Panda, - winners and big big losers

Log in to reply
C

Curious

Free Member
Jan 10, 2011
700
196
  • #4
    Patrick Altoft also did a post yesterday, interestingly he talks about a couple of voucher code site that were on the list that apparently havn't noticed much of a drop in traffic - http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/analysing-the-uk-panda-farmer-update/ if anyone wants to have a look.

    One of our sites took a beating middle of last month and not recovered, hit by the start of Panda perhaps.. :(
     
    Upvote 0
    OldWelshGuy

    OldWelshGuy

    Free Member
    • Jun 12, 2008
    15,879
    6,836
    South West Wales
    www.owgmarketing.co.uk
  • #6
    keep in mind that both Amit Singhal & matt cutts pretty much admitted that excessive advertising is a factor in the algorithm.

    Thnik about it.

    site #1 lots of duplicate content, lots of advertising

    site#2 lots of duplicate content, no advertising

    Which is more likely to be hit? Obviouslty the commercial site over the hobby site.

    Many Internet lmarketers,/SEO's get gready, they run their own sites to build links from etc, but they want to squeeze the life out of them by earning from the sites also. bad move IMO. better to have the appearance of many hooby sites linking out sites across the web, and all done for the love of the topic :D

    Money making sites, and link building sites need to be treated sepearately. Money making sites get treated as clients, while link building sites get treated as tools, and a good workman looks after his tools and would never put them at risk of damage by the elements.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: MASSEY and Curious
    Upvote 0
    C

    Curious

    Free Member
    Jan 10, 2011
    700
    196
  • #7
    Lets say for example though you had a little site like the above which was built to test crappy links and it had ads + affs, that you expected to be hit by panda, and it was, but on exactly the same day you had a genuine business website that got hit as well, biz site all good (imo) content, all original, no bad out links, no advertising..

    Totally different sites.. totally different links.. Both hit. It's confusing me!
     
    Upvote 0
    C

    crossdaz

  • #8
    Curious said:
    Lets say for example though you had a little site like the above which was built to test crappy links and it had ads + affs, that you expected to be hit by panda, and it was, but on exactly the same day you had a genuine business website that got hit as well, biz site all good (imo) content, all original, no bad out links, no advertising..

    Totally different sites.. totally different links.. Both hit. It's confusing me!
    Click to expand...

    There is a lot of dust in the air at the moment- it will take a while for every page to be crawled, re-crawled and re-indexed.
    I am seeing scenarios as you describe - certainly nothing like you'd expect. I'd give a couple of weeks and then re-evaluate. It's tempting to start meddling but looking at sites that are benefiting so far I'd say sit tight and wait for the aftershocks?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Curious
    Upvote 0
    C

    Curious

    Free Member
    Jan 10, 2011
    700
    196
  • #9
    Well we were looking at having a slightly different site anyway, so now I'm in two minds..

    We were going to move over to a cms to make adding new pages easier anyway. Think we'll move on with the new site, it'll be a while before we're finished, and give the original a chance to find its legs again..

    Such a horrible feeling though just not seeing yourself rank for anything! It wasn't a really high traffic site, but its funny not seeing a presence in the serps after so long being there.
     
    Upvote 0
    C

    Chunkford

  • #10
    Curious said:
    Lets say for example though you had a little site like the above which was built to test crappy links and it had ads + affs, that you expected to be hit by panda, and it was, but on exactly the same day you had a genuine business website that got hit as well, biz site all good (imo) content, all original, no bad out links, no advertising..

    Totally different sites.. totally different links.. Both hit. It's confusing me!
    Click to expand...

    Google has called this a high-quality sites algorithm.
    IMO as well as probably other factors mentioned before, Google defines quality as votes, as in this information has lots of votes must be of higher quality.
    So look at the site and see where the votes go.
    Basically every content page has to defend for itself now.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: George123 and Curious
    Upvote 0
    M

    MASSEY

  • #11
    Actually thinking about it i think i had a site hit by panada.

    It is an exact match for the term and sat comfortably on page one. I used it as a link whore and tested some advertising plugins amazon affiliate links etc. It fell to page four.

    I removed them all now though.
     
    Upvote 0
    C

    Curious

    Free Member
    Jan 10, 2011
    700
    196
  • #12
    Thanks for all the replies, very much appreciated guys.

    With regards to content I'm going to expand upon what we've got in the new site. But the content that exists, apart from the homepage which explains what we do so could be seen as promotional, all other pages are explaining systems on offer and the different properties of each. System A is this, and has a fire rating of x. but a sound rating of y etc. All good info, originally written and expressed..

    Take this as an excuse to expand and create further detail and more quality then.
     
    Upvote 0
    T

    trebor8

  • #14
    Chunkford said:
    IMO as well as probably other factors mentioned before, Google defines quality as votes, as in this information has lots of votes must be of higher quality.
    So look at the site and see where the votes go.
    Basically every content page has to defend for itself now.
    Click to expand...

    hasn't the algo just got better at assessing the bounce rate?

    BTW, why did they call it Panda?
     
    Upvote 0
    C

    Curious

    Free Member
    Jan 10, 2011
    700
    196
  • #15
    Sorry to post the same link again but it has been updated a bit at the bottom (http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/analysing-the-uk-panda-farmer-update/); they're saying that traffic of sites they've been using to compare, there doesn't seem to be a noticable difference in the traffic left and traffic that's gone - if it was bounce rate or anything related is does stand to reason that the traffic would be of different quality I suppose. Little piccy in there as well.

    Called Panda after one of the bods at G that headed it up. Read an article the other day that discussed the fact there are two panda's at G, so perhaps Big Panda (as it was apparently named internally) was a nickname used to differentiate between the two. Sorry, but can't for the life of me think where I read it.
     
    Last edited:
    Upvote 0
    C

    Chunkford

  • #16
    • Like
    Reactions: George123
    Upvote 0
    I, Brian

    I, Brian

    Free Member
    May 18, 2005
    1,964
    822
  • #17
    trebor8 said:
    Not sure if this already posted, but wow..some humongous hits

    http://blog.searchmetrics.com/us/2011/04/12/googles-panda-update-rolls-out-to-uk/
    Click to expand...

    I've just noticed, one of my websites is listed on the "biggest losers" list - and I can tell you for a fact we've not seen any significant fall in traffic from Panda - fairly steady, really. :)

    Day Number of visits
    01 Apr 2011 27978
    02 Apr 2011 22387
    03 Apr 2011 32915
    04 Apr 2011 25376
    05 Apr 2011 32708
    06 Apr 2011 26924
    07 Apr 2011 24480
    08 Apr 2011 21897
    09 Apr 2011 20350
    10 Apr 2011 23238
    11 Apr 2011 25598
    12 Apr 2011 22868
    13 Apr 2011 26891
    14 Apr 2011 27026

    I'm not sure what searchmetrics criteria is for "organic performance index", but either it's very cryptic, I've overlooked something, or they are talking bollox. :)
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Codefixer, OldWelshGuy and RadiusBPO
    Upvote 0
    I, Brian

    I, Brian

    Free Member
    May 18, 2005
    1,964
    822
  • #19
    The BBC covers this:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13091708

    and electricpig.co.uk is questioned about their massive "94%" drop in Google traffic, according to Searchmetrics.com.

    Response: they've lost about 0.5%

    It is obvious that Searchmetrics are completely making this up - they've compiled a very random set of words and tracked them, without adjusting the list according to whether anyone was actually searching for these words.

    I remember having a go at someone on UKBF a while back for doing exactly the same thing.

    So there's a lesson for everyone - compile a set of fake stats, get a few people to talk about it, and eventually you can con mainstream media into reporting what you say as true!!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Codefixer, MASSEY and RadiusBPO
    Upvote 0
    terryuk

    terryuk

    Free Member
    Jan 26, 2007
    1,760
    310
  • #23
    stephan42 said:
    Looking through that list of losers, its a little worrying that some of the major article submission websites have taken a big hits - ezinearticles.com -93,69%, buzzle.com -84,97%, and articlesbase.com -88,68%. Does this mean the end of article submission?
    Click to expand...

    Article/parasite submission will always be big, domain authority plays too much of a role. Just depends what way you look at it.
     
    Upvote 0
    Log in to reply

    Latest Articles

    Top Bottom
    Community
    Articles
    Menu