What I Don't Understand About Google

[Websitehandyman]

Well the are a lot of things I don't understand but here an example.

Two websites, Site A is dedicated to Widgets and has done for perhaps 10 years, Site B is a general blog been online for a few years.

Site B - has a page "how to value your widgets" just one page out of perhaps 10,000 on the site.

The phase "selling your widgets" gets ranked in google higher in Site B then Site A.

I see this all the time and although I can think my way into understanding why I still don't think that it's right in the sense that the Google customer would want to see A before B.

I'm sure it's a complete coincidence that site B carries Google Adsense Ads and Site A has no adverts.

 

[directmarketingadvice]

I still don't think that it's right in the sense that the Google customer would want to see A before B.

It depends on the quality of the content.

It could be that, in the 10 years it's existed, no-one has ever seen fit to link to site A because the content is crap. But site B is linked to by many people who see genuine value in the content it provides.

In which case, wouldn't I rather see the page on site B?

I'm sure it's a complete coincidence that site B carries Google Adsense Ads and Site A has no adverts.

Yes it is.

 

[terryuk]

Or Site B has inbound links to maybe 1k of it's 10k pages which would be a good indicator of a decent site eh, compared to site A which has few links to just one page.

It's hard to say without seeing

 

[fisicx]

The phase "selling your widgets" gets ranked in google higher in Site B then Site A.

Site B has 'selling your widgets' in the page title and site A doesn't.

 

[RedEvo]

Domain strength doing its thing?

d

 

[DannyApps]

Google is like being "cool" at school the more "friends" and "cooler" the friends the more you are perceived as "cooler." Except, cool is relevance for your content. Google is nothing short of a popularity contest.

 

[Websitehandyman]

You are all missing the point, it's nothing to do with Seo and everything to do with delivering the best content for the search.

How can showing one page which might only contain some spam and a link be better then delivering an establish site built for purpose.

Google's recommended SEO tactics simply encourage spam. The effect of which means that valid reputable companies have to buy Google adverts to get their foot in the door. Either that or pay people to do their spamming for them. Not all but some.

 

[RedEvo]

You are all missing the point, it's nothing to do with Seo and everything to do with delivering the best content for the search.

How can showing one page which might only contain some spam and a link be better then delivering an establish site built for purpose.

Because Google ranks pages not sites. If the blog page is regarded as a higher authority, for a variety of reasons, then bobs your uncle.

d

 

[fisicx]

It has everything to do with SEO in it's broadest definition. The page ticks all of googles boxes so ends up ranking higher. If site A isn't optimised for that exact phrase and site B is then it will win.

 

[terryuk]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmBjRgOBBmHcdF9LZUloSm9zTUlXMWh4WWZIVEJ4eGc

Anyone care to shed some light on that mumbo

 

[AndyOwl]

Here are a few suggestions:

1. Site A may have duplicate copies of the same page - only one will ever get considered.
2. Site A may have problems with canonical URLS (eg widgets.co.uk/ is not the same as widgets.co.uk, or for that matter widgets.co.uk/index.htm.
3. Above all, Google seems to value domain names highly (too highly, IMHO). So widgets.co.uk will score better than BasilBrushTrading.co.uk.

However, I share your frustration. The only long-term solution is to provide good content. Eventually, as Google's algorithms get better, quality will out!