Dump my Google penalized site and start over or.. ?

[keyon]

I feel that it might be impossible to fix. Dump or start again?:

I went through all this about a year ago. And while most people back then advised me to wait it out (no penalties, just a huge drop in serps), instead I got impatient and started doing a lot of knee-jerk reaction stuff -- like changing domains, changing web hosts, redesigning the site, sending re-inclusion requests to Google. None of which did any good to fix the problem. So I put everything back the way it was and diverted my attention to other things. It's been 9 months, and the site is now back to where it was. Apparently you just can't rush these things.

[deepsand]

Certainly feels that way. I think Google's close to a federal lawsuit about monopoly and unfair business practices and they know it.

Has anyone noticed the curious fact that, regardless of the Google SE market share reported by others and/or for elsewhere in the world, the US figure claimed by Google itself has remained just shy of 70%?

70% is, off course, generally the threshold for triggering invocation of action under the Sherman Antitrust act.

[ozsubasi]

I've completed the feedback form but also requested a reconsideration via GWT. I've posted the reply I received as a thread starter:
http://www.webproworld.com/webmaster...ration-Request
but it seems to be saying that because my site hasn't been interfered with manually by the webspam people it doesn't qualify for a manual reconsideration.
I have a smaller sister site that hasn't been hit in the same way and one thing I have considered (if my main site doesn't recover) is moving the content over to that site.

[deepsand]

...the reply I received ... seems to be saying that because my site hasn't been interfered with manually by the webspam people it doesn't qualify for a manual reconsideration.

Precisely what I've been trying to get countless people to understand.

[ozsubasi]

If nothing else, perhaps the reply will help remove some of the apparent fear of asking for a reconsideration, i.e. that it could draw attention to a site that may not be welcomed. If in the first instance Google is checking whether or not a manual penalty has been attached, and if not is sending out replies such as this, then there would not seem to be anything to lose by doing it if someone suspects they may have been penalized. At least they will find out.

[deepsand]

If nothing else, perhaps the reply will help remove some of the apparent fear of asking for a reconsideration, i.e. that it could draw attention to a site that may not be welcomed. If in the first instance Google is checking whether or not a manual penalty has been attached, and if not is sending out replies such as this, then there would not seem to be anything to lose by doing it if someone suspects they may have been penalized. At least they will find out.

In the absence of affirmative evidence that they do no more than check to see if a manual action has already been taken, it cannot be concluded that that is always the case.

[ozsubasi]

In the absence of affirmative evidence that they do no more than check to see if a manual action has already been taken, it cannot be concluded that that is always the case.

You are of course correct that one reply does not constitute conclusive evidence. But it does say:
"We reviewed your site and found no manual actions by the webspam team that might affect your site's ranking in Google. There's no need to file a reconsideration request for your site, because any ranking issues you may be experiencing are not related to a manual action taken by the webspam team."
which to me is a clear statement that no manual actions means no reconsideration. However, I am sure others will have filed as well and perhaps we will learn of more (and maybe different) replies.

[keyon]

Don't get obsessed with all this. We can never understand completely the how and why of Google. Since there was no manual action, just let it go and focus on other components of your marketing strategy that don't have anything to do with organic search.

[deepsand]

You are of course correct that one reply does not constitute conclusive evidence. But it does say:
"We reviewed your site and found no manual actions by the webspam team that might affect your site's ranking in Google. There's no need to file a reconsideration request for your site, because any ranking issues you may be experiencing are not related to a manual action taken by the webspam team."
which to me is a clear statement that no manual actions means no reconsideration.

Which says nothing re. whether or not such request may yet result in further scrutiny which may draw a manual action.

[ozsubasi]

Which says nothing re. whether or not such request may yet result in further scrutiny which may draw a manual action.

Is there any evidence to suggest that it may?