Domain Forum from Acorn Domains Amazon Affiliate Script

Today's Drop Dates are: 19-08-2014 or 26-08-2014   All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:54:53 PM.
Domain Sales Prices Services Offered Domain Drop Dates
Go Back   UK Domain Forum Acorn Domains > Website Design and Promotion > Search Engine Optimisation

Search Engine Optimisation Discuss Search Engine Optimisation

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 22-11-2008, 08:48:40 PM     #1 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 80
jrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant future

How Many IPs on a Class C

Over in a 'Contextual Advertising' thread the subject digressed and a question was posed as to how many sites are OK on the same IP/subnet.

In a video by Matt Cutts: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...60678227172395 he says that 5 is OK but with 2000 you might get dropped.

We have 400 but have used experts to create content that was very expensive to create, is highly ranked and well linked to from great sources - all of the links were voluntary without expecption - nothing paid, etc. We aimed to make really great content.

In the contextual thread another publisher had 5 sites and got dropped out of the index.

I am unsure about how many sites might be safe. On one side of the argument one could argue that if there are enough votes (links) then Google finds a trusted source of quality content. On the other one could argue that Google might be saying 'why is there a need for 400+ sites on one IP'.

I was going to get up to 1000 sites but to be honest I am worried and think we might stop where we are and concentrate on making what we have much better. Anyone have any thoughts?
jrowlinson is offline  
Old 22-11-2008, 09:20:14 PM     #2 (permalink)
rob
Founding Member
 
rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,058
rob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond repute

'experts' and content can cost alot but that is zero guidence on quality.

One thing I noted from clicking through on another thread and a google is you have alot of similar text ie. contact pages etc , so it might not just be hosting locations that cause issues.

It will not help with ease of scale, but why not treat them all as seperate sites or at very least smaller groupings.

You mentioned if google linked the lot then you would be out of the game, and to be honest that could happen tomorrow with the current setup IMHO.

It does seem higher than needed risk currently, but you are in a lucky position with resources and awareness to be proactive rather than reactive to any google-slap.

Google likes good 'proper' sites, you are creating lots of high quality MFA style sites. You need to convince google that is not the case, and stuff like the 400 on one ip , similar text and styles will not help that.

Not sure if this is better on the other thread, but its all related
__________________
Q&A's - value my website Q&A's - sell my website Wrexham News - wrexham news 6000 posts and founder member, but sig got mysteriously deleted... LOLZ
rob is offline  
Old 22-11-2008, 09:32:21 PM     #3 (permalink)

 
Skinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 3,723
Skinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond repute

An average shared server will have 300+, and a well built cluster will have 10,000+ (owned by different people).

I know servage has 10,000s that are all interlinked (porn) and not been de-indexed, I have a dozen or so on there.

I think minisites, and sites that offer no real benefit to the index, stuff like that may suffer, but real sites shouldnt have many problems.
__________________
Contact: Steven

Last edited by Skinner; 22-11-2008 at 09:37:52 PM.
Skinner is offline  
Old 22-11-2008, 10:13:52 PM     #4 (permalink)
rob
Founding Member
 
rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,058
rob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond repute

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skinner View Post
An average shared server will have 300+, and a well built cluster will have 10,000+ (owned by different people).

I know servage has 10,000s that are all interlinked (porn) and not been de-indexed, I have a dozen or so on there.

I think minisites, and sites that offer no real benefit to the index, stuff like that may suffer, but real sites shouldnt have many problems.
Agreed - Google has the tech to 'see' the difference between hosting companies and mini networks of sites.

This can be down to WHOIS records, site structures, repetative content etc etc.

The question is the difference between a MFA style site and a 'real' site, and the solution to that problem is google's product
rob is offline  
Old 23-11-2008, 01:16:27 AM     #5 (permalink)

 
Skinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 3,723
Skinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond reputeSkinner has a reputation beyond repute

I think Whois is the key here, they compare the whois to the sites and if they are very very similar and content is fodder they get the chop.
__________________
Contact: Steven
Skinner is offline  
Old 23-11-2008, 09:00:31 AM     #6 (permalink)

 
bensd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 4,710
bensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond reputebensd has a reputation beyond repute

Domain Trader Rating:
(100% / 102)
So if google has the tech to compare the whois - if you stuck up 100 interlink sites all on different servers would you still get penalised?
bensd is online now  
Old 23-11-2008, 09:35:09 AM     #7 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 80
jrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant futurejrowlinson has a brilliant future

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob View Post
The question is the difference between a MFA style site and a 'real' site, and the solution to that problem is google's product
I am sure that Google is fine with MFA sites - what about about.com which could be defined as a MFA site. I guess the issue is the quality threshold of the content.

In my case I think Google might also ask - why 1000 sites with 100 pages and not one site with 100,000 pages. My reason was to create 'expert' sites. The problem is that the Google algorithm might not think like me - as per that Matt Cutts video.
jrowlinson is offline  
Old 23-11-2008, 12:40:49 PM     #8 (permalink)

 
ratboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,449
ratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond repute

I am facing this problem at the moment. My issue if that I want to create local geo sites with useful information that people feel "ownership" of. Many others do the one URL/town but I want the actual town URL for mine. It's just a different way of doing it. However, I want to avoid being dumped my G.

My view is that the sites need to be different in many ways. Structure etc. I am planning on using a few different hosts (eggs in a few baskets etc). I won't be linking between them, and where I do I'll consider nofollow.

John, I like what you have done. And it's a similar project to mine in many respects. Like you say you have to ask why didn't you just spend your 400 x .co.uk on one mega generic... and your answer being that you want that "expert" status reflected in the URL. I think thats a very honest way of thinking. The issue I have found here is that it would be much easier to build inlinks to a one URL site, than one with 400, thats a 400 x dillution. maybe thats the issue, that our competitiors therefore have a 400 x advantage on votes... just a thought. Good job though, especially the girl in the sewing video. Wooow!
ratboy is offline  
Old 23-11-2008, 12:50:01 PM     #9 (permalink)
rob
Founding Member
 
rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,058
rob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond reputerob has a reputation beyond repute

Quote:
Originally Posted by ratboy View Post
My view is that the sites need to be different in many ways. Structure etc. I am planning on using a few different hosts (eggs in a few baskets etc). I won't be linking between them, and where I do I'll consider nofollow.
Good way of doing it, and juggling the WHOIS records help. I am sure Google does not break Nom's t&c's but somehow they know whats what on .uk as well

Quote:
Like you say you have to ask why didn't you just spend your 400 x .co.uk on one mega generic... and your answer being that you want that "expert" status reflected in the URL. I think thats a very honest way of thinking. The issue I have found here is that it would be much easier to build inlinks to a one URL site, than one with 400, thats a 400 x dillution.
Interesting point, however 400 x 5 = 2k and that wont get you far in mega generic style names.

It would be intersting to see how the two models would stand up, and at the end which would be preferable ie.

400 x mini sites with content
one 'information.co.uk' site with several hundred subdomains or the like.

As above no chance of getting info.co.uk or the like for four figures, but it could be worth a think as if you could migrate to such a setup you would instantly have a pile of sites to help you boost it.
__________________
Q&A's - value my website Q&A's - sell my website Wrexham News - wrexham news 6000 posts and founder member, but sig got mysteriously deleted... LOLZ
rob is offline  
Old 23-11-2008, 12:55:30 PM     #10 (permalink)

 
ratboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,449
ratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond reputeratboy has a reputation beyond repute

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob View Post
As above no chance of getting info.co.uk or the like for four figures, but it could be worth a think as if you could migrate to such a setup you would instantly have a pile of sites to help you boost it.
Remember the age effect too. Buying a 1997 name for example could jump you beyond the G MFA trigger.
ratboy is offline  
Closed Thread



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Domain Name Community Replies Last Post
3000 2nd class stamps Leeroy General Board 0 17-07-2008 05:05:58 PM
Network Solutions named in class action suit - TamilStar.com RSS Domain Name News 0 26-02-2008 01:59:02 PM
Network Solutions named in class action suit - VNUNet.com RSS Domain Name News 0 26-02-2008 12:59:04 PM
Class action suit launched against Registerfly, ICANN - Malaysia Sun RSS Domain Name News 0 28-03-2007 08:59:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:54:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
All content on Acorn Domains is member generated and is not moderated before posting. All content is viewed and used by you at your own risk and AD does not warrant the accuracy or reliability of any of the information. The views expressed are those of the individual contributors and not necessarily those of AD. Please contact us to report any issues or send a PM to "Admin".