New Google Update 24th April

[chippyb]

Does that mean sites like go compare and money supermarket will lose out as they dont sell the product and forward you on to another site!?

 

[Aegean]

In some cases yes, I would expect that to be the case, however these are comparison sites and Google likes product and service comparisons, just like it likes product review sites.

So for example if you search for "greek holiday" the first two sites are direct bookers, namely thomas cook and thomson, whereas if you search for "greek holiday deals" the top two spots are taken up by what are essentially comparison sites, as that search requires a comparison, so its lastminute and dealchecker.

 

[dashu1]

All they do is earn commission from the product providers.

If you were Google would you not see that as an easy way to make a lot of money yourselves - by producing your own comparison engine, putting it at the top of the results, and taking the commission yourself?

 

[Adem]

I've seen a few of my sites drop but I'm waiting a couple of days before seeing what the exact damage is.

 

[Aegean]

All they do is earn commission from the product providers.

If you were Google would you not see that as an easy way to make a lot of money yourselves - by producing your own comparison engine, putting it at the top of the results, and taking the commission yourself?

Absolutely, and if you give it 6-9 months you will see that happening. At the moment Google is concerned with exact product or service searches, so shortly you will see much more Google-based services for things like 'flights to london' or 'flights to spain', which they are currently doing in the states and will do in the UK and Europe. It already does it for hotels and other things from the data from its own Google business centre data.

So you are right, the next step is comparisons from its own dataset.

 

[xstu74]

Only one site dropped a couple of places but this is due to sites bumped up, the rest have SO FAR made good gains. Ive checked the sites ive sold over the past few months and all have made good gains.

But this is defo multi phased so im not counting my chickens yet.

Seems Google has a new business plan (user quality my arse) looks more like its back fired for now

 

[addz123]

What I mean by "legitimate" is sites providing actual unique and relevant information, or if its a product search - sites that actually sell the product, etc. If you are simply forwarding people on to sites that sell the product your rankings will fall.

This is such bullshit.

Everything you say might have been true in 1999. But hello, it's 2012!

Most savvy people who want to buy something in retail will check what fits them and then compare prices online. The internet is turning into a comparison network where people can find the best deals, offers, reviews, prices, compare bonuses in the gaming industry, etc. I bought return tickets to France on a ski-trip for £25.

Look at the latest trends on the internet: groupon, voucher codes, late minute deals, price comparison sites.

People do not always want direct retailers. People want INFORMATION, which is precisely what 3rd party affiliate sites all offer. Yes some affiliate sites are low quality, but then they won't convert well or any make money, they will lose out to bigger affiliates who invest more, and they will show much more obvious signals to Google that they suck.

 

[Aegean]

You should read things more carefully.

That is exactly what I said, if you are looking for reviews, you'll get reviews. If your search calls for a comaprison, its comparison sites that will be displayed. If you search for products, you will get either the products displayed themselves or sites that sell the products.

Google's aim is to provide the user with the information they are looking for.

 

[addz123]

Having checked some of the top ranking sites for competitive terms in the gaming industry, they have tons of VERY HIGH quality links from completely irrelevant sits that has obviously been selling links on their sidebar.

Huge NASA site linking to online casinos and bingo sites in the sidebar? Is google so incapable of spotting this? Is this not link spam? I mean seriously, I don't know how Google can call this an anti webspam update when even the biggest brands are buying links.

This should be called "small affiliate sites and businesses" update, because they're really the only ones this update has affected.

 

[dazc]

This should be called "small affiliate sites and businesses" update, because they're really the only ones this update has affected.

Whenever there is a major update there are always people complaining but on this occasion I think there may be good reason.
Danny Sullivan isn't exactly well known for being a google critic but:
http://searchengineland.com/did-googles-search-results-get-better-or-worse-119469

I can't believe they didn't see all this junk in the sandbox before it was launched - or have things been patched so often that only a live update will show the real result - which in this case is quite awful?

 

[seemly]

Just a small add to this comment -

Google's aim is to provide the user with the information they are looking for.

- as quickly as possible.

 

[xstu74]

End Game - Google no more free lunches on us, you want to play in Google you pay "PPC"
Just my opinion but there a business with a search engine its all about the ching ching, Big fish on top little minnows pay to play.

Greed Greed

 

[murph]

I know lots of examples of big brands link buying who are stronger than ever after this update. I get the impression it's double standards more than ever. Clear up the Internet should read: make way for the real money spenders!!!

 

[djbw]

I've just searched for a product with 5400 local exacts and got a Nokta parking page for second place!

 

[xstu74]

25/04

So looks like it wasnt related to on page seo, more keyword spamming.

Cutts is clarifying that now somewhat infamous over-optimization statement.

“I think ‘over-optimization’ wasn’t the best description, because it blurred the distinction between white hat SEO and webspam. This change is targeted at webspam, not SEO, and we tried to make that fact more clear in the blog post,” Cutts told me.


26/04 On tweeter within the last few hours:

Matt Cutts‏@mattcutts - van Searchmetrics data is a weekly diff & includes a Panda data refresh, so sites going up/down mostly aren't due to algo update.

There was a further algo
Matt Cutts - yup, believe a Panda data refresh on 4/19. I don't think @rustybrick asked us about it; we sometimes wait for him to ask.

 

[addz123]

It was 100% related to buying links.

Any sites who haven't bought many links were untouched, where as any sites that had bought any significant amount of questionable links were slammed.

 

[xstu74]

It was 100% related to buying links.

Any sites who haven't bought many links were untouched, where as any sites that had bought any significant amount of questionable links were slammed.

I noticed a site in my niche that dominated the no.1 spot primary links based upon directories dropped a few spots which was a moment of happiness for me

 

[VSC]

It was 100% related to buying links.

Any sites who haven't bought many links were untouched, where as any sites that had bought any significant amount of questionable links were slammed.

Well that's not my personal experience - some sites infact the opposite

I have to go with the view that big G messed up on this update.

 

[dazc]

It was 100% related to buying links.

Any sites who haven't bought many links were untouched, where as any sites that had bought any significant amount of questionable links were slammed.

That's some kind of joke I'm not getting right?

 

[dazc]

I have to go with the view that big G messed up on this update.

No statements from Cutts saying how pleased they are with the result should equate to an imminent roll-back. I hope so anyway?