The post discusses how often certain ‘areas’ of the page, such as footers, switch-out links to better detect paid linking. Many sites have relegated paid linking to footers and other segments of the page that seem natural.

The ambiguity of whether or not a page’s content should be updated on a regular basis is touched on, but is left just as ambiguous as ever. I think it’s common sense: If you have a news page, it should change quite frequently. If you have a statistics page, it should change as often as stats are measured. If you have a resource/reference page, then it should be updated ONLY as often as authoritative information changes.

I’m, personally, delighted to see that ‘partial indexing of pages’ is being given serious focus, if only briefly.

We all know, and have for some time, that the more inter-related terms a page ranks well for gives it better ranking for these terms, across-the-board.

I do, however, find that what is discussed about ranking ceiling, traffic throttling, and the yo-yo effect has some solid basis – as opposed to just giving SERP watchers something to complain about.

Enjoy!

Chat Man

Now, the technology that spurred a whole new on-line political arena is open to the masses, for the most part.

I will ponder the following questions (you’re more than welcome to ponder with me!):

1. How long before spammers take advantage of this search technology?
2. Will this really give Google the edge it needs to maintain ‘top dog’ status?
3. How long will it be before others institute similar capabilities?
4. How long, really, will it be before this search method produces reliable, relevant results?
5. How is this advancement going to affect text searching? (sometimes I just want a song’s lyrics – not the artist, not the EBay page, just good ‘ol fashioned lyrics in text form. Will I still get the results I expect?)

Hmm… I wonder…

Chat Man

The simple fact of the matter is, Google ‘penalties’ are penalties for a reason. The reason Google imposes penalties is to keep their SERPs clean of web-negative sites, to offer a variety of relevant results to the end user, and to promote a ‘healthy web.’ Web-negative sites (malware/spam sites) and irrelevant results in Google SERPs will make people use another Search Engine – Why would Google give up their ‘bread and butter’ so easily?

One easy way to figure if your site is penalized is to review the ToS and highlight any terms that your sight may be violating, then fix to comply.

Just because your site doesn’t rank well, doesn’t mean you’re penalized; and this is important to keep in mind.

Speed, security, open source. How Google has put these three in-line with each other is a bit beyond me, but my limited test run with Chrome shows *significant* speed increases, so I can safely say that I’ll play with it a bit.

Hopefully, I’ll be able to write about it’s best, and worst, features. Although, the idea of a browser’s performance moving me to write is a bit, well… disconcerting. But those are the breaks, right?

Anyhoo, the point of my posting anything regarding a browser is because of two things: (1) It’s a Google product (Hello! If this thing hits big and I ignored it, I’d look a bit ’steewpid,’ to say the least.), and (2) Rendering concerns.

Google said:

Google Chrome uses the same open source rendering engine as Apple’s Safari browser (WebKit), so your landing pages and sites should appear in Google Chrome as they do in Apple Safari. The way users interact with ads and sites should be similar as well.

Ensuring that your site renders correctly in Safari is a good indicator that GChrome will navigate your site just fine, but I recommend trying it out to be sure. If GChrome takes off (and I’ve very little reason to believe that it won’t) and you haven’t prepared for it, you’ll only be cutting off your nose to spite your face, in essence.

Thanks for dropping by and please leave comments of any kind regarding GChrome – it should be interesting to watch unfold.

Chat Man

Even though G has made some significant steps toward indexing flash, there’s plenty of opinion that *depending* on flash content to be indexed may not be the best basket to put all your eggs in.

Add your thoughts to the conversation!

Points to consider noted by members are:

1 Know the causes of the drop in rankings. Don’t make the same mistake twice!

2 Domain age. A site with significant age may be better off cleaning as opposed to starting from scratch.

3 Site Size. Smaller sites are easier to move to a new domain; larger sites may pose a few challenges.

4 Consider the TLD extension.

I think server platforms could make a difference, too, but that’s just me. Do you think there are other factors to consider?

Post a comment with your thoughts!

Chat Man

Anyhoo, obvious sense is obvious sense. PageRank, and it’s weight in overall page ranking for specific queries, is near moot. (Okay, maybe ‘moot’ is a bit strong, but you get the picture, eh?) PageRank is a direct measurement of incoming links to your site and it’s pages, this is true, but it’s far more important to note that it is a weighted factor. A small site, heavily targeted on a niche phrase and supported by varying, relevant, original content can, very easily, dominate a SERP with a PR of 1; while a PR 4-5 site may not be able to achieve first, or second, page results on a moderately competitive term.

I like to track page rank for one reason and one reason alone: When PR shifts, it’s usually due to overall Google shifts, not just my site.

If PR jumps or shifts (on any site, not just your own), one could expect the SERPs to follow. But there’s no certainty in saying that a PR shift will affect your traffic, as noted by David Naylor’s personal experience.

Do the two have anything in common, or are the two strictly exclusive?

Data compilers may enjoy this next G-shift, as it appears to be multi-pronged.

As always, thanks for stopping by!

Chat Man