Thanks for asking.
I've examined the three sites, both current, and pre-Florida. I've
compared them to published search engine guidelines.
eMarketingmag.com
-----------------
Without listed inbound links, or the few links to inside pages finding
404 errors, this is currently a single page website. One page. No
links out. While informative, it doesn't cover -every- aspect of
eMarketing. As a searcher, I'd be disappointed in this information as
the first search result for "emarketing". There's no place to "go from
there" except my own BACK button. It's not surprising the site is
having difficulty. It's only found past the 500th position (as a link)
in Yahoo, where it hasn't been specifically banned.
Prior to November, 2003, the site offered advice on link exchanges
that directly contravened both major search engine Guidelines. It was
heavily populated with links to "bad neighborhoods". Most PR was
vested by its own network of crosslinked sites.
StarMonitor.com
---------------
This is an affiliate site, well over 95% of its content copied
directly from the original product site. This, in the eyes of the
search engines, is certainly enough to be considered duplicate
content.
Prior to November, 2003, the site was linked with bad neighborhoods
(link exchanges). Most PR was vested by its own network of crosslinked
sites.
Actonvision.com
---------------
This is an Internet Marketing site, a subsite of Iconocast. Most pages
contain duplicate content. Some pages add Internet News, however, this
is also syndicated content. There's a fair amount of keyword stuffing
in the text content. There's "over optimization" in intersite link
text and keyword density. Its extensively crosslinked to the same
network of related sites. It recommends branding and ranking tactics
that are contrary to search engine guidelines.
Common Features
---------------
StarMonitor and Actonvision are linked to shadow domains. Common
content is used on all three sites, and is duplicated on
emarketingmagz.com.
Trends: Opinion and Observation
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Beginning with the Florida update, there's been a major change
effected in search engine optimization. It's no longer -just- a matter
of optimizing. Google has changed its algorithm to favor natural, or
organic sites, and now has become less favorable to sites employing
optimization strategies. It's not about finding different strategies
to optimize for Google. It's about NOT optimizing.
Observation of results and specific sites dropped from the index gives
a strong indication that Google has aggressively sought to identify
techniques that have been used to artificially inflate PageRank or
SERP positions. They have changed the algorithm(s) to deselect pages
which exhibit these characteristics. The search engines have placed a
number of characteristics, tactics, and strategies on a list of
unwelcome behaviors. They have warned webmasters that use of such
tactics can result in permanent exclusion from the index.
Search engines are also aggressively penalizing duplicate content. It
is of no help to users to find the same content several times in the
top five results. As a Researcher, a 'professional searcher' as it
were, it certainly aggravates me discover duplicate or affiliate
content at the top of the listings.
It has also been observed that both major search engines are
aggressively penalizing crosslinking between related domains and
sites, a strategy intended to artificially raise the importance of the
site. Buying and selling of links (and importance) is also on the list
of undesirable strategies.
Search Engine Optimization Targeted
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Google's Information for Webmaster SEO page outlines what Google
considers unethical behaviors by Search Engine Optimizers. Previous
pages on the sites you've asked me to evaluate have violated several
of the "Beware Of" Google considers to be in the realm of unethical.
Beware of SEO's that claim to guarantee rankings, or that claim a
"special relationship" with Google, or that claim to have a "priority
submit" to Google."
Information for Webmasters | SEO
://www.google.com/webmasters/seo.html
The current Actonvision site actually states that unethical networking
techniques are being used to achieve rankings.
http://www.actonvision.com/website_marketing/process.html
Google Webmaster Guidelines
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Make a site with a clear hierarchy and text links. Every page should
be reachable from at least one static text link.
-- Currently all sites are deficient in clear, easily defined
navigation.
Offer a site map to your users with links that point to the important
parts of your site. If the site map is larger than 100 or so links,
you may want to break the site map into separate pages.
-- Sites contain a limited number of duplicated content pages, without
a clear site map.
Create a useful, information-rich site and write pages that clearly
and accurately describe your content. Think about the words users
would type to find your pages, and make sure that your site actually
includes those words within it.
-- Sites seem to exist to promote a method of search engine
optimization that is now considered passe' and in fact, named in
several lists of "Don't's"
Quality Guidelines
------------------
"Avoid tricks intended to improve search engine rankings. A good rule
of thumb is whether you'd feel comfortable explaining what you've done
to a website that competes with you. Another useful test is to ask,
"Does this help my users? Would I do this if search engines didn't
exist?""
-- The sites evaluated exhibit keyword stuffing, duplicate content,
crosslinking.
Don't participate in link schemes designed to increase your site's
ranking or PageRank. In particular, avoid links to web spammers or
"bad neighborhoods" on the web as your own ranking may be affected
adversely by those links.
-- The sites are linked by, and crosslinked to a network of related
sites.
Quality Guidelines - Specific Recommendations
---------------------------------------------
Don't load pages with irrelevant words.
-- Eliminate keyword stuffing in any form. Use natural language,
written for humans, not the search engines.
Don't create multiple pages, subdomains, or domains with substantially
duplicate content.
-- Unlink all crosslinked sites. Do not use link exchange programs.
Avoid "doorway" pages created just for search engines, or other
"cookie cutter" approaches such as **affiliate programs with little or
no original content.**
-- Create original content to "sell" StarMonitor. The handling of
duplicate content has changed. One page (original page) is
displayed with "natural ranking". All others are devalued, and
are usually located at the very bottom of the SERPs.
Google Webmaster Guidelines
://www.google.com/webmasters/guidelines.html
Yahoo Webmaster Guidelines
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Unfortunately, not all web pages contain information that is valuable
to a user. Some pages are created deliberately to trick the search
engine into offering inappropriate, redundant or poor-quality search
results; this is often called "spam." Yahoo! does not want these pages
in the index."
-- Pages that have substantially the same content as other pages
-- Pages using methods to artificially inflate search engine ranking
-- Pages that give the search engine different content than what the
end-user sees
-- Excessively cross-linking sites to inflate a site's apparent
popularity
-- Multiple sites offering the same content
"This is one of those cases that the Penalty just does not go away."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, that appears to be the case. Undesirable practices have
been continued. At this point, it may well be considered a permanent
penalty. There's actually nothing in the Webmaster Guidelines that
gives much hope that such penalties are temporary.
"...Certain actions such as cloaking, writing text that can be seen by
search engines but not by users, or setting up pages/links with the
sole purpose of fooling search engines may result in **PERMANENT
REMOVAL** from our index..." (emphasis, mine).
It may well be that SEOs who promote practices contrary to published
guidelines would be treated more strictly than a site which might
accidentally employ such techniques. Search engines, after all, are
committed to user experience. It is widely agreed that search engines
have no obligation to index or list every website, and that the
list/no list and ranking decisions are at the sole discretion of the
individual search engine companies philosophies. If a site encourages
other sites to break the rules, it may warrant stricter penalties or
discipline.
Into the Future
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Webmasters who spend their energies upholding the **SPIRIT** of the
basic principles [Design Guidelines, Content Guidelines, Quality
Guidelines] listed above will provide a much better user experience
and subsequently enjoy better ranking than those who spend their time
looking for loopholes they can exploit."
You may wish to hold on to current domains for PPC efforts, however,
you need to clean up disfavored practices, such as offering ranking
through linkage, and mirror domains.
Given the current SEO environment, you might consider a future
strategy that emphasis content creation, rather than optimization. If
the domain names have been permanently banned, you would need to
completely disassociate all new ventures from them, including all
links, common servers, and IP blocks. Under the new order, one
comprehensive site will do better than smaller subsites. A site that
grows with new, original content daily will do better than a site that
remains the same size.
You might find Brett Tabke's "26 steps to 15k a Day" an interesting
read. While density or text optimization formulas quoted (in 2002) may
no longer be applicable, the general method of site building comes
highly recommended. A number of WebmasterWorld posts boast that sites
using these Guidelines have remained untouched by negative effects of
the updates over the past year, and many have noted increases in
traffic and position.
26 steps to 15k a Day
http://www.searchengineworld.com/misc/guide.htm
I hope you find this information helpful. If you have questions, I'll
be glad to clarify.
---larre |
