point of view (even though it's free).
That might be a valid explanation for the "high serps position/low traffic" situation.

In that case, I would owe Google an apology, which I offer now. It is nice to have a reasonable explanation for something like this. Having worked with Adwords, I think it is entirely possible that this is the correct evaluation of the problem.

It also makes sense that Google search and Adwords would work in a similar way.

Thanks!
Dan

[Seminole386]

I have found Scrub The Web to be helpful in spotting problem areas that hurt rankings. While not helpful in getting your ranked. According to it, you have broken many rules. Check it out
http://www.scrubtheweb.com/cgi-bin/webtools/meta-check.cgi?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.imapia.com

[cinebiz]

This might be a strategy for later, but you could try offline advertising. Print could work, but TV is an obvious choice - don't experiment with Gogogle stuff for television, though... they don't know what they're doing yet. Use a real agency like Cheap TV Spots or some of the other great boutiques out there.

This all depends on the openmindedness of your client, though. Some folks are fixated on web placement, and think they must live or die by it. SEO should be about getting people to the site, in whatever way that can happen.

[incrediblehelp]

You didn't read the post properly:
The search term in question was

"driving directions and maps"
not
"driving directions"

OK sorry about that. Regardless watching rankings go up and down is not a healthy way to spend time. Also Google is not going to push their websites higher throughout the organic SERPs to push your website down. Of course if they did, what could you do anyways...it is their SERPs to control.

Concentrate on more long tail keywords like stated before and you will succeed in this space above the big boys.

[sirius77]

Google doesn't have to throttle traffic resulting from clicks on links they publish in search results, they can just alter (reduce) rank of hand selected sites they see as competition using site-unique bias. There is a lot of evidence they do this. See http://www.searchenginehonesty.com/

Google has a perfect right to play with ranking of specific sites for any reason. Playing fair is not a requirement. It would be nice if they admitted it, but that is not required either.

[Peter (IMC)]

I got this from the home page html code:


<meta content="driving directions, mobile maps, maps directions, mobile mapping, cell phone, driving directions usa, driving directions canada, cell phone mobile, cellular mobile, gis mapping, gps mapping, gsm mobile, mapping software, mobile applications, mobile cell, mobile communication, mobile data, mobile devices, mobile gis, mobile gps, mobile handsets, mobile interface, mobile map, mobile mapper, mobile motorola, mobile navigation, mobile network, mobile networks, mobile phones, mobile roaming, mobile software, mobile systems, mobile technologies, mobile technology,mobile telecom,mobile track,mobile tracking,mobile wireless,phone mobile,thales mobile mapper,cell phones,local search,alabama driving directions,atlanta directions,az directions,business map,business software,car directions,city map,city maps,co directions,colorado directions,county maps,delaware directions,denver directions,directions,directions quest,driving directions,driving map,florida directions,ga directions,georgia directions,get directions,gps software,idaho directions,iowa directions,louisiana map,map,map address,map and directions,map com,map data,map direction,map software,map for interstate,map usa,map quest,map driving,map to,mapping data,mapping software,mapquest maps,maps,maps directions,maps directions,me directions,mi directions,mo directions,mobile mapping,ms directions,new hampshire jersey mexico orleans directions,nj directions,or directions,palm map,palm maps,rhode island directions,road map,road software,road maps,satellite map,sc directions,seattle directions,south carolina directions,state map,street software,street maps,travel directions,travel map,travel direction,treo map,us map,usa directions,usa map,vermont directions,vt directions,wa directions,wedding map,wedding card,wedding direction,wedding maps,mapping software,gps software,gis software,garmin software,best software,mapping download,mapping pocket pc,garmin download,pda mapping,gps mapping,mapping programs,digital mapping,interactive mapping,pocket mapping,gis mapping,online mapper,mapping data,wireless api,garmin software,handheld software,palm computer software,navigation software,pda maps,garmin software,magellan software,mobile gis,mobile collection,mapx mobile,mobile navigation,svg,svgt,map driving direction,get driving direction,driving direction shortest,direction driving intersection,driving direction and traffic map,blast direction driving map mapping,free driving direction,aid direction driving map traffic,quickest driving direction,direction driving interest point traffic,point to point driving direction,find driving direction,free map driving direction,door to door driving direction,aid check construction driving direction,local driving direction,driving direction in canada,get free driving direction,quick driving direction,direction driving review,truck driving direction,driving direction fastest shortest,driving direction to and from,travel driving direction,map driving direction canada,direction driving map travel,truck route driving direction,street driving direction,driving direction northern ontario,commercial vehicle driving direction,,commercial driving direction,fastest driving direction,best driving direction,find a map and driving direction,driving direction ontario,driving direction location city state,riving directions, rdiving directions, ddriving directions, sriving directions, friving directions, eriving directions, rriving directions, xriving directions, criving directions, diving directions, dirving directions, drriving directions, deiving directions, dtiving directions, d4iving directions, d5iving directions, ddiving directions, dfiving directions, drving directions, drviing directions, driiving directions, druving directions, droving directions, drjving directions, drkving directions, dr8ving directions, dr9ving directions, driing directions, driivng directions, drivving directions, dricing directions, dribing directions, drifing directions, driging directions, drivng directions, drivnig directions, driviing directions, drivung directions, drivong directions, drivjng directions, drivkng directions, driv8ng directions, driv9ng directions, drivig directions, drivign directions, drivinng directions, drivibg directions, drivimg directions, drivihg directions, drivijg directions, drivin directions, drivin gdirections, drivingg directions, drivinf directions, drivinh directions, drivint directions, driviny directions, drivinv directions, drivinb directions, drivingdirections, drivingd irections, driving directions, driving irections, driving idrections, driving ddirections, driving sirections, driving firections, driving eirections, driving rirections, driving xirections, driving cirections, driving drections, driving driections, driving diirections, driving durections, driving dorections, driving djrections, driving dkrections, driving d8rections, driving d9rections, driving diections, driving dierctions, driving dirrections, driving dieections, driving ditections, driving di4ections, driving di5ections, driving didections, driving difections, driving dirctions, driving dircetions, driving direections, driving dirwctions, driving dirrctions, driving dirsctions, driving dirdctions, driving dir3ctions, driving dir4ctions, driving diretions, driving diretcions, driving direcctions, driving dirextions, driving direvtions, driving diredtions, driving direftions, driving direcions, driving direcitons, driving directtions, driving direcrions, driving direcyions, driving direc5ions, driving direc6ions, driving direcfions, driving direcgions, driving directons, driving directoins, driving directiions, driving directuons, driving directoons, driving directjons, driving directkons, driving direct8ons, driving direct9ons, driving directins, driving directinos, driving directioons, driving directiins, driving directipns, driving directi9ns, driving directi0ns, driving directikns, driving directilns, driving directios, driving directiosn, driving directionns, driving directiobs, driving directioms, driving directiohs, driving directiojs, driving direction, driving directionss, driving directiona,driving directiond,driving directionw,driving directione,driving directionz,driving directionx,maps,free maps, road atlas, driving distance,mapping,automobile travel directions,autoroute,to get driving directions,mobile phone maps" name="keywords" />

Not only is creating such a list of keywords a huge waste of time, it´s seriously reducing the optimization of the page. How can you expect high rankings with this type of "optimization"?

I found this too:




<h2>About the iMapia Software Application</h2></p> h2 inside p?

You´re using blog software, aren't you?

This site is not optimized, just using an enormous meta keywords tag, h1, h2 and h3 and p tags doesn't make a site optimized.

[grahampen]

I just noticed that no-one had chipped in on the issue of adwords not always showing.

Adwords are of course throttled based on you daily budget you set. Google will try to reduce the number of times the Ad is shown based on what it expects to be the conversion rate for your position. So to get the Ad to show every time at the top of the page you have to be prepared to pay a lot of money.

For my key words I gave this a try and set up just for a couple of days an unlimited budget with an over the top price - I was surprised at how little more than I was currently paying got me to the top!

[lala]

Could it also add to your problem that your pages do not comply with the W3C? Result: Failed validation, 47 errors on your home page...

lala

[Peter (IMC)]

Could it also add to your problem that your pages do not comply with the W3C? Result: Failed validation, 47 errors on your home page...

lala
Even though it is always best to have valid code, these problems aren't caused by validation errors.

[lala]

Thank you Peter!

Just another question related to coding and SEO:
If you had a lot of code in the <HEAD> section with your title, keywords and description tags a bit further down, would that affect the rankings? I have a client using Netsuite, but found the code of the template rather bizarre (what might be caused by the fact that I do not know too much about this product). It also has a lot of errors showing up when I validate...

lala

BTW, I am fairly new to discusssion groups, so please let me know if I should not ask related questions in an existing thread...

[Peter (IMC)]

Thank you Peter!

Just another question related to coding and SEO:
If you had a lot of code in the <HEAD> section with your title, keywords and description tags a bit further down, would that affect the rankings? I have a client using Netsuite, but found the code of the template rather bizarre (what might be caused by the fact that I do not know too much about this product). It also has a lot of errors showing up when I validate...

lala

BTW, I am fairly new to discusssion groups, so please let me know if I should not ask related questions in an existing thread...

In my opinion, all that code is not going to make the difference between high rankings and no rankings. However, a lot of (useless) code that can be placed in external files, can affect the rankings. But this is not a matter of how valid the code is, but an optimization issue. If it is there just for the search engines, you can just as well take it out (except for the meta keywords and description tags).

[nexternal]

Nice. SEO Strikes again.

It started with a conspiracy theory, then a site plug...

Yet it finished when I Googled "driving directions" and got 26,000,000 results....

[lala]

Cheers, Peter.

But why does the W3C exist? Most sites work perfectly fine even with invalid code...

lala

[SemAdvance]

I also dropped to page 3 for that same search term after my post here today, a funny coincidence, no?
Maybe it's not good to post a link here at WebProWorld.com :) Maybe it is a bad neighborhood.

That you feel Google rankings could be effected in 24 hours by a post here, makes me wonder how qualified you are to perform SEO on a site????

It just does not take effect that quickly!!!

[mjesales]

While I doubt there is any sort of throttling going on - i could see them programming it so that google maps comes up before the results - then the rest of the results just as they come.

[xtopher]

I can confidently assume that non compliant page code doesnt affect seo or ranking position. Just look at the evidence online. You can find hundreds of US .com sites, 6 or 7 years old that are authority sites, rank well and have great ibls`s. On the other hand they are M$ Frontpage sites with the usual mess of non compliant code. (M$ usually ignores all Standards to implement its market leverage and the tie in to its products). If the search engines are to work they must take into consideration this factor of poor code.
The only benefit of compliant code is an amount of future proofing it gives you and knowing it will work on compliant browsers (IE excluded, obviously).

As regard to the meta keywords. That sort of spamming isnt really necessary. I would state that is a total lack of seo ability writing code like that.

[danno]

I thought that I had closed the issue a long time ago, it was simply a matter of being placed high in serps for many keywords, but getting low traffic.

The answer is that the amount of information given in the description tag was affecting my click-through-rate and causing it to be very low.

Regarding the comment about the link in webproworld.com causing a problem, it was a joke.The joke was that Google was monitoring the forum and dropped me to page three over the comment or that WebProWorld was a bad neighborhood in the eyes of Google. Everyone else seemed to get it. I can't help that. I have lots and lots of keyword phrases on page one and two of Google consistently and have this site on page one in over 50 search engines (and that's just the English ones) and you don't get consistently high ranking in Google either without knowing what you are doing. So lighten up already and read the whole thread!

The fact that people keep commenting on these things, when it was clearly resolved after only one page of posts, shows that people don't even read the whole thread and take everything out of context.
The people who actually read the whole thread stopped commenting a long time ago.

WebProWorld.com needs a function like that at ExpertExchange where you can say "Accepted Answer" when someone makes a comment that provides an acceptable answer to a question raised in a post.

The accepted answer came from Bill yesterday,
userid: LinksAndTraffic. Read the thread to see the whole answer.

BTW Google couldn't care less about your meta keywords tag. It is there for other engines only.
The 1990's are over :)

Danno

[Peter (IMC)]

I thought that I had closed the issue a long time ago, it was simply a matter of being placed high in serps for many keywords, but getting low traffic.

The answer is that the amount of information given in the description tag was affecting my click-through-rate and causing it to be very low.

Regarding the comment about the link in webproworld.com causing a problem, it was a joke.The joke was that Google was monitoring the forum and dropped me to page three over the comment. I have lots and lots of keyword phrases on page one and two of Google consistently and have this site on page one in over 50 search engines (and that's just the English ones) and you don't get consistently high ranking in Google either without knowing what you are doing. So lighten up already and read the whole thread!

The fact that people keep commenting on these things, when it was clearly resolved after only one page of posts, shows that people don't even read the whole thread and take everything out of context.
The people who actually read the whole thread stopped commenting a long time ago.

WebProWorld.com needs a function like that at ExpertExchange where you can say "Accepted Answer" when someone makes a comment that provides an acceptable answer to a question raised in a post.

The accepted answer came from Bill yesterday,
userid: LinksAndTraffic. Read the thread to see
the whole answer.

BTW Google could care less about your meta keywords tag.

Danno

I don't know what kind of dictatorial regime you prefer to live in, but I like the openess of this forum where it is allowed to talk about something even after the issue has been resolved for you. You don't own this thread... :)

[danno]

I don't know what kind of dictatorial regime you prefer to live in, but I like the openess of this forum where it is allowed to talk about something even after the issue has been resolved for you. You don't own this thread... :)

I did not see your name in your profile so I will just assume it is Dick.

I meant, commenting on it as though it had not been resolved. I'm all for free-for-all forums.

Danno

[sirius77]

I see a lot of discussion regarding bad HTML and/or spammy practices such as keyword stuffing. However, if the site is a directory and therefore competing with Google it will almost certainly continue to be banned or suppressed using site-unique bias, even if cleaned up. You can spend lots of time and money playing this game. Gee, if we fix this will it work? If we fix that will it work? At the end of all of that, if it is still a directory, it will still be banned.

Google has their own directory (even though it has apparently not been updated since 2005!) They do not appear to care what kind of directory yours might be, how many inlinks you have, or what value your site might represent. The folks in their banning department are probably not the sharpest blades in the drawer and are not paid to make subtle value judgements.

See Kinderstart's experience: http://www.searchenginehonesty.com/kinderstart.html

[LinksAndTraffic]

I see a lot of discussion regarding bad HTML and/or spammy practices such as keyword stuffing. However, if the site is a directory and therefore competing with Google it will almost certainly continue to be banned or suppressed using site-unique bias, even if cleaned up. You can spend lots of time and money playing this game. Gee, if we fix this will it work? If we fix that will it work? At the end of all of that, if it is still a directory, it will still be banned.

Google has their own directory (even though it has apparently not been updated since 2005!) They do not appear to care what kind of directory yours might be, how many inlinks you have, or what value your site might represent. The folks in their banning department are probably not the sharpest blades in the drawer and are not paid to make subtle value judgements.

See Kinderstart's experience: http://www.searchenginehonesty.com/kinderstart.html


If you are going to profess search engine "honesty," then please include "honesty" in your posts!

I am not looking to promote my directory, because it is not yet working 100% the way I want it to, BUT if it is "honest" that google bans directories, then why does google have 536 of my "directory" pages indexed????
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.web-comet.com

Dude, please. "Honesty" means that you check your facts before you go running your mouth.

[sirius77]

LinksAndTraffic: The fact that Google hasen't banned you YET does not mean that they will not eventually ban you. All it takes is some competitor complaining via Google's "Help us improve" form to nominate you for deletion. The fact that some of your pages are indexed does not mean that Google is not currently or will not eventually use site-unique bias to reduce the rank of your site to the point that it might as well be deleted.

The people that run the "honesty" site, http://www.searchenginehonesty.com/ have performed some studies that convincingly show that Google does indeed ban directories just because they are directories. The Kinderstart site is a convincing demonstration that Google does indeed use site-unique bias. The studies clearly state how the study was done and how the conclusions were reached. The studies are repeatable. That is, you could do the study yourself.

The problem is that people can spend a great deal of time and money building a site only to find it banned or suppressed by Google and possibly even Yahoo and MSN (although the studies say that Google is much more likely to ban directories.) The obvious first thought is "Gee, I must have done something wrong. Maybe this or that feature of my site design triggered a spam trap." Google does everything possible to convince webmasters that they only ban sites for doing something wrong. (To apply for reinclusion you must now stipulate that you admit you did something wrong.) This leads to spending even more time and money trying to fix the problem. If the site was banned because it is a directory or otherwise seen as competition the "problem" is unfixable.

The studies indicate that directories are banned regardless of merit. There are unbanned directories out there that are absolutely pure spam. There are banned directories that clearly have more value for users than 99 percent of Google's unbanned results. Let's face it, an index of 10 billion web pages has a lot of garbage so it is not that difficult to build a good site. Google's spokesmen like Matt Cutts absolutely refuse to discuss this issue and hide behind the idea that disclosing reasons for banning a site could reveal trade secrets.

[activeco]

At a certain point, one would think that a keyword phrase that receives 55,000 to 100,000+ searches per month according to overture, would deliver a fair amount of traffic if you were placed at position #14/15 on page 2 of Google "above the fold".

1) Do you refer to quoted phrase?
I couldn't find imapia on the map before I quoted the 'driving directions and maps' phrase. Only then I got the site on position 26.

2) Numbers 7, 8, 9 & 10 , thus first page results get roughly 3% of click throughs each.
Even if we know that Google's traffic delivers 2.5x of the Yahoo searches, you can't expect getting more than 1%-1,5% of click throughs.
So let's say, from 200,000 monthly searches, getting 1.25% click throughs comes at slightly above 80 clicks daily.

[LinksAndTraffic]

Google's spokesmen like Matt Cutts absolutely refuse to discuss this issue and hide behind the idea that disclosing reasons for banning a site could reveal trade secrets.

No one comments on pending litigation, and Google is no exception. If you think Cutts should comment on it, then you are expecting way too much of the Google people.

I read your kinderstart case. While you might think it is convincing, I disagree. I don't think the case is at all convincing; rather, I think it is a fine example of another frivilous lawsuit.

Your case stated that Kinderstart is actually in the Google's cache. That is not evidence of a ban by Google of Kinderstart! I know this to be fact, because a friend of mine was actually banned from google for a while, and as my friend's site proved, if a site gets banned by google, none of the site's pages will be included in the google cache (site: related search).

Now, if you were to restate your argument and say that google has devalued the kinderstart directory, then you might have a pertinent argument.

We have all known for some time that Google does devalue directories, although not because they are competitors. Google does devalue directories, because they are basically link farms and not content-driven websites.

And who can really blame them?

As users, those of us who use Google for search do not want to be directed to a page full of links on a topic. Nope. We want to be directed to the pages that have the real content that helps us users learn what it is that we want to learn.

Am I upset that Google devalues directories in their search results? Certainly not. I do not want directory pages showing up in the Google SERPs.

If Google wants to keep me as a user of their search product, then they had better show me in their SERPs links to the pages that answer my questions, not links to pages that have links to sites that may or may not answer my specific questions.


What it all comes down to is this: Not kinderstart, not you, not even I have a "god-given right" to be on page one of the Google SERPs. We don't even have a right to expect to be in the top 1000 results of a Google search.

If we can get our sites into page one of the Google results, awesome, we will make some extra money. If we cannot get to page one or fifty of the Google results, then we need to find other ways to get traffic and buyers to our websites. It is not Google's responsibility to help us to make money. It is OUR responsibility to make money from our website.

Is kinderstart really a frivolous lawsuit? Certainly, it is. If the kinderstart case even stood a snowball's chance of winning, then brick-and-mortar could start suing their competitors on the grounds that their competitors had a better physical location for their business. "If I could only beat Wal-Mart in court and gain access to their physical location, then I could clean up in the marketplace!" What a novel concept... Shoot, for that matter, if my location is the thing that is killing my profits, why should I not sue my landlord for building his building in such a crappy location? Or perhaps, I will just sue the newspaper for not putting my advertisement in a place that will guarantee that people knock my doors down to buy my products.

A quality web directory has its place in the world, but it is not in the Google SERPs. A web directory is often a distraction when we are searching on the web, because we have to trust that the listing's owner (or the directory's manager) will always give an honest assessment of the website in the listing. We both know that will not happen.

I use google for my search, because if I want to find a page that is listed in the kinderstart directory, I want to go directly to that page -- not through a third-party -- and I want to get the information that Google promised that I would find on that page.

[sirius77]

LinksAndTraffic: Yes, I don't expect Google to comment on Kinderstart, per se. But they also refuse to comment on their practice of generally banning directories and other competing sites.

Google can use two methods for suppressing sites they don't like. One is called banning, and involves deleting the site from their index so it is physically impossible to find the site in a Google search. The other way is to alter the rank of a particular site ("site-unique bias") such that it is almost impossible to find in a search. The second method is used in the Kinderstart case. The study describes how this was determined. A third method, including only "supplemental" results and not actually indexing pages on a particular site, is used by Yahoo and possibly Google.

The merit of Kinderstart's lawsuit is up to the courts to decide. I think I said earlier that I don't think they have a very large chance of winning.

Google, pending court action, has a perfect right to ban directories or anyone they don't like for any reason. If they want they can suppress sites about Catholics or sites about Barney. They are doing one thing I think will probably turn out to be illegal: They are promoting their "PageRank" numbers listed on the toolbar and in their directory as being unbiased, mathmatically derived, merit factors when in some cases they are the result of a purely editorial decision (to ban the site or bias rank). This constitutes making an intentionally false statement about the site, aka defamation or libel.

My purpose in making the post was to warn people who have built or are thinking about building a directory or a site like a directory, not to expect any traffic from Google. Also keep in mind that Google can and does ban sites for totally arbitrary or anti-competitive reasons, not just because the site "did something wrong." If yours is such a site you are not welcome to submit a reinclusion request. Reinclusion requesters are required to stipulate to doing something wrong and having fixed it.