Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Cutts Explains the Mess

__/ [ "Pet @ www.gymratz.co.uk ;¬)" ] on Wednesday 17 May 2006 14:02 \__

> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> I thought this would be of interest to some:
>> http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/indexing-timeline/
>> Very long post. Here is a snippet.
>> ,----[ Snippet ]
>> | Fair enough. Some people don't want to read the whole mind-numbingly
>> | long post while their eyes glaze over. For those people, my short
>> | summary would be two-fold. First, I believe the crawl/index team
>> | certainly has enough machines to do its job, and we definitely
>> | aren't dropping documents because we're "out of space."
>> `----
> I'm still of the opinion it's a money generating issue.
> After all, when lots of sites are getting dropped from high ranking
> SEO'd positions which provide zero revenue to Google are now having to
> resort to Adwords to regain their share of the business.

I very much doubt it. See comments below.

> This in turn is forcing UP the pricing for key phrases/words and those
> companies that have enjoyed top placings on KW's are now having to stump
> up even more to keep their places.

That reminds me of people who suggest that Microsoft designed their O/S to be
insecure only so that they can sell OneCare (equivocal to Wanker), which is
their new system protection service. It's that approach where you punish the
customer to extract more money out while s/h/it suffers.

> Lots more competition at the bottom leads to an increasing prices right
> up the ranks.
> Hell, I am bordering on signing up to a use their ppc services myself
> after being around for 7 years !!

That's almost as long as I have had content on the Web... but all was
Geocities garbage that never reached the SE's as far as I can tell.

> It's all too sinister if you ask me, but a great way of whooping up
> company profit ready for the big Shares sell-off !
> Or am I being a bit sceptical?

Conspiracy theory, I am inclined to think. *smile* But I can attest to this
experience. Neglect of the old indices is a degradation in terms of search
results. These are long-established ranks that have settled and are most
likely satisfying the users (surfer-side, that is). Change to that old
status-quo repels the users and gives them a reason to turn elsewhere.
Another conspiracy might defend the fact that more Webmasters get their
chance (15 minutes under the limelight), which makes them love Google.

Best wishes,


Roy S. Schestowitz      |    It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon
http://Schestowitz.com  |  SuSE GNU/Linux   ¦     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
  2:00pm  up 19 days 20:57,  8 users,  load average: 1.02, 0.69, 0.64
      http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index