McDar Experiment

[mcdar]

NOTICE:

I have been trying to stay consistant with the time frame I update the daily results for this experiment (for whatever it is worth).

However, I will be out of town tonight and tomorrow so tomorrow's update will be late.

If anyone see's a problem with this, please let me know and perhaps I can ask for a volunteer to post the update for tomorrow.

Thanks,
Caryl

[Foxy]

Hey thats not good enough!!! Hehe Just kidding - go have a good time things will wait

Bob, Alek, both well said - lets move on

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
****Google PR/Backlink update currently is in progress!

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's (no way of telling which are accounted for)
__________________
PR/Backlink info (so far) from the 64.233.161.xxx bank of datacenters

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's link(?)
__________________

[digitalpoint]

If you are tracking it in the keyword tracker, you should just post the chart it makes (under custom charts you can overlay multiple keywords on a single chart). See attachment for an example...

- Shawn

[mcdar]

Thanks Shawn, excellent idea! I edited and added the graph to todays update.

[Foxy]

I'm naming this group the Beatles

It just gets better - getting better all the time!

:)

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
****Google PR/Backlink update currently is in progress!

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's (no way of telling which are accounted for)
__________________
PR/Backlink info (so far) from the 64.233.161.xxx bank of datacenters

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's link(?)
__________________
Attached Thumbnails

__________________

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
****Google PR/Backlink update currently is in progress!

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's (no way of telling which are accounted for)
__________________
PR/Backlink info (so far) from the 64.233.161.xxx bank of datacenters

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's link(?)
__________________

__________________

[Foxy]

I see it's [G] picked up on one more link [PR4] lets see whether that is it or it picks up the next. I wonder if I should link from the one its picked up to the next - shall I wait a few days first? :)

[mcdar]

Hi Foxy,

I think we should just be patient. It is very good for folks to see that just because a link went up, does not mean that Google will find it right away. A lot depends on how deep the page is that it is listed on and how deep Google is crawling.

Even when Google finds the page with the link, nothing says that Google has followed the link and recorded the linked-to page (as seen by Alek's Link).

[Foxy]

Right - will keep my itchy fingers at bay :)

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
****Google PR/Backlink update currently is in progress!

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's (no way of telling which are accounted for)
__________________
PR/Backlink info (so far) from the 64.233.161.xxx bank of datacenters

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's link(?)
__________________

__________________

[Sorvoja]

Hi mcdar,

It was an interesting read.

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's (no way of telling which are accounted for)
__________________
PR/Backlink info (so far) from the 64.233.161.xxx bank of datacenters

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's link(?)
__________________

__________________

[leeds1]

How did you find the number of links changing each day - you list a datacentre but how do you use it?

thanks

[mcdar]

leeds1,

I am not reporting the number of links changing. I am reporting the fact that Google has cached the page the link is located on.

I use the Google Datacenter Watch Tool (link is my sig below) and search for the following...

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004 ...


__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all ...

note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004 ...

The reason I can search this way is that none of these sites have the words sleeping bags anywhere else accept in the link to this experimental page.

It is important to remember that nothing is stagnant in Google. Just because Google now reports 49 links to this page, does not actually mean that TODAY Google is actually counting or will continue to count ALL 49.

As new links are discovered, they will be taken into account and conversely, if links are lost, that will be taken into account and reflected in the serps on an on-going bases. Googles report of Backlinks will remain the same until the next update. Even though it will not be accurate.

Given that this is a controled experiment, we know exactly how many links there are to this page. Just how many links Google is ACTUALLY crediting this page with at any given moment, will most likely always remain an unknown.

[leeds1]

Do you do all of that manually ? or set up a little script ?

[mcdar]

I do it all manually. It really dosn't take that long.

[Foxy]

McDar I was just wondering if it would be of use to place an allintext column alongside the allinanchor in your tool as I was looking at the sleeping bags example on the tool this morning and I noticed that the number 1

1. sleepingbagsandtents.com

was number 1 for allinanchor but also no.1 for allintext but nowhere for all in url

yours is no.7 for allinanchor 7 for all in text and 2 in allinurl yet still not at number 7 in the order of things!

If we take Compars thoughts on onpage seo into account would it not be a good idea to have this column in place before any such action is taken? :)

[mcdar]

Hi Foxy,

Not so fast! Just because we have moved to #7 for allinanchor (and allintext), does not neccessarily mean we deserve to be in the top 10 results for this search.

I have taken the liberty of adding two columns to today's Keyword Tool results to help point out something I suspect to be true.

I believe that what "category" a site is in can add extra weight. You will see that the Manufacturers seem to have an advantage here.

Here is my challange: (to everyone - it is a good exercise in analysis) - Look at the attached table and tell us which site in the top ten, we have the best shot at replacing and why/how.

______________________
Bonus Question:
Look at the last two Manufacturers, Big Agnes and Wiggy's. Can you tell us why the PR5(Big Agnes) site has placed ahead of the PR6(Wiggy's) site?
______________________

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004 [/B]
137 - 4/30/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info (so far) from the 64.233.161.xxx bank of datacenters

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

__________________

[Foxy]

Not so fast! Just because we have moved to #7 for allinanchor (and allintext), does not neccessarily mean we deserve to be in the top 10 results for this search.

Oh yes you are :D

You certainly will be soon!

[mcdar]

Foxy,

I hope you read the whole post and are considering the table I put up. Placing high in allinanchor and allintext is NOT the only factor in determining placement!

In fact, the #9 position for allinanchor:sleeping bags (campstoves.net) is NOWHERE in the 775 regular search results returned for sleeping bags.

This is plain to see on the table.

Caryl

[compar]

Not so fast! Just because we have moved to #7 for allinanchor (and allintext), does not neccessarily mean we deserve to be in the top 10 results for this search.

Here is my challange: (to everyone - it is a good exercise in analysis) - Look at the attached table and tell us which site in the top ten, we have the best shot at replacing and why/how.
______________________
Bonus Question:
Look at the last two Manufacturers, Big Agnes and Wiggy's. Can you tell us why the PR5(Big Agnes) site has placed ahead of the PR6(Wiggy's) site?
______________________
Let me say I agree 100% with you. It is just way too simplistic to think that one parameter like allinanchor is all it takes to rank in the SERPs. There is another thread going on this forum that makes this equally simplistic suggestion
allinanchor allintext allintitle pagerank = Google SERPs (http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=455 ).

I think "relevance" is Google's most important measurement and they don't give us a tools to measure this. While I think anchor text and titles are important they are certainly not the whole answer.

As far a PR goes two of the top ten in your chart show PR0. I find this almost unbelievable, but that is what they show and they are in the top ten today????

Now to the questions.

1. I would say that the site we have the best shot at beating is #8, outdoorgear. The reason in order of importance are:
a. It is a UK domain showing up in a USA search.
b. We have a superior allinanchor rating.
c. It is showing PR0 at the moment -- very strange.

2. Big Agnes is placed ahead of Wiggy's because Google has a sexual bias in favor of woman :D The real reasons are:
a. Big Agnes has more backlinks.
b. Big Agnes has a better allinanchor rating.
c. This indicates one more time that PR is not a major determinant of SERP postion.

[Foxy]

I hope you read the whole post and are considering the table I put up. Placing high in allinanchor and allintext is NOT the only factor in determining placement!

In fact, the #9 position for allinanchor:sleeping bags (campstoves.net) is NOWHERE in the 775 regular search results returned for sleeping bags.

This is plain to see on the table.


I'm only winding you up!!! :D

Yes I did read the whole post, and what is more, I read the whole thread this morning [yes it is true all 28 pages and 278 posts] but I'm thinking on my response to your questions - gut feel tells me one way but I am considering..... :)

[mcdar]

...I think "relevance" is Google's most important measurement and they don't give us a tools to measure this. While I think anchor text and titles are important they are certainly not the whole answer.

As far a PR goes two of the top ten in your chart show PR0. I find this almost unbelievable, but that is what they show and they are in the top ten today????
Now to the questions.

1. I would say that the site we have the best shot at beating is #8, outdoorgear. The reason in order of importance are:
a. It is a UK domain showing up in a USA search.
b. We have a superior allinanchor rating.
c. It is showing PR0 at the moment -- very strange.

2. Big Agnes is placed ahead of Wiggy's because Google has a sexual bias in favor of woman The real reasons are:
a. Big Agnes has more backlinks.
b. Big Agnes has a better allinanchor rating.
c. This indicates one more time that PR is not a major determinant of SERP postion.
__________________
Bob Wakfer
Web Site Design, Hosting and SEO Services by Computer Partners


Bob,
I don't find it unbelievable at all. Look at the SIZE of those sites!
24,900, 4510 (not so big), and 2,300,000 pages respectively.

I think #8 is almost unmovable, at least by us. Forget PR as we both agree, it means little here.
They have 4510 pages to our 275.
They have 180 Backlinks to our 49.
They have 6060 "other links" to our 566.
We would most likely have to beat them soundly in one of those areas and that won't happen anytime soon.

IF, you eliminate the manufacturers, we are left with stiff competition on this page.

The best target I see is gear-zone. I will just have to find a way to quickly add about 1500 pages to my site or quickly add 100 more quality links.

...and to think that this keyword is rated moderately difficult.

I think this emphasizes the challanges that the small moms and pops face with regard to search engine placement.

You must find a way to GO BIG or stay home - just me rambling...

Don't get me wrong, I think we will still move ahead but the closer we get, the steeper the climb.

Caryl

[Foxy]

1. I would say that the site we have the best shot at beating is #8, outdoorgear. The reason in order of importance are:
a. It is a UK domain showing up in a USA search.
b. We have a superior allinanchor rating.
c. It is showing PR0 at the moment -- very strange.

2. Big Agnes is placed ahead of Wiggy's because Google has a sexual bias in favor of woman The real reasons are:
a. Big Agnes has more backlinks.
b. Big Agnes has a better allinanchor rating.
c. This indicates one more time that PR is not a major determinant of SERP postion.
__________________


My gut feel was 8 also but unlike Bob I hadn't considered the geophysics as there is another uk in the first 10 too, but my order is

a. The superior allinanchor rating
b. Superior allintext
c Superior allinurl

The second question was
a. Big Agnes has more backlinks
b. Big Agnes has a better allinanchor rating
c. Big Agnes has a better allintext rating

There it is :p

[Foxy]

I don't find it unbelievable at all. Look at the SIZE of those sites!
24,900, 4510 (not so big), and 2,300,000 pages respectively.

I don't think that size overshadows the smaller site - what I think it does is that it gets you there quicker Eg the forums [on that other thread] - they are up there immediately because of their size and because they are being spidered all the time - my guess will be that in due course they will disappear as the relevance is determined and the real pages will remain.

Because of the smaller size the smaller sites take longer to rise because they don't inherit the authority

[compar]

Bob,
I don't find it unbelievable at all. Look at the SIZE of those sites!
24,900, 4510 (not so big), and 2,300,000 pages respectively.
Caryl
What I find unbelievable is not that they are in the top ten. What I find unbelievable is that they have this number of links and have no PR. PR is calculated from linking pages. How can they have all those links and no PR??????

[mcdar]

Bob,

Now that you mention that, IT IS ODD!

How do you suppose that is?

Unless all of the links are on pages PR4 and above but the PR4 pages are NOT passing on PR value because there are TOO MANY other links on those same pages.

What do you think?

[edited to add]
I just clicked on the hyperlink in that table for sportsmans guide. Ironically, many of the pages included in the 387 backlinks are PR0 or PR2 internal pages of the site. But, indeed, looking at those pages, they have probably greater than 50 outgoing links on the page.

[Foxy]

They are

PR6 from Shawns tool

They have 39 backlinks

and 2050 pages in the url

[Arnica]

Because of the smaller size the smaller sites take longer to rise because they don't inherit the authority
I think you're spot on with the 'authority' factor being important. Although I'm not too sure it's solely to do with size. In my roughly parallel experiment my new domain places well in the allinanchor: results but nowhere in the SERPs. An 'old' domain totally unrelated to the new domain theme and with only 30 or so pages actually appears in the SERPs for that term because I have placed a link to the new domain on it. It would appear that G has some other hidden factors that define a site's quality/authority irrespective of theming (age, other quality links?). It's a grand old game SEO.

It would be interesting to see how a brand new domain would place in the SERPs for 'sleeping bags' with the same links and anchor text but without the 'authority' of Caryl's site behind it.

Mick

[mcdar]

Foxy,

What site are you referring to?
Also, on the tool, the main site is listed in the description, however, a mouse over will reveal the actual page returned in the results. So, it is the PR of the page returned in the results that is displayed NOT the PR for the main site and links pointing to THAT page that are reported.

[hulkster]

I'm a little confused by this also - there is only a handful of outbound links from www.komar.org (which is PR7) so you would think there would be SOME passing of PR ... or maybe the fact that there is too many inbound links negates that. Interestingly enough, another outbound link at http://www.powder2glass.com/Google_Toolbar_Compute/ doesn't have an PR either.

I guess I was thinking that if you had a limited number of outbound links, then your PR passing to them would be significant, but this suggests I need to clean up a bunch of the inbould links. It is puzzling that with all the links to the sleeping bags page, it has not acquired any page rank.

alek

P.S. A link I just added was to my Lunar Eclipse Pictures (http://www.komar.org/faq/lunar-eclipse/) so I'm curious to see how this does. BTW, the Adsense ads are quite the crack-up on that page - cheap real estate on the moon! ;-)

BTW, there is another lunar eclipse coming up next week that non-USA surfers may be able to see.

[Foxy]

Quite

But in my view the PR of the "site" [read 1st page] transfers an inherited "authority" to the pages in the site in general so you can see PR0 pages ranking 1 for search phrases.

[The site was outdoorgear]

[mcdar]

...

It would be interesting to see how a brand new domain would place in the SERPs for 'sleeping bags' with the same links and anchor text but without the 'authority' of Caryl's site behind it.

Mick

Hi Mick,

I have such a site already. I put it up in January. It has done sooo poooorly, I have just neglected it for now. I use PPC to get traffic to it.

It is small, only 60 pages, PR5, 9 Backlinks, 190 "other links".

It currently does NOT come up in the results for sleeping bags at all.

Your challange sounds interesting, but I don't know if this site is caught up in the "sand box" effect or not.

*Sand Box effect - There have been many reports by webmasters, on many forums, that new sites are NOT getting placement in the serps... Speculation is that Google is imposing some sort of "waiting period..." (a whole nuther topic).

Caryl

[mcdar]

Quite

But in my view the PR of the "site" [read 1st page] transfers an inherited "authority" to the pages in the site in general so you can see PR0 pages ranking 1 for search phrases.

[The site was outdoorgear]

Foxy,

I think there is merit to what you are saying. There sure seems to be evidence supporting it. BUT, only circumstantial evidence that most likely would be very hard, if not impossible to prove.

Any ideas from anyone as how to test for this?

Caryl

[hulkster]

Ummmmm ... waiting period, aka sandbox ...

Now if I worked at Google, that WOULD be a smart move, since I lose the "currency effect" (but I have the NEWS link to handle fast breaking stuff), but I gain by making it real difficult to relate cause-effect in SEO .. plus an argument could be made that if something is relevent, it will be relevent a week from now too (for non-breaking-news stuff at least).

alek

[mcdar]

...Now if I worked at Google, that WOULD be a smart move, since I lose the "currency effect" (but I have the NEWS link to handle fast breaking stuff), but I gain by making it real difficult to relate cause-effect in SEO .. plus an argument could be made that if something is relevent, it will be relevent a week from now too (for non-breaking-news stuff at least).

alek


Alek,

Which comments are you referring to?

[compar]

I guess I was thinking that if you had a limited number of outbound links, then your PR passing to them would be significant, but this suggests I need to clean up a bunch of the inbould links. It is puzzling that with all the links to the sleeping bags page, it has not acquired any page rank.

alek
If you are talking about the experimental page it has a PR5. Where did you get the idea it had PR0?

[compar]

Caryl,

How many visitors have you had from Google since the page started to rank in the top 30 pages? And have you made any sales?

In the end that is what this is all about.

[hulkster]

WRT sandbox comments: I must have been reading in another forum where they were talking about how Google might delay changes for some period of time to the SERP's.

WRT sleeping bag PR: Yea, I got confused - this is PR5. I'm still puzzled why no PR passed to the Google Compute Page, but then again, it's on the same IP, just different domain, so that may also have an impact.

WRT how many visitors/sales of sleeping bags have been made since the experiment started: GREAT question and one I've been meaning to ask - that IS the bottom line.

alek

[mcdar]

I'm a little confused by this also - there is only a handful of outbound links from www.komar.org (which is PR7) so you would think there would be SOME passing of PR ... or maybe the fact that there is too many inbound links negates that. Interestingly enough, another outbound link at http://www.powder2glass.com/Google_Toolbar_Compute/ doesn't have an PR either.


Alek,
Sorry I missed your post earlier!

I do think that the total number of links (internal and external) come into play here. I can think of no other reason why the link from your page is not showing up.

It's not so much that the page is not passing PR as it is, apparently, not even being counted. (as it does not appear in the backlinks reported by Google this last update)

[hulkster]

Alek,
Sorry I missed your post earlier!

I do think that the total number of links (internal and external) come into play here. I can think of no other reason why the link from your page is not showing up.

It's not so much that the page is not passing PR as it is, apparently, not even being counted. (as it does not appear in the backlinks reported by Google this last update)

Yea, I saw the "not reported" earlier and have thought about commenting - that's pretty bizzare ... since if you do a back link check on http://www.powder2glass.com/Google_Toolbar_Compute/ you WILL see the back link listed from www.komar.org

I added that just a few days before I did your sleeping bags link, so I wonder if there was some sort of cut-off for back-links that it just missed (?)

alek

[mcdar]

Alek,

The odd thing is, Foxy added links AFTER yours and the first one did get included in the update.

Caryl

[mcdar]

Here are the dismal results as has been requested.

Since the page went up, there have been 18 hits from Google for the search sleeping bags

There have been 231 hits to the page itself (probably most as a result of this thread)

Caryl

[hulkster]

Alek,

The odd thing is, Foxy added links AFTER yours and the first one did get included in the update.

Caryl


I have ZERO explanation for this - as I said earlier, I assure you there is no cloaking or other monkey business on the link - its just been a plain old HREF since the day I added it.

Is quite odd.

alek

[mcdar]

Alek,

I did note that the link is totally clean, some time ago, in this thread. It may very well have to do with it's position on your page.

I read a remark somewhere else in this forum about a "50 link/page" theory. I can't find it right now. Mayby Bob remembers something about it.

[edited] Found it! http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=396&highlight=50+links

Maximum Links per Page???

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have read in other forums that Google will not read or index more than 50 links per page. I was just mentioning this to a friend of mine and he asked, what upon reflection is, an obvious question.

Does the 50 link limit -- if that is accurate -- apply to both internal and external or is it only external. If it applies to internal links that would means site maps would have to be broken up into 50 link groups.
__________________
Bob Wakfer
Web Site Design, Hosting and SEO Services by Computer Partners


Although, this was discounted, immediatley in that thread- it may be a topic worth revisiting.

Would your link to the experiment page be counted if you moved it closer to the top of the page?

Would that be looked on as some kind of support for the "50 link theory"?

Idunno...

[hulkster]

Alek,

I did note that the link is totally clean, some time ago, in this thread. It may very well have to do with it's position on your page.


Thanx for the info on the 50-link thing - I'm pretty close to that. WRT "cleanness of link", yes, you did say that earlier and sorry if I came off overly defensive ... I'm just puzzled over it.

alek

[hulkster]

FYI FWIW Guys: I tidy'ed up the top-level www.komar.org page ... a little (it's still a mess) ... so the total number of HREF's is now 45 with the sleeping bag entry being #37. Just wanted to let you guys know since you are keeping track of things.

Note that we are at halfway point of my one-month "free PR7 link offer" in exchange for people taking a look (and hopefully considering/running) Google Compute (http://www.powder2glass.com/Google_Toolbar_Compute/) along with their Toolbar - as outlined on that page, it's a good cause ... and we just busted into the top-100 within Team Google (out of over 300,000).

So if mcdar wants me to move the location, change anchor text, add titles, etc. of that link, just let me know.

alek

[Foxy]

The Sandbox effect

When you register a site it immediately gets crawled by Freshbot [recently I had one that got to the top, with a "friendly" phrase, in 4 days and I thought that was quick - but I have topped that this week with one that did it in 12 hours!!!] which I believe sets the "tone/theme" of the site from the information it gives - It has a PR of 0. G has come back 5 times, 1/day, but I expect that now to stop [as it did on the other new site] until later when it gets crawled by other Gbots.

Now logic says that it is not possible for a site to have a huge number of supporting links from elsewhere when it is new, so logic also says that G is not going to be looking for those links [from those other robots] until later, and, as we know, it takes some time for the Robots to get around, perhaps this is intentional.

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

__________________

[mcdar]

FYI FWIW Guys: I tidy'ed up the top-level www.komar.org page ... a little (it's still a mess) ... so the total number of HREF's is now 45 with the sleeping bag entry being #37. Just wanted to let you guys know since you are keeping track of things.
...

Alek,

Thanks for the "heads up". I have noted the change on today's update. I think it is best that no other change is made, so if it now gets "recorded", that change is all we have to consider (on our end anyway).

I do hope that you can leave the link in place at least until the next PR/Backlink update so we will be able to see if your change made a difference.

Caryl

[compar]

Here is a new suggestion. I don't suggest we do it now.

But when we feel that all our present work has driven this page as far as it can, then a really easy thing to do would be for Foxy, Alek and me to all add 'sleeping bags' to our forum sig. That will immediately add 800 plus links.

It will be interesting because some people think that forum links were devalued either by Florida or since.

[Foxy]

Absolutely Bob :)

[mcdar]

Yes, I agree. It sounds like a good addition to the experiment, once the page has stabilized (what ever that means in Googlese).

Caryl

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

__________________

[Foxy]

I see finding my third link has made a big difference then!!!!

Hahaha!!

:D

[mcdar]

Hi Foxy,

Yes, (HaHa) actually today one more of yours was added and two more of Bob's, plus Alek has change his page so maybe that will make a difference with his link.

But, with all of that, we sunk 2 positions.

So...
1) Google really reacts a lot slower than we all imagin it does.

OR

2) We are at a point that even 3 (maybe 4) new links wasn't enough to push us past the "next hurdle"(read: sites ahead of us).

I'm betting on the first.

[Foxy]

I quite agree

Look at this one

Southampton Restaurant (http://www.canutecafe.com/)

Launched Monday 10am, in Google for "Canute Cafe" at No 4 at 10pm!

But look at the phrase "Southampton Restaurant" in your tool

No 173 today, but allinanchor No 1, only 1 page and PR0!!

Google does take time as in my comment on the Sandbox. :)

[leeds1]

Excellent stuff - some of my news links were accounted for in today's serps for my pages - about a week after adding them - don't know if they're all in.

Good news is that I am now #2 for allinanchor for business plan/plans and 1st on the second page for both phrases after being on 3rd page (google.co.uk) and up about 30 places in dotcom

I did also heavily reduce my KW density so dont know if links helped or density or both. Methinks that authority sites (could be big sites) and do what they almost want, but the little guys need to play a bit by the rules.

I'm thinking of adding a forum in the next couple of weeks to boost the size of my little site !

Stay tuned.

[mcdar]

leeds1,

Congratulations! It sounds like you are making great progress.

I agree, bigger IS better. I am currently looking into ways to increase the size of my site (significantly).

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

__________________

[compar]

Just a quick note on the additional links being reported from my InfoPool (http://infopool.compar.com). I have added 4 new articles in the last week. So these pages will not have any PR value until the next upgrade.

If they run true to form they will immediately become either PR4 or PR5.

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

__________________

[leeds1]

Thanks all for the encouragement.

My site went up again today. I'm #9 on .co.uk but steady on .com

[compar]

It looks like we may have started to plateau. What do you think?

Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs

Is it time to give it another nudge?

[bpal]

Maybe some other external links should be traded or gathered... ones that aren't given to you. That way, when the links used for the experiment are gone, your site doesn't plummet down the rankings... unless of course you want to see the results of the links going away without having many other links.

[mcdar]

bpal,

Of course I do not want to see the page plummet in the rankings. However, I think it is neccessary to keep everything very controlled for the sake of this experiment.

It has been my experience that I have little control over the links I ask for and received from other websites. Even when I give the code to copy and paste, they end up changing it. So, for now, we will stick to what can be controlled.

What we learn here can be applied to help many people. I read a lot of advice given on these forums that may or may not be accurate. In fact, some may actually be detrimental instead of benificial.

Since linking plays such an important role in search engine placement, and acquiring links can be such a tedious task, I for one, would like to know the most effective way to link.

If we can determine that links from sites, not "related" to the topic of our own site, are just as effective to get links from, that certainly opens the field of who to ask for links. It has been said on SEO forums that you actually get penalized for linking to non-related sites. I think we have evidence to dispute that claim.

The experiment is also showing evidence to dispute other "theories" being doled out these days as FACT. So, I think it is very important that we continue on the path we are currently on.

If others disagree, please speak up.

Caryl

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

__________________

[compar]

No one has answered my question. Have we plateaued? Should we go to plan B and have several of us add "sleeping bags" to their sig on this forum?

[mcdar]

It looks like we may have started to plateau. What do you think?

Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs

Is it time to give it another nudge?

Bob,

I'm not certain what we should do.

It seems like we are in virtually the same place we were with 4 less of your links, 2 less of Foxy's links, 2 links of mine missing, and Alek's link not counted!

Were you thinking about adding the "signature" links now?

[edited to add] Oooops, you replied while I was typing!

Caryl

[mcdar]

I do agree that it looks like we've plateaued, but the reason is obscure.

Any ideas?

[mcdar]

I just manually filled in the information for pages/sites 11 thru 17 so we could get a better idea of the players ahead of us.

What do you think (anyone)...

Maybe we should add the sig links at this point!

I looked into Hans' Amazon php program just to add some more pages (quick) to the site, but I am not on an Apache server so it won't work...

[Foxy]

Why don't I throw a bundle of PR4s at it first from all over - eg france, homes, delis, gifts etc and then we wait a week [or how long it takes to start showing the links] and then do the signature bit?
:)

PS goto your tool and type in "seoinc.com" and "search engine optimization" and look at the structure of the results!

[mcdar]

Foxy,

PS goto your tool and type in "seoinc.com" and "search engine optimization" and look at the structure of the results!


I have done that. What in particular are you referring to?
I see that they have beaten the competition, soundly, with Backlinks and Anchor text.

[Foxy]

Yeah I see

Just posted this

Got it in one!

But look at the triangle shape down [5400 down to 90] for Backlinks

and the 'A'
1
2
7
3
5
6
12

that is affected "only" by the Links

__________________

[mcdar]

my reply from the other thread...

Forget the last column (links)...

Look at how site size will nudge the placement.
Allinanchor:
1. 96 5400 1 2090
2. 1 2930 2 5810
3. 880 2840 7 10800
4. 120 228 3 4050
5. 82 207 5 345
6. 135 150 6 7370
7. 9630 90 12 35700
8. 634 174 10 1430
9. 72 4950 9 1250
10. 9120 780 15 12400

But look at positions 8 and 10. Allinanchor is the winner there. (but it could also be a "category" thing)

We should probably move this to one thread or the other... :D

[edited to add] positions 8 and 9 looks like a site size thing...

[leeds1]

Caryl,

This may seem an odd observation but your McDar links are in bold and sleeping bags is not - would this have any effect - I believe G likes bold text would this have any effect at all?

[leeds1]

and I've made it to grunt status - :)

[mcdar]

Sir Grunt leeds1, :p

Are you referring to the links in my signature?

[leeds1]

I was indeed referring to your sig links. Would bold make any difference - does a bold link make a difference on a web site ??

[compar]

I just manually filled in the information for pages/sites 11 thru 17 so we could get a better idea of the players ahead of us.

From that list I would say we should be in at least 11th place. The easiest thing to do would be for foxy alek and I to simply add sleeping bags to our sig and see what happens from there.

I think there are some response I haven't read yet. I'll do that and then comment again.

[compar]

I have no objection to foxy adding more links. How many are you thinks about adding foxy?

But the sig link thing would also test the impact of forum links. So I'm easy either way.

Leeds comment about bold linking text is interesting. I think bold and heading tags usually are only thought to effect the importance or relevance of on-page content. I have never heard of anyone saying that they effect the impact of anchor text. If anyone really thinks that might be an issue I could bold all my text links very easily. That's the power of doing it via server side includes.

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

__________________

[mcdar]

I have no objection to foxy adding more links. How many are you thinks about adding foxy?

But the sig link thing would also test the impact of forum links. So I'm easy either way.

Leeds comment about bold linking text is interesting. I think bold and heading tags usually are only thought to effect the importance or relevance of on-page content. I have never heard of anyone saying that they effect the impact of anchor text. If anyone really thinks that might be an issue I could bold all my text links very easily. That's the power of doing it via server side includes.

I agree that things seem to have stabled.

What step should we take next? The sig link addition should be picked up almost right away as Google spiders this forum several times a day. Foxy's additional links will most likely take a few days as they did previously.

I guess if we were to see any effect as a result of the sig links, it should be rather quick.

Foxy and Alek, where are you on these suggestions?

[mcdar]

I just did a search on Google for site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags and it returned 217 pages.

I have 173 posts with sleeping bags in my sig (193 total posts) and there are 35 pages in this thread. So, I do not know what Google is counting.

Perhaps, this search would help indicate whether or not G has picked up the additional sig links, once you guys have added them.

[compar]

I just did a search on Google for site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags and it returned 217 pages.

I have 173 posts with sleeping bags in my sig (193 total posts) and there are 35 pages in this thread. So, I do not know what Google is counting.
I think the term sleeping bags has been used in other threads on this forum in reference to the experiment and information in this thread in particular. So this may explain the extra incidences you found in your search.

Maybe we should PM foxy and Alek to coordinate this sig experiment. They don't seem to be seeing our last few posts yet.

[Bootleg]

I'm new to this forum but have been following this thread since it started. When I do a site search here +url of your signature Google only shows 7 pages. Questions I'm wondering about include: Is Google not spidering deep enough here to pick up all 35 pages of the thread, does Google return incomplete results on this type of search, is there a way to rephrase my search that will find more instances of your signature without just finding the phrase "Sleeping Bags" which is all over this site now thanks to you folks, or is something else happening here?

This is a great thread and I have lots of other thoughts and questions, but I'll just start with this.

[hulkster]

Maybe we should PM foxy and Aaek to coordinate this sig experiment. They don't seem to be seeing our last few posts yet.

We're just not as frequent readers of the forums! ;-)

It would be an interesting experiment, but I think I'll sit this one out. Another aspect will be when we DROP the links to see if that makes any difference. My experience with doing stuff out of my personal home page (http://www.komar.org/) has been a BIG initial jump upon addition, but then some sort of dampening affect when removed - be curious to see what difference it makes in this case when it's pulled. Note that I promised I'd leave it up for a month, but I'll extend that to the next PR update.
alek

[compar]

It would be an interesting experiment, but I think I'll sit this one out. alek
Ok foxy are you in or out? I'm ready to make the change just let me know if and when your going to do it. If we both do it it will add over 650 links in one shot.

[mcdar]

...Note that I promised I'd leave it up for a month, but I'll extend that to the next PR update.
alek


Alek,

We appreciate your participation in this experiment. You should not have to wait much longer to remove your link. If Google stays on course, the next PR/Backlink update should be the first part of next week (Monday will be 18 days from the start of the last update).

Thanks again,
Caryl

[mcdar]

Ok foxy are you in or out? I'm ready to make the change just let me know if and when your going to do it. If we both do it it will add over 650 links in one shot.

Bob,

If we make this addition soon enough, it might be in time to show up in the upcoming PR/Backlink update, which should be sometime early next week.

Caryl

P.S. - I have just added some Amazon products (affiliate stuff) to my site this morning. I am not sure at this time how many pages, if any, it will add to my site. I'm still working on it. Don't know if any of it will be spidered in time for the next update.

[hulkster]

Alek,

We appreciate your participation in this experiment. You should not have to wait much longer to remove your link. If Google stays on course, the next PR/Backlink update should be the first part of next week (Monday will be 18 days from the start of the last update).

Thanks again,
Caryl

No problem - I added the link at 0645 MDT on April 16th, 2004 (although it wasn't crawled until that night, so that is technically the starting point) and I won't remove it before then as promised. And as noted, I WILL leave it up until the next PR update stabilizes. I will let you know when it is removed and subsequently crawled.

I appreciate those folks who looked at the took at the Google Toolbar page (http://www.powder2glass.com/Google_Toolbar_Compute/) that describes the Folding@Home project and how you can help benefit research into cures for diseases.

alek

[Foxy]

Golly!!!

I'm here guys.........running all 20 stone of me!!!! [280pounds for you expats]

What I have noticed is that whenever the Serps have dropped about two days before some more back links have been added

eg for a period only 1 of my three showed then 2 and finally 3 but if you look 2 days before a "significant" movement in the position of the page you will "see" the uplift in the backlinks for not only mine more recently but compars further back.

So, in my view it is directly [and I mean directly with a two day lag] linked to the "finding" of the links.

There are two ways:

either I drop in a bundle of PR4s to match [50] Compars at 50 odd PR5s
or we use the blunderbuss approach with the signature

Your Call :D

[compar]

either I drop in a bundle of PR4s to match [50] Compars at 50 odd PR5s
or we use the blunderbuss approach with the signature

Your Call :D
Caryl and I both favour the sig route. So I'm prepared to add the link to my sig today. Are you in? PM so I don't miss your answer please.

[leeds1]

Two observations:

1) Was there any resolution on whether a bold link will help at all ?

2) As most of the links are in this thread - why not spread it out a bit - may be that's causing a hold on the links

I remember people saying that over 50 links then you're dust - maybe something on the forum thread or is it just the page (the latter probably)

leeds

[leeds1]

in fact - there are 28 links on the headers for each forum page - then the first is the first posters avatar link. At the end of my post above there are another 30 links (all the edits, post reply and sig links add up - so you're probably only pulling in a few posts per page)

spread it out...

[Foxy]

Signature changed :D

[compar]

Two observations:

1) Was there any resolution on whether a bold link will help at all ?

2) As most of the links are in this thread - why not spread it out a bit - may be that's causing a hold on the links

I remember people saying that over 50 links then you're dust - maybe something on the forum thread or is it just the page (the latter probably)

leeds

I said in response to your message that I didn't think it had any impact on anchor text. I've been hanging around forums for a long time and I've never heard anyone suggest that. So I would say no it has no impact.

The issue of 50 links -- and Google themselves suggest not more than 100 links per page -- is a per page issue. I don't think an entire thread is displayed on a single page. Check the URL as you move from page to page in this thread.

And most of the links are not in this thread Foxy and McDar and I have posted liberally all over the forum.

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

__________________

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15] ]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16] ]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[compar]

Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
It will be interesting to see what happens to the placement in the SERP in the next couple of days. This should absolutely establish whether or not sig links have any relevance or impact.

[mcdar]

Bob,

I predict that, if anything, the sig links should give us a boost in Allinanchor: placement. Wheather or not it is actually enough weight to give us a boost in the serps.

I will be totally surprised if we see no effect at all.

We should also keep in mind that Google should be getting ready to do another PR/Backlink update, as early as tomorrow! This may have a delaying effect on any changes as Google seems to "quiet" just before a change/update. I could be wrong.

Caryl

[leeds1]

I am waiting with anticipation. I think hundreds count but a few do not - but we'll all know for certain soon....

[mcdar]

I just noticed that when using the keyword tool, the total pages for my site seem to be an "old" result.

search [ site:wwwdomain.com ]

Maybe G is getting ready to rumble... (tomorrow will be 18 days exact, from the beginning of the last update.)

[leeds1]

I got third pages crawled and cached for 7th May - but not all of them - my site stats are up to date

[Foxy]

yeah Bob

By my reckoning, looking at the cycle in time terms it could be due for a placement change about now and another on the back of our new sig links in 7-8 days as I think the "updates" are done sort of weekly, in this case, and it takes two days to "Mexican Wave" [©FoxyWeb] the google datacentres :D

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16] ]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
__________________
Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[schlottke]

The forum posts definatly help on allinanchor, i've seen several results just off the keywords in my posts on this forum alone.

[Foxy]

I just noticed that when using the keyword tool, the total pages for my site seem to be an "old" result.

search [ site:wwwdomain.com ]

Maybe G is getting ready to rumble... (tomorrow will be 18 days exact, from the beginning of the last update.)

just thinking about it this morning made me remember that it was one year ago that google dumped internal back links, and six months after Florida

so are we in for another biggy? :eek:

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[compar]

1670 - 5/11/2004
I wonder where that number comes from? It is too high is it not?

I hope Google does a backlink and PR update soon. It would help clarify a few things.

[mcdar]

I know that seems high!! I think pages/posts are counted more than once...

I've cut out a portion of the results... (see attached)

Note: the "view single post"

[Foxy]

Do you want a few hundred + more from me? Instantly?

[mcdar]

Sure Foxy, what kind of links?

Let me know and I will note it in today's Update.

Caryl

[Foxy]

Posted in signature at seochat some 344 at the moment

[compar]

I know that seems high!! I think pages/posts are counted more than once...
Well I guess that's possible. Each post does have it's own individual URL.

Very interesting. If that is the case then I suspect we will see the numer go to aproximately 2,200 in another day or two. You and Foxy and I all have between 350 and 400 posts each on this forum. If you add those together and multiply by 2 you get the 2,200 number.

[compar]

I just checked again and Caryl you only have 208 posts at the moment. So I'll have to lower my forecast to 18,000 to 1,900 hundred.

[mcdar]

I have just added the following to today's Update...

__________________

Caryl (287) and Foxy (344) added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
__________________

and will continue to monitor that each day as well.

Caryl

[leeds1]

I have a puney 45 posts if you want those (although I may blow my character sig length !)

[Foxy]

About 3000 then!

[leeds1]

The other week I posed the question that not all forum links may be counted because of the estimated 50 link limit G has on a page.

I just had another count (as Ive just begun my vbulletin board so have seen all the links) and on DP's pages there are 53 links BEFORE any post is listed. (you know, links, search, all the tools, adwords........) Maybe there is a dampening effect here ?

Leeds

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
189 - 5/11/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[compar]

The other week I posed the question that not all forum links may be counted because of the estimated 50 link limit G has on a page.

Google's Webmaster Guidelines suggest that you limit links to 100 or less per page. So I personally can't believe that they would implement a policy of only reading 50 links while their guidelines suggest that anything up to 100 is permissible.

[mcdar]

I have a puney 45 posts if you want those (although I may blow my character sig length !)

leeds1,

Thank you very much for the offer.

I think that you may be on to something there when you mentioned in another post about the 50 link thing.

I would have guessed that the forum links would have had some effect at least on our Allinanchor: placement, but it seems to have had little effect. At least up to now.

I'm not sure what else we should do, at this point.

Caryl

[mcdar]

Google's Webmaster Guidelines suggest that you limit links to 100 or less per page. So I personally can't believe that they would implement a policy of only reading 50 links while there guidelines suggest that anything up to 100 is permissible.


Bob,

You would think that as logical. However, I can conceive of no other reason why Google did not count Aleks PR7 link as a backlink to the page.

That one still has me scratching my head! :confused:

(then again - with the 54 other links on his page the PR passed was diluted down to a PR1 per page - I think - maybe that was it)

[compar]

(then again - with the 54 other links on his page the PR passed was diluted down to a PR1 per page - I think - maybe that was it)
What makes you think this?

If you look at my Page Rank Calculation (http://www.compar.com/PR.htm) chart it suggests that a PR7 page with 50 links on it will pass PR5 with a single link.

While nobody knows for sure how PR is calculated most knowledgable observers have agreed that my chart is reasonably accurate.

It certainly seems from our experience that the impact of links, if they are going to have any impact at all, is almost immediate. However I don't think we can really make any final decision until after the next PR/backlink update.

[mcdar]

Bob,

I knew I would get that wrong! Thanks for clearing that up.

Yes, we will see if anything shows up in the update.

Caryl

[leeds1]

Is there a difference between a link passing Pr over and a link improving serps ?

Maybe if it's over 50 you get no Serps points but you still get a share of the PR ?

Unless there is some horrific delay in links being accounted for in SERPs I see no other reason .....

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
189 - 5/12/2004
194 - 5/13/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
189 - 5/12/2004
194 - 5/13/2004
195 - 5/14/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/13/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[mcdar]

__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/13/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
__________________



I find it very curious how Digital Point and SEO Chat forums seem to get spidered so differently!

:confused:

[compar]

Digital Point certainly is an aggressively spidered forum.

I'm also a member of the Internet Marketing Research forum. You might call it the home of the "links are king" school of thought. Their threads don't get spidered near as thoroughly as the information from this forum does. Or if they get spidered they don't show up in the backlink searches like the link from this forum.

Maybe it is the vBulletin software. Almost all the other forums are using phpBB. There was a lot of talk after Florida that Google was devaluing forum links. If there is any truth in that maybe they did it by devaluing links from phpBB sources.

In any case the members of this forum are getting a real bonus from the way that Google treats the links from here.

[mcdar]

Bob,

Both, Digital Point and SEO Chat are vBulletin forums!

[Rational]

First of all, let me just say that this must be one of the most interesting threads I've read (I found the thread by following a link posted by Bob Wakfer at IMR, by the way).

I saw that the sandbox theory came up in the discussion, and in relation to this, I have a question if that's okay. The theory has been that new domains are put in a sandbox, or some kind of quarentine, before they start ranking for their keywords.

At IMR today I read a post by John Scott where he said that new links were diluted, and would only gain effect after a certain time (his Bluefind Web Directory had triggered this filter by amassing a large number of links in a very short time from the same network, internet.com). I don't know if this is in addition to the sandbox theory, or a new theory.

Anyway, he gave two links to two different SERPS. One of a SERP with the filter (i.e. a normal search), and one without the filter (made possible by adding -ksjfdljflsjkdfj a large number of time after the search term). In a normal search the bluefind directory would be 200+ somewhere, but when searching with the -adjflsjdfksjfh (which word you use doesn't matter as long as it doesn't exist and is repeated a large number of times) bluefind showed up at #13.

I tried to do the same when searching for sleeping bags (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=sleeping+bags+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+&btnG=Search), and your site showed up as #4, Caryl. If John is right, this means that you currently have enough links to justify a #4 position, but that some of the effect of these links are held back because the links are relatively new. Do any of you involved in this very interesting experiment have any thoughts on this?

[hulkster]

Rational,

I've seen this thread at IMR (can't seem to find it now to review exactly what was said), but I think the idea was that the LINK itself is sandbox'ed, not neccessarily the page that it points to, even is that page itself is new. I think that is what you are saying, and may actually be a reason that the PR7 sleeping bags backlink from www.komar.org didn't seem to show up (?)

Another good example I can think of is the team powder2glass Google Compute page (http://www.powder2glass.com/Google_Toolbar_Compute/) which currently shows up on the 4th page if you do a Normal Google Search. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&q=google+compute&btnG=Search) However, it shows up on the 1st page if you do a "sandbox'ed" Google Search. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&q=google+compute+-dsa+-dsa+-dsa+-dsa+-dsa+-dsa+-dsa+-dsa&btnG=Search)

So while Google obviously "knows" about the page (and hasn't completely kicked it out of the normal SERP's), the links are less than 2 months old, so probably just now starting to kick in.

It may be that if the anchor text matches keywords for which the page is optimized for, Google sandboxes/devalues that link for some period of time, although that doesn't always seem consistant. Additional tweeks may be applied in the algorithm depending on the total number of links (from a specific domain and/or also everyone) to try to detect Google bombing ... although argueably a lotta keyword specific votes to a certain page does imply it is an authority in that area, although I can see a dampening factor applied.

Regardless, if I worked at Google, the whole N-U contest would be quite interesting to me and I'd be looking closely at the internals of the search algorithms to see how to improve and/or make sure it doesn't break - heck, what happens if a site has a MILLION links!

alek

[schlottke]

SEOChat, SEO-GUY, and DP all use the same excellent software. It spiders out of the box unlike most other forums because of the built in archive and holds its PR better.

[mcdar]

...I tried to do the same when searching for sleeping bags (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=sleeping+bags+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+-slfjsdhfkshfkshf+&btnG=Search), and your site showed up as #4, Caryl. If John is right, this means that you currently have enough links to justify a #4 position, but that some of the effect of these links are held back because the links are relatively new. Do any of you involved in this very interesting experiment have any thoughts on this?

Hello Rational,
Welcome to the Digital Point Forum!

Thanks for that information. I had not seen that "filter remover" before and it has certainly shown a new light on the sandbox theory pertaining to new links instead of just new websites!

What I find curious is that it does NOT seem to apply to ALL new links, as the experiment page has made great progress that could not have been accomplished without the "new" links (since all are new). But, perhaps, high PR links are diminished by this filter...

I still have to ponder this one :)

Caryl

[Rational]

I've seen this thread at IMR (can't seem to find it now to review exactly what was said), but I think the idea was that the LINK itself is sandbox'ed, not neccessarily the page that it points to, even is that page itself is new. I think that is what you are saying, and may actually be a reason that the PR7 sleeping bags backlink from www.komar.org didn't seem to show up (?)

Yes, this is how I interpreted John's theory as well. I am, however, as puzzeled as you are regarding why your PR7 link didn't show up. If we follow John's theory on the links' reduced power, it should still show up as a backlink (only with reduced power/effect). I don't think this particular page has been blocked from passing PR either... since other sites show it among their backlinks. Maybe it simply is a glitch in the way Google shows the backlinks?

It will definitely be very interesting to see what happens when you pull the link (if everything else remains stable and no other links are acquired during that period).

Here is what John said in relation to "links on probation" theory:
Google has a filter. It keeps certain pages from achieving top rankings on competitive keywords via use of anchor text. Links are put on "probation" and full power of those links go into effect only after a certain amount of time. It is a good measure on Google's part to prevent the abuse of their ranking algo.

...and here is a link to the thread on IMR:
http://www.internet-marketing-research.net/forums/ftopic7379-0-asc-40.html

I think this theory makes a lot of sense. If Google reduces the power of new links for a period, they will make the SERPs more stable (generally) and still be able to catch big movements on the internet. New sites with interest for the general public will still rise to the top, it will just take much more to move quickly up.

From a SEO perspective, it will be a question of whether it is beneficial to power one's way to the top, or be more patient.

Another good example I can think of is the team powder2glass Google Compute page which currently shows up on the 4th page if you do a Normal Google Search. However, it shows up on the 1st page if you do a "sandbox'ed" Google Search.

So while Google obviously "knows" about the page (and hasn't completely kicked it out of the normal SERP's), the links are less than 2 months old, so probably just now starting to kick in.


I am also experiencing this with a new site of mine. I put it up in the beginning of March, and acquired all my links during a period of 2-3 weeks. Google indexed the entire site very quickly, and I could find the site seaching for different phrases in the text... but I was nowhere to be found for my targeted search term (which is used as anchor text on close to 100% of the IBLs). All the pages linking to me were spidered very quickly as well, so Google knew about the links.

I haven't touched the site since then, and have not acquired any new links either. And now... suddenly, my site has started to rise quickly towards the top of the SERP. To my great delight, of course :)

It is difficult to say for sure why this is happening, but the way this has happened make me lean towards John's theory.

Maybe it is possible to say that conducting an unfiltered or sandboxed search, shows the current potential of a site (all inclusive, title, IBLs etc.), and that if nothing had changed the SERP of a normal search would move toward this state. In the real world links are lost, gained and sites re-written so it is impossible to say that this is how the SERP will look in the future... if the theory is right and this do show the current potential of a site, it sure gives a lot of new and interesting information though ...this is, however, all speculation and theories from my end... and that's why this experiment is so interesting. More knowledge! :)

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
189 - 5/12/2004
194 - 5/13/2004
195 - 5/14/2004
198 - 5/15/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004

__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[Rational]

Hi Caryl and thanks for the welcome! :)

I didn't see your post while writing the other one (was doing a lot of other things at the same time).

What I find curious is that it does NOT seem to apply to ALL new links, as the experiment page has made great progress that could not have been accomplished without the "new" links (since all are new). But, perhaps, high PR links are diminished by this filter...

I still have to ponder this one :)

Yes, I will be very interested in hearing your thoughts on this one when you've had time to think some more about it.

Can it be that the filter is applied on these new links, but that the sheer volume and the fact that they are as targeted as they are, still makes your site show up at #15? And... if all the links had had their full effect, you would have been at #4 already? I don't know.

[Rational]

...I just thought of something... there might be a way of testing John's theory without reducing the value of the current experiment. This can be done simply by taking a note of the site's position in the unfiltered SERP. And, when your site reaches #1 in this SERP, simply ensure that it stays there (i.e. add some links if someone else does any optimization that pushes you down).

Then, as time passes, the position in the unfiltered and filtered SERP should start to converge for your site.

The SERPs themselves will never converge, due to natural fluctuation in links and optimization, but the positions for one site can in theory.

[mcdar]

Rational,

At your suggestion, I have just added the following to today's Update and will continue to monitor this as well.

__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004

__________________

This is a fine contribution to the experiment and may go a long way in explaining the "glass ceiling" we have seemed to have hit. Time will tell... ;)

Thanks!
Caryl

[compar]

I read John's original post about the sandbox theory and the filtered search. I will admit that I was sketical. BTW a filter like that use right after Florida seemed to give you the pre Florida results, which would had nothing to do with the "newness" of links.

However, I intended to test John's search but have been too busy with a bunch of other things. Due to Rational's input I finally got around to testing it on a variety of pages I'm working with and it certainly seems like the theory is has some validity.

Caryl, could you offer this search as an option with your Keyword Analysis Tool?

I just added it to a search using your tool for a very new site I'm working on. The site does not currently show up in the top 200 spots, but with the filter it is #7. (see the attach copy of the results page) Also look at the allinanchor numbers. This search has ranked the sites in exact allinanchor order.

[mcdar]

Bob,
I will look into adding that search to the Keyword Analysis Tool this coming week, when I get some time.

Caryl

[mcdar]

I Just did a search for sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa on the Datacenter Watch Tool (link in sig below) and selected the Allin: search.

The top 10 were EXACTLY the same results for...

Regular results, Allintext results, and Allinanchor results!

The only place they differed was in Allinurl.

This is indeed curious :confused:

Caryl

[mcdar]

By the way...

I probably will NOT be able to post an Update tomorrow as I will be out of town until tomorrow evening.

Caryl

[greg]

wow this is a long thread.

Anyway, I've used your tool a time or two mcdar, seems to be a good tool.

PR would be nice as Bob suggested, why not talk to these guys and possibly partner in some way or see if they will let you pull page rank from them: http://www.webmasterbrain.com/proogle/

Also it would be nice as I think has been suggested(i am not reading all 41 pages) to maybe analyze the difference among search engines. which is something I thought digital point did at one time, but I can't find the tool anywhere.

[digitalpoint]

In regards to PageRank, I think the problem with pulling PageRank on a data center specific tool, is you are going to need to make a LOT of PageRank queries which would slow the whole thing down.

Up top, in the navigation bar there is a "Tools" menu. Mcdar's tool is available from there, but there is also a nice (and quick because I made it fast for them.. hehe) tool for viewing PageRank by keywords.

- Shawn

[compar]

Also it would be nice as I think has been suggested(i am not reading all 41 pages) to maybe analyze the difference among search engines. which is something I thought digital point did at one time, but I can't find the tool anywhere.
McDar has done a tool that looks at Google and Yahoo simultaneously. Here's the link http://www.mcdar.net/Q-Check/QuickCheck.asp

[greg]

well what do you know, guess that is what I get for always following links to his site rather than exploring the thing.

[hulkster]

... (misc. good comments, plus quote from John Scott at IRM)


Hulk say good comments/analysis by Puny Human Rational
Hulk look at normal and sandbox SERP results for "stable" sites.
Hulk notice they seem pretty similar.
Hulk like the "predict future" idea ... IF all else equal/stable.

Hulk also say John Scott (JS) at IMR one smart Puny Human!

[Rational]

Rational,

At your suggestion, I have just added the following to today's Update and will continue to monitor this as well.

[...]

This is a fine contribution to the experiment and may go a long way in explaining the "glass ceiling" we have seemed to have hit. Time will tell... ;)

I will most eagerly read this thread every morning to see what we learn as they days pass by! :)



Also look at the allinanchor numbers. This search has ranked the sites in exact allinanchor order.

The top 10 were EXACTLY the same results for...

Regular results, Allintext results, and Allinanchor results!

I have done a few tests today as well, and it is a striking similarity between the allinanchor SERP and the filtered SERP. This might be due to the fact that we are looking at some rather competitive search terms though...

When doing the test on some less competitive search terms (400.000 results in the normal/filtered SERP and 10.000 for allinachor) the similarity of the SERP for allinanchor and the unfiltered SERP is reduced to a much lower level.

I think, however, that this is a good thing for the experiment/analysis, as it sort of confirms Google's emphasis on links for competitive search terms.

Something else one could look at in an attempt to verify the validity of John's theory, is whether the normal SERP is more aligned or less aligned with the allinanchor SERP than the unfiltered SERP. If the unfiltered SERP generally is more aligned, then that would be an argument in favor of John's theory.

Why is this an argument in favor of John's theory? I here assume that Google quickly is factoring in the on-page elements in the normal filtered results (but not the links), and that the links are quickly factored into the allinanchor results, so if both links and on-page elements are quickly factored into the unfiltered results this SERP should be more aligned with the allinanchor SERP than the filtered SERP.

In other words, new links should quickly result in a change of the allinanchor SERP and the unfiltered SERP, while the normal/filtered SERP would lag behind, so to speak.

Anyway, after these speculations, I'd like to mention something about John's Bluefind which I checked while writing this. The quote from John was made April 25th; at that point Bluefind was #213 +/- in the normal/filtered SERP and in #13 in the unfiltered SERP. I have no idea where it was in the allinanchor SERP for "web directory", as he didn't say anything about that.

When I checked this now, Bluefind is #16 in the unfiltered SERP, #20 in the filtered SERP and #29 in the allinanchor SERP.

It is too bad we lack the information from the days in between, but the position in the normal/filtered SERP is now very close to the one in the unfiltered SERP. The strange thing is the discrepancy between the unfiltered SERP and the allinanchor... This is a very competitive search term, so I would have thought that they would be more aligned.

It might be due to what was mentioned here earlier... maybe the allinanchor results are fetched from another index, and that this index isn't completely up to date right now... (John has been acquiring a huge number of links since launching the web directory; according to Yahoo he has 571.000 backlinks... and 17.400 according to Google...) ...or it could be something else... any ideas?

If his own theory is right, this is one tough SERP, as he'll need even more backlinks to move further up.

[Rational]

Hulk say good comments/analysis by Puny Human Rational
Hulk look at normal and sandbox SERP results for "stable" sites.
Hulk notice they seem pretty similar.
Hulk like the "predict future" idea ... IF all else equal/stable.

Hulk also say John Scott (JS) at IMR one smart Puny Human!


Hehe... :)

Rational think Hulk funny, green and observant. Stable sites very interesting, and make good argument for theory. :)

[Foxy]

Hi guys - thought you had lost me?

Tough - No

I've been away doing some manual work cleaning up a garden for the BBQ

Which brings me to my parallel-ish experiment.

Remember I said that I had that bet on for champagne involving weber bbqs (http://www.growlers-sausages.com/weber_bbqs.htm) well what I did was to use my normal on page techniques and then blast it with forum sigs as well as others.

Remember the site is almost non existant [18 pages] is about sausages - it ....well you can see!

Now DP got to two + in quick time as did the other to 4+5 ish and the world [all two searchs a day]must have thought that this forum was about selling BBQs - especially when you look at Hulks site signature, and I predicted that they would do so because of their size, authority if you like, and that my little page would eventually get there but would have to be patient.

My reasoning was based on two factors

1. Size is important - with a continuing proportional growth rate. This gives the authority and continous refreshing of the site that G likes.

2. It is not logical for a site to have 1000s of relevant links at a start up unless 1. applies - this is not "sandboxing" by G but I would guess that they would test 1. against 2. over a period which I suppose is a variant of Sandboxing. So I add pages every now and then that are relevant with the link from here going to that page, as above.

So what has happened

Well I started nowhere, of course, and quickly came down to 30 ish and then down to 18 and now it has drifted to 35 - I think because I have not added new content for a couple of weeks.

But I did start a thread Weber BBQs when I introduced the last new page and it got to the premier position for DP.

I did keep a check on its position for allinurl etc and also for the the "sandbox" theory by the same method as rational put forward [sorry guys didn't think to say so - well done rational , welcome to the forum] and, [for the sake of a direct comparison the same search add ons to McDar] I have the search phrase here

weber bbqs -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa

with the results showing the second page in the No1 position - showing the importance of allinurl and the index page in the no2 with DP in 3rd showing the importance of "Title" and 4 showing the "content" element.

Now there is only one other "thing" that I do that is different and that is anchor linking from my own third party eg site one anchors to a relevant site 2 which anchors to relevant site 3 which anchors back to site one and site 2 and 3 have an increasing authority which I believe that will eventually detemine the No1 position and I was going to suggest that we "do" this tactic when we got closer.
:)

[Foxy]

I also meant to add that in a similar play around with a well established site that got knocked at Austin but that has 200 odd pages, that sat at number 1 for years before for "ski france", I recently changed [end of season experiment] its first text to H2 from H1 and it dropped 10 positions with immediate effect from 8 to 18 -23 so I changed it back and - on Mcdars datacentres it is back to 10. It is 4+5 for all in anchor. I also dropped it out of my signature here - and I haven't put it back yet.

But if you do a

ski france -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa

you will find us at Number 4.

ski france (http://www.ski-france-ok.com/)

which does query the "sandbox" theory a tad! :)

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Postion #27 allinanchor: #5 - 05/16/2004 [11 datacenters #31] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/16/2004 (All datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
189 - 5/12/2004
194 - 5/13/2004
195 - 5/14/2004
198 - 5/15/2004
204 - 5/16/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
3100 - 5/16/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004[/B]
108 - 5/16/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[compar]

Postion #27 allinanchor: #5 - 05/16/2004 [11 datacenters #31] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
I personally don't see anything significant in this backward movement. I'm tracking another two or three sites with keyword ranking in the 20s to 40s range and they will move backwards and forward 10 to 15 places on any given day.

I don't understand what causes this instability in Google's results, but my experience is that it is pretty standard. In fact I've been some what amazed at how consistent the sleeping bags results have been. I mentioned to Caryl just the other day that we should be prepared for a set back.

What I'm trying to say is that I think that we have learned a lot from this experiment. I hope everyone won't run off with a lot of wild speculatiom due to this one set back in results and un do everything we have learned.

[Foxy]

I tend to agree in fact this "mexican wave" as I term it I have noticed for some time and seems to precede an update which, as we know is due.

Equally I would be surprised if anybody took a conclusion otherwise as the ramblings above by me support the same. :)

[leeds1]

I read the thread but I think confused :confused:

The term I am following the most I am #9 (in uk) when I do the -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa I am #1

The guy at #1 in standard serps moves to #11

What does it all mean ?

Are there some links coming on board that'll mean I'll be #1 soon - hope so :D

[compar]

Leeds1,

I'm not sure why you are confused. It seems to me the theory has been discussed very thoroughly. The suggestion is that Google doesn't give new links their full value for some probationary time period. There may be all kinds of reasons for this.

The suggestion is that if you search using all the '-nonesense' terms in the search term you can defeat this filter or link damping effect. The results of this search then are assumed to be where your page would rank in the SERPs if all your links were given full value today.

So to answer you specific question, if this theory is correct then it looks like your site will be moving up. And it would seem to suggest that the site that is #1 today, must not have any new links coming on line and so he is going to get surpassed by several sites.

[leeds1]

Thanks Bob

Great clarity - let's hope this is the case - I'll let you all know.

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Postion #27 allinanchor: #5 - 05/16/2004 [11 datacenters #31]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Postion #28 allinanchor: #5 - 05/17/2004 [5 datacenters #33] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 6 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/16/2004 (All datacenters)
53 - 5/17/2004 (All datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
189 - 5/12/2004
194 - 5/13/2004
195 - 5/14/2004
198 - 5/15/2004
204 - 5/16/2004
205 - 5/17/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
3100 - 5/16/2004
3350 - 5/17/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004
108 - 5/16/2004
181 - 5/17/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[Foxy]

I think that it is time [maybe wait for the "update"] to whack in some on page SEO eg H1 "sleeping bags" as first text

What do you think Bob, Caryl?

[compar]

I think that it is time [maybe wait for the "update"] to whack in some on page SEO eg H1 "sleeping bags" as first text

What do you think Bob, Caryl?
I've always thought the page could benefit from a couple of paragraphs about why this is the greatest place in the world to be buy sleeping bags. And of course this section should have a few headings using h1 and h2.

If we do this now it will distort the experiment. Untill we are really satisfied that we have driven it as far as we can with linking I don't think we should do anything.

The interesting question in all the sandbox discussion is nobody has speculated how long links get left in the sandbox. But if the '-das' search means anything it seems to indicate that this page will move to #3 based on the strength of what we have done. I'd like to leave it totally alone and see if this happens and over what time period.

[hulkster]

I think that it is time [maybe wait for the "update"] to whack in some on page SEO eg H1 "sleeping bags" as first text

What do you think Bob, Caryl?

The PR7 www.komar.org link has now been up for a month as I promised I would do on page 15 of this thread (http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=256&page=15&pp=10) - I added at 0645 MDT on April 16th, 2004 and it was spider'ed by Google that night.

However, I am willing to leave this up through the next Back Link update ... and will let folks know when it is pulled ... so that's one change that is coming - unknown if it will made any type of significant short-term disruption.

alek

[compar]

Alek,

I think it would be good if you could leave it up until the next upgrade, just so that we can see exactly how Google is showing it and using it. It may have been instrumental in driving the sleeping bags page to a higher PR. If that is the case we should see the result when you take it down. If you take it down now we will learn nothing.

So if you can hang in that will be good.

I sure wish Google would get on some regular PR/backlink reporting upgrade schedule.

[hulkster]

My wording may not have been entirely clear, but YES, I WILL leave it in until the next BL/PR update.

alek

[Foxy]

Sorry Alek I did not include to ask you what you thought about the H1 idea

My sincere apologies :o

I think that holding your valuable PR7 till the next update after this one would be very beneficial

So what does the McCompalekfoxy team think? [I will use that phrase in the future] :D

[Rational]

Thanks for the welcome a few days ago, foxyweb :)

I've re-read part of this thread, and something Bob said made me start thinking about something. For the purpose of my coming speculation, let's assume that the sandbox theory regarding the new links is correct and that we can see the unfiltered SERP by using the "-dsa" search.

When Google implemented this dampening effect into its algorithm, what would have happened if they at that point not only applied it to all new links acquired after the implementation but also for those acquired some time back? Let's say 6 or 18 months back... This would, as far as I can see it, have resulted in the following:

1) A major shakeup of the SERP (Florida?)
Particularly sites that had optimized for Google by way of IBL after Google's cut date would fall deep down into the SERP. This would in large effect mean sites SEO'd for the famous money-words.

2) We would be able to find pre-Florida results by using the "-dsa" search

BTW a filter like that use right after Florida seemed to give you the pre Florida results, which would had nothing to do with the "newness" of links.

Exactly, the filter removal search could only have worked if Google had applied the sandbox also on older links (how far back, I have no idea).

3) The old sites would start moving gradually up in the SERPs again.
...and this would seem to happen without any good explanation.

Florida has been declared a major failure, and the "normalization" we have seen in the SERPs over the last months have been assumed due to Google carefully amending the Florida-update. Maybe Google hasn't backed off but this is the very result of the Florida update?

Why did Google, if this theory has any hold, not only apply the filter on new links (acquired after the implementation), but also on links some time back? If they had either applied it on every single link or on every new link, the SERP would have been stable.

Google's reasoning may have been that this was a good opportunity to clean up the SERPs. After all, a large proportion of the sites that had been floating to the top of the SERPs during the last couple of years for the money words, had been SEO'd -- something Google views as an attack on their algorithm's integrity. By doing this, they would clean up for a while, and maybe discourage people from optimization.

This in addition to the fact that the dampening factor applied on new links will make the SERPs more stable from this day forth :) ...and that Google has more time to take down (i.e. discover) sites moving up due to their private IBL networks before they float to the top of the filtered SERPs. ...in Google's point of view, Florida may indeed have been a great success.

It will be very interesting to follow this experiment in the upcoming weeks.

[hulkster]

Sorry Alek I did not include to ask you what you thought about the H1 idea

My sincere apologies :o

I think that holding your valuable PR7 till the next update after this one would be very beneficial

So what does the McCompalekfoxy team think? [I will use that phrase in the future] :D


No need to apologize since I'm more a watcher than a participent in the experiment. Go team McCompFoxy! ;-)

alek

[Foxy]

what would have happened if they at that point not only applied it to all new links acquired after the implementation but also for those acquired some time back? Let's say 6 or 18 months back...

Well done Rational!! Why didn't I think of that one - it has been staring me in the face!!

The ski france site lost all its links in May 2003 - I ignored it - Florida did nothing to my positions, or links, but Austin did when I got hammered across the board only to come back after a month or two to similar positions corresponding with a return of links [all internal] at about the time of Austin and also now anchor links from elsewhere.

Which, I think corresponds with your rationale [sic] does it not?

BTW the H1 link that I changed to H2 and dropped 10 odd places for this site was changed back to H1 2 days ago and in some datacentres I am back to pos 8 or better. :)

[Foxy]

I've always thought the page could benefit from a couple of paragraphs about why this is the greatest place in the world to be buy sleeping bags. And of course this section should have a few headings using h1 and h2.

If we do this now it will distort the experiment. Untill we are really satisfied that we have driven it as far as we can with linking I don't think we should do anything.

The interesting question in all the sandbox discussion is nobody has speculated how long links get left in the sandbox. But if the '-das' search means anything it seems to indicate that this page will move to #3 based on the strength of what we have done. I'd like to leave it totally alone and see if this happens and over what time period.

Good thinking Bob - lets just stay put for the mo.

I think this experiment will prove the sandbox too!

[compar]

This in addition to the fact that the dampening factor applied on new links will make the SERPs more stable from this day forth :) ...and that Google has more time to take down (i.e. discover) sites moving up due to their private IBL networks before they float to the top of the filtered SERPs. ...in Google's point of view, Florida may indeed have been a great success.

It will be very interesting to follow this experiment in the upcoming weeks.
Rational,

All I can say is that is a very rational :) suggestion and explanation of what Forida was all about. So contrary to my statement that Florida had nothing to do with newness of links, it may of in fact had everything to do with newness of links.

Indeed, the next few weeks will be interesting.

[leeds1]

How do you explain the sudden drop in rankings for sleeping bags - it was quite consistent then - *bam* - down 10+ spaces

Normal flux or something else ?

ps -Foxy - you said about an H1 link - is this an H1 on your page linking back to the same page ?

ta

[Foxy]

ps -Foxy - you said about an H1 link - is this an H1 on your page linking back to the same page ?


No, this is taking the on page SEO one step higher - you will see where I refer to it above with the ski site in that I tested a theory that H2 was ranked in the algo for G higher than H1 [it doesn't as I dropped 10 places overnight!] - and makes the Title tag and H1 work together - which is logical afterall if that is what your page is about! :)

With regard to the drop - I refer to it as the "mexican wave" right now as it seems to occur just before the "dance" or, update in todays language, as the "dance" doesn't happen any more, and is a sudden drop off and then , normally recover just like a mexican wave and then after move on again upwards if that is what the signs are showing. :D

[mcdar]

Good thinking Bob - lets just stay put for the mo.

I think this experiment will prove the sandbox too!


I agree! I think the experiment has been focused on linking and anchor text so to start changing on-page factors would kind of blur the results.

I also think we have a chance to show some evidence regarding the "sandbox" effect.

Caryl

[mcdar]

How do you explain the sudden drop in rankings for sleeping bags - it was quite consistent then - *bam* - down 10+ spaces

Normal flux or something else ?

ps -Foxy - you said about an H1 link - is this an H1 on your page linking back to the same page ?

ta


Leeds1,

I don't know if this drop is isolated to our experimental page. I have read on another forum that a great many folks are reporting the same thing happening in the last couple of days.

Foxy may be right on, though. As you will be able to see in today's Update, the instability between datacenters looks like it did back on 4/18 (just a few days prior to the last BL/PR update.)

The "Drop in ranking" may have been obscured by our sudden lunge, but you will notice that just as the BL/PR update began, we moved up 10 places.

Caryl

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Postion #27 allinanchor: #5 - 05/16/2004 [11 datacenters #31]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Postion #28 allinanchor: #5 - 05/17/2004 [5 datacenters #33]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 6 DCs
Postion #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/18/2004 [2 DCs #25, 10 DCs #27, 4 DCs #29, 6 DCs #34] Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/16/2004 (All datacenters)
53 - 5/17/2004 (All datacenters)
56 - 5/18/2004 (All datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
3100 - 5/16/2004
3350 - 5/17/2004
3500 - 5/18/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004
108 - 5/16/2004
181 - 5/17/2004
230 - 5/18/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[Foxy]

It amazes me how slow seochat is to collect the back links!

BTW the "parallel" .....errr, not really, experiment with me BBQs has left me still where we were with G but Yahoo has me at 3 and 4!!!

Y is definitely quicker at getting a site up :)

[mcdar]

It amazes me how slow seochat is to collect the back links!

BTW the "parallel" .....errr, not really, experiment with me BBQs has left me still where we were with G but Yahoo has me at 3 and 4!!!

Y is definitely quicker at getting a site up :)

Yahoo grabed the experimental page and put it in the number 3 position.

But it must have been just a fling! This month, we are NOWHERE to be found for the search on Yahoo.

[hulkster]

BTW guys, I had an idea for a theming experiment if it interests you. I've noticed that FoxyWeb is targetting the keyphrase "weber bbqs" and actually has this forum thread (http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=481) ranking #2 for the term right now, even though there is argueably very little relevent "weber bbqs" content there.

Even though I'm a "BBQ guy" (note .signature!), I don't have any information anywhere on/underneath www.komar.org/bbq/ that is weber related - in fact, I just did a find/grep and the term "weber" does not exist.

So while my website is on the top page for terms such as "bbq grill" (so if it has a theme, that is probably it), it does not rank in the top-100 for terms such as "weber" or "weber bbqs"

I gotta wonder what would happen if I did not change ANY content, but some folks did "weber bbqs" (or maybe some other brand) links inbound to this page.

Just a late night thought that popped up - similar experiments could be done with other sites/keyphrases.

alek

P.S. FoxyWeb: Absolutely NOT trying to "poach" your keyword, and again, since I have no actual content on my website for "weber bbqs"

[mcdar]

I have reached the limit for the length of a post on this board.
(you cannot exceed 10,000 data points)

So, this morning I eliminated the record I was keeping of my posts to this forum. I figured that, since we were now recording all of our signature links with the site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags, that it was redundant anyway.

However, there still is a problem, from this point forward, in how much data can be added.

Any suggestions?

Caryl

[Foxy]

BTW guys, I had an idea for a theming experiment if it interests you. I've noticed that FoxyWeb is targetting the keyphrase "weber bbqs" and actually has this forum thread (http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=481) ranking #2 for the term right now, even though there is argueably very little relevent "weber bbqs" content there.

Even though I'm a "BBQ guy" (note .signature!), I don't have any information anywhere on/underneath www.komar.org/bbq/ that is weber related - in fact, I just did a find/grep and the term "weber" does not exist.

So while my website is on the top page for terms such as "bbq grill" (so if it has a theme, that is probably it), it does not rank in the top-100 for terms such as "weber" or "weber bbqs"

I gotta wonder what would happen if I did not change ANY content, but some folks did "weber bbqs" (or maybe some other brand) links inbound to this page.

Just a late night thought that popped up - similar experiments could be done with other sites/keyphrases.

alek

P.S. FoxyWeb: Absolutely NOT trying to "poach" your keyword, and again, since I have no actual content on my website for "weber bbqs"


Cool idea Alek!

Gets my vote

When do we do it? Perhaps when I've pushed my page to the top - all things are in place now but I will have to wait for the delay - if I want to win the Champagne. :D

[Foxy]

I have reached the limit for the length of a post on this board.
(you cannot exceed 10,000 data points)

So, this morning I eliminated the record I was keeping of my posts to this forum. I figured that, since we were now recording all of our signature links with the site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags, that it was redundant anyway.

However, there still is a problem, from this point forward, in how much data can be added.

Any suggestions?

Caryl

Ask Shawn nicely if he could assist for the period by extending the post limit - he should be out of bed bt now!!

Hehehe :D

[mcdar]

Alek,

Can you expound on what you mean by "Theming"?

NOTE: * = Weber BBQ (just so we don't push yet another forum post to the top of the serps)

Because, what I see you suggesting is to take a lot of unrelated sites (non-BBQ) and inserting links with anchor text * and point them to a page that does NOT contain * on it, and see if it can then rank for the term * .

That is just Google Bombing isn't it?

Caryl

[Foxy]

I think he was interested in the fact that his site was about BBQs but he doesn't have the term * on his site so it would give an indication of the strength of the * anchor without any on page of the same

[hulkster]

I think he was interested in the fact that his site was about BBQs but he doesn't have the term * on his site so it would give an indication of the strength of the * anchor without any on page of the same


Yea, I think (!) that is what I was thinking.

However, the more I think about it, you guys are much more "players" than I am, so maybe one of you has a "themed" site that could be used for good for testing - the BBQ one just popped into my mind because I've seen it discussed and I happen to have a little info on my web site about it.

An interesting science experiment would be have three URL's with "equivelent back-links" (if that is possible!) with one having on-page content customized for the keyphrase, another NOT have the keyphrase, but being "themed" in that area (again, if such a thing as theming truly exists and/or is measureable), and finally the third being similar to the second one, but no theme (that's the GoogleBomb example).

Just thinking out loud,

alek

[mcdar]

I must admit that, although I have read many posts regarding theming, I do not understand the essence of it.

I have heard it expressed that if you have a site about *, that all of your links come from pages about the same topic. Then folks go on to suggest that links coming from off topic sites will spoil your ranking.

Does anyone else have a better understanding of the subject?

[compar]

Alek,

That's an interesting experiment and doesn't conflict with the sleeping bags experiment.

My only suggestion would be to start a new topic dedicated to it. This thread is so long now that new reads are overwhelmed and not reading it because of the length. So I think we should endeavour to keep it strictly on topic.

Maybe we need to start a "other questions arising from McDar experiment" topic. People who are trying to apply the information garnered here to their own pages and situations could do so on that thread.

[compar]

Would anybody mind if I worked with Shawn to move all the non-relevant posts off this thread to the new thread I suggested in my last post?

McDar would this help your 10,000 points of data problem?

Shawn, I could identify everthing I think should be moved. How do you want to handle it from there?

[mcdar]

No Bob, the 10,000 datapoints have to do with a single post or reply.

I would imagine that most people would be able to keep their replies under that limit. :D

But, you are right. The size of the thread has become too overwhelming for some to attempt reading it from start to finish. Unfortunately, they might be missing out on some pertinent info.

Plus, there may be some that would like to discuss aspects of this experiment but have hesitated. So, an annex (weird thought) to the thread might be a good idea.

Caryl

[Foxy]

Go for it guys on all fronts - very acceptable solution to this thread and a new thread sounds good

[compar]

Caryl,

I have thought for some time that the size of your results posting could be reduced. Maybe show only the last 10 or 14 days of data with a link back to the previous post that showed the earlier stuff.

I'm still waiting to hear from Shawn about if and how we can move the non relevant post to another thread. I like the term "annex" I think I'll use that as part of the new thread title.

Shawn, Shawn, where are you?

[mcdar]

I have resolved the size of the update issue!

I have copied the entire Update to an html page and will include a link to the complete documentation with the daily update.

The daily update will only include a portion of the results. Not sure about how much to include daily on the post, though. Perhaps the last 10 days...

Caryl

[Foxy]

Remember to use "sleeping bags" as the link...Ha ;)

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
_______________
NOTE: Due to size constraints, the entire report can no longer appear in a post.
You can view the entire report here... Complete Report (http://www.mcdar.net/update.htm)
________________
Last 10 days

Position #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Position #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Position #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Position #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Position #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #27 allinanchor: #5 - 05/16/2004 [11 datacenters #31]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #5 - 05/17/2004 [5 datacenters #33]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 6 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/18/2004 [2 DCs #25, 10 DCs #27, 4 DCs #29, 6 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs
Postion #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/19/2004 [8 DCs #27, 6 DCs #34] Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
56 - 5/18/2004 (All datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
3100 - 5/16/2004
3350 - 5/17/2004
3500 - 5/18/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004
108 - 5/16/2004
181 - 5/17/2004
230 - 5/18/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[compar]

Damn, I wish Google would hurry up with the next PR/backlink update. It would answer a lot more questions.

I know, "patience is a virtue", but I've never been very virtuous :)

[mcdar]

Bob,

Google seems to be busy with some other kind of changes right now. They may end up skipping this update completely as they did back in Feb/March.

According to Rank Pulse (http://rankpulse.com/) Google was doing some major changes in that timeframe (Feb/Mar).

_______________
Google BL/PR Update Dates

...26 days(may 19)
April 23
(15 days)
April 07
(18 Days)
March 20
(38 days)- G seems to have missed one here
February 11
(16 days)
January 26
(15 days)
January 11
(18 days)
December 24
(18 days)
December 6
(16 days)
November 20
_______________

[Rational]

Well done Rational!! Why didn't I think of that one - it has been staring me in the face!!

Rational,

All I can say is that is a very rational :) suggestion and explanation of what Forida was all about.

I'm a bit slow getting back here, but thanks a lot guys! ...just trying to be rational ;)

On a more serious note, this experiment, or more correctly, this Experiment with a capital 'E', has opened up my eyes to several things... and also inspired me to start several new research projects on my own. The world of SEO is very exciting these days! :)

I think the key to a successful project/experiment like this one, is to change as few variables as possible at the same time. So, I agree that it is very beneficial for the project to wait with the on-page elements until the current positions have stabilized.

And regarding the theming, Alek, I like the idea of testing this. There is a lot of speculation back and forth, and having some more data for analysis could be interesting. But you'll need at least two sites to test it properly (themed and unthemed - everything else being equal), as you say.

In relation to these questions, I can also mention that goRank released a report on Google's ontology - which might be interesting.

Off topic:
I've taken a tour and looked around this forum, and you seem to have been able to create a very nice, professional and friendly forum here. That is not a small achievement, so well done guys! I'll definitely come back here more often :)

[compar]

In relation to these questions, I can also mention that goRank released a report on Google's ontology - which might be interesting.
Can you give us a link to the goRank report please?

[Rational]

Can you give us a link to the goRank report please?

Sure:

Do related keywords matter in Google rankings? (http://www.gorank.com/research/google_ontology_analysis.php)

[compar]

In relation to these questions, I can also mention that goRank released a report on Google's ontology - which might be interesting.
I just read the goRank report and I don't think it proves anything. I think there is another explanation for their results which is just as plausible.

Before I tell you my explanation let me say that the other problem with this "research" is that we have no idea of how competitive the keywords they used are. But if we assume they are relatively competitive. And we believe, as I do, that links, and not content, are the real SERP placement drivers for competitive keywords, wouldn't the following explanation be just as plausible.

The higher the density of a particular keyword or related keywords in a site the higher the probabilty that those keywords would be used in anchor text. The more that these keywords are used in anchor text the higher the sites will rank in the SERPs.

Google bombing has proved over and over again that you can drive a site to #1 in the SERPs without ever having the keywords appear in the content. This goRanking test is virtually meaningless if they don't include backlinks and anchor text. They don't even mention this variable let alone suggest that they tried to hold this constant for the pages in the study.

[Rational]

The report is interesting enough, but I am not sure whether it answers the question as to how important ontology is when the search terms are more competitive.

goRank has produced some earlier reports on keyword density averages for Google and Yahoo based on low-volume search terms. Such search terms have been selected to reduce/remove the influence of off-page factors (links: PR and anchor text) from the results, to better focus on the on-page factors, i.e. keyword density in various page elements.

I couldn't see goRank mentioning anything explicitly regarding the competition level for the different keywords they investigated this time, but if they are again low-volume, it is difficult to say how important ontology is when anchor text and PR also is brought into the picture.

However, at least in a low-competitive SERP (where the site is ranked based on on-page factors), the report seems to establish that a site with keyword density also for what gorank deems as related search terms will rank higher.

If I've understood this correctly, it means that your potentially prospective themed experiment still has a lot of validity :)

[Rational]

Hi Bob,

I typed my answer without seeing yours. But it seems as if we are more or less in agreement here.

If the search terms are competitive, I agree that their findings easily could be due to anchor text for related keywords. Good thinking!

However, based on their earlier reports, I don't think they have chosen competitive keywords (although I have no real backing of this conviction, as I couldn't find any mention in the report) - and thus, the report would only be valid if there is no anchor text involved. ...and consequently, of little practical value.

I think the experiment Alek suggested would be of more practical use, as we would never dream of getting to the top of a SERP without the use of anchor text.

[Foxy]

I have now read this article too and like you two Bob, Rational, I am in agreement - the rationale of anchor text etc is very strong.

Equally I don't rate the KWD very highly as a method [in fact I ignore it] but I do rate, only out of protection if it becomes a major player in the algo, the ideas of theming, or ontology, but what I did do whilst at gorank was to test the keyword phrases in google [where I am not in the top 10 yet but digitalpoint with the title is, and yahoo where I am no 3] for the phrase "weber bbqs" - interesting results! :D

[mcdar]

I agree, I do not find the experiment to be of any real significance.

When you look at the broader picture, on-page keyword density and, to an even lesser extent, related words play a very minute role in the actual serps.

I would only even consider these factors if I was neck and neck with a competitor on all other major factors i.e. anchor text, backlinks, etc.

Caryl

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
_______________
NOTE: Due to size constraints, the entire report can no longer appear in a post.
You can view the entire report here... Complete Report (http://www.mcdar.net/update.htm)
________________
Last 10 days

Position #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Position #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Position #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Position #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #27 allinanchor: #5 - 05/16/2004 [11 datacenters #31]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #5 - 05/17/2004 [5 datacenters #33]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 6 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/18/2004 [2 DCs #25, 10 DCs #27, 4 DCs #29, 6 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs
Postion #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/19/2004 [8 DCs #27, 6 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs
Postion #29 allinanchor: #4 - 05/20/2004 [9 DCs #28, 2 DCs #34] Note: Allinanchor #5 on 2 DCs **27 DCs are NOT responding**

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
56 - 5/18/2004 (All datacenters)
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
3100 - 5/16/2004
3350 - 5/17/2004
3500 - 5/18/2004
Unchanged from previous date
3510 - 5/20/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004
108 - 5/16/2004
181 - 5/17/2004
230 - 5/18/2004
232 - 5/19/2004
254 - 5/20/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[schlottke]

sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa

what does this do, exactly

[schlottke]

oh, and why was the ending -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa chosen

[leeds1]

any ideas on why you dropped the 10 or so places on the 16th - have you just put it down to flux ? :confused:

[Rational]

sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa

what does this do, exactly

Hi Schlottke,

As you know, it is more difficult to move rapidly to the top of the search results now than it used to be. The theory is that this is due to Google dampening the effect/power of new links (the "sandbox" theory) for an uncertain amount of time. It also seems like the search above may show the results without the dampening effect, i.e. where your site had been positioned had the links been given their full effect.

These are, however, so far only theories -- and part of the McDar Experiment is to investigate these issues more closely. If the theories are correct, then your site's position using the sandbox-removal search above and its position using a normal search, should converge over time. We do, however, not know how long the new links remain in the sandbox, as Bob has pointed out. This is another question the experiment hopefully will throw some light on.

[Rational]

oh, and why was the ending -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa chosen

Which exclusion parameters you choose are irrelevant, as long as you choose a non-existent word and repeat it enough times to make the whole search consist of 10 or more words. You could also, for example, use -sdjfdkjf or -shsfhue or -fiuewugf.

[Rational]

any ideas on why you dropped the 10 or so places on the 16th - have you just put it down to flux ? :confused:

As far as I can see, it is most likely flux. According to the material from McDar, Google has not dropped any of the backlinks, and I find it rather unlikely that so many other sites suddenly had their links coming out of the sandbox at the same time. Further, both the allinanchor and the sandbox-removal search results have been very stable. I cannot see anything else influencing the results at the moment.

[mcdar]

any ideas on why you dropped the 10 or so places on the 16th - have you just put it down to flux ? :confused:

leeds1,

I would be more concerned were it not for the thousands of other sites that are being reported as dropping huge amounts in the serps as well. Also, the fact that 31 datacenters are now down is an indication that Google is up to something at the moment.

This is NOT something that is just happening to the experimental page.

Caryl

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
_______________
NOTE: Due to size constraints, the entire report can no longer appear in a post.
You can view the entire report here... Complete Report (http://www.mcdar.net/update.htm)
________________
Last 10 days

Position #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Position #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Position #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Position #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #27 allinanchor: #5 - 05/16/2004 [11 datacenters #31]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #5 - 05/17/2004 [5 datacenters #33]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 6 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/18/2004 [2 DCs #25, 10 DCs #27, 4 DCs #29, 6 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs
Postion #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/19/2004 [8 DCs #27, 6 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs
Postion #29 allinanchor: #4 - 05/20/2004 [9 DCs #28, 2 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 2 DCs **27 DCs are NOT responding**
Postion #27 allinanchor: #4 - 05/21/2004 [10 DCs #26, 2 DCs #33] Note: Allinanchor #5 on 2 DCs **31 DCs are NOT responding**

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
56 - 5/18/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
3100 - 5/16/2004
3350 - 5/17/2004
3500 - 5/18/2004
Unchanged from previous date
3510 - 5/20/2004
3620 - 5/21/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004
108 - 5/16/2004
181 - 5/17/2004
230 - 5/18/2004
232 - 5/19/2004
254 - 5/20/2004
298 - 5/21/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004
Unchanged from previous date
#2 - 05/21/2004

__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[Foxy]

Off the top of my head I think it was 24th May last year that my sites lost their links in the first major shuffle then 6 months later November was "Florida" and then "Austin" I believe was a reinstatement of some factors rather than a full shake up which resulted in my links reappearing and we are all seeing movement - some more than others. So 24th here we come [if my memory is right!]:)

[schlottke]

Well Super. I can't wait until they come out of the sandbox and grow up then- I'll be #1 for just about every keyword relating to wrestling known to man. heh.

[schlottke]

Well I just thought of something.. Perhaps they aren't ever going to receive their full effect now since google may have a filter in place to not allow all back links from say a forum, or hundreds of pages on the same domains content??

[mcdar]

We will not know the answers to any of these questions until Google settles back down.

If we are lucky, there won't be too much of a mess to sort out when it is over.

[compar]

Well I just thought of something.. Perhaps they aren't ever going to receive their full effect now since google may have a filter in place to not allow all back links from say a forum, or hundreds of pages on the same domains content??
It will be hard to tell anything for sure as McDar says until Google does the next PR/BL update. I tend to think they may be discounting some of the sig link from the forum. Other wise the sudden addition of 3500 new link would have made a larger change in the 'allinanchor:' ranking. At least one would think so.

I just had a thought. Google is supposed to only count one identical link per page. If this is the case then it would dilute our usable link count by about a factor of 10. So maybe we are really only getting credit for 350 links rather than the 3500 that actual appear in sigs.

[schlottke]

Thats what I was thinking to. I assumed that google somehow is reading sig links and counting either 1 or none of them, its hard to tell at this point. Im still seeing gradual increases on all my terms without going on any linking campaigns. The only thing that strikes me as odd and throws that whole idea off is my term wrestling directory. I link ONLY from 4 forums with this term, no where else, and the site is #4.

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
_______________
NOTE: Due to size constraints, the entire report can no longer appear in a post.
You can view the entire report here... Complete Report (http://www.mcdar.net/update.htm)
________________
Last 10 days

Position #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Position #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Position #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Position #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #27 allinanchor: #5 - 05/16/2004 [11 datacenters #31]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #5 - 05/17/2004 [5 datacenters #33]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 6 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/18/2004 [2 DCs #25, 10 DCs #27, 4 DCs #29, 6 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs
Postion #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/19/2004 [8 DCs #27, 6 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs
Postion #29 allinanchor: #4 - 05/20/2004 [9 DCs #28, 2 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 2 DCs **27 DCs are NOT responding**
Postion #27 allinanchor: #4 - 05/21/2004 [10 DCs #26, 2 DCs #33] Note: Allinanchor #5 on 2 DCs **31 DCs are NOT responding**
Postion #27 allinanchor: #3 - 05/22/2004 [1 DCs #25, 7 DCs #26] **31 DCs are NOT responding**

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
56 - 5/18/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
3100 - 5/16/2004
3350 - 5/17/2004
3500 - 5/18/2004
Unchanged from previous date
3510 - 5/20/2004
3620 - 5/21/2004
3650 - 5/22/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004
108 - 5/16/2004
181 - 5/17/2004
230 - 5/18/2004
232 - 5/19/2004
254 - 5/20/2004
298 - 5/21/2004
318 - 5/22/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004
Unchanged from previous date
#2 - 05/21/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[mcdar]

It will be hard to tell anything for sure as McDar says until Google does the next PR/BL update. I tend to think they may be discounting some of the sig link from the forum. Other wise the sudden addition of 3500 new link would have made a larger change in the 'allinanchor:' ranking. At least one would think so.

I just had a thought. Google is supposed to only count one identical link per page. If this is the case then it would dilute our usable link count by about a factor of 10. So maybe we are really only getting credit for 350 links rather than the 3500 that actual appear in sigs.

Bob,

We have moved from #8 to #3 in allinanchor. The ONLY change being the addition of the sig links during that time frame.

I think from #8 to #3 is a pretty big jump. 5 out of the possible 8 positions is not bad.

Now we just have to wait and see what Google is up to! :rolleyes:

Caryl

[schlottke]

Have you seen sleeping bag sales increase quite a bit?

[compar]

Bob,

I think from #8 to #3 is a pretty big jump. 5 out of the possible 8 positions is not bad.

I would still think, without doing any real research, that if we were 8th for less than 100 links before we all changed our sigs, that we should have been catapulted straight into #1 with the addition of 3500 addition new links. I'll bet when the PR/BL update finally arrives that we only get credit for about 350 links from the forum.

[rickbender1940]

I would still think, without doing any real research, that if we were 8th for less than 100 links before we all changed our sigs, that we should have been catapulted straight into #1 with the addition of 3500 addition new links. I'll bet when the PR/BL update finally arrives that we only get credit for about 350 links from the forum.

Just read through this thread from beginning to end. Phew! A lot of things I've seen in my own experimenting seem to be confirmed. Like the external link making a sudden difference - I linked from only 4 (PR4) pages of another domain to mine and shot up 10 places on a term I'd been stuck at around 16 for a long long while. Removed the link and shot down. Re-added and was back. The same effect except with moves of 100 and 160 positions was also seen in some related keyword searches!

One other effect I also noticed was that sometimes links from a domain gave a quick boost which then slightly diminishes or even disappears after a day or two. This one's a puzzler, and I have to run some tests on it to try and figure it out.

I also strongly suspect but need to test more that multiple links from the same domain don't have much effect past a certain number. So 50 links or 500 will have much the same effect. I'm seeing this myself where going from 2 links to 7 from the same domain made no noticeable difference (PR 5 and 6 links). Certainly the 3500/350 sig links seem to have made little difference to sleeping bags in this thread's study.

Once Alek drops his link I suspect we'll be seeing a sudden and drastic fall for sleeping bags. It would be infomative if Compar dropped his links one by one, from 55 down to a single one, to see where the suspected threshold (if indeed it exists) lies. Although with a server side include this would be a pain. Another alternative is that Alek add a second link from another page on his site.

[Foxy]

One other effect I also noticed was that sometimes links from a domain gave a quick boost which then slightly diminishes or even disappears after a day or two. This one's a puzzler, and I have to run some tests on it to try and figure it out.

yep its quite a thread but, as you have, its well worth reading all the way thru and also as I did reread to keep on track.

The quote above may well be answered by this one of Hexed

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=730

which is an very good attempt at an explanation and in my mind has substantial credence its a phenomena I call a "mexican wave" and I have been seeing it on a number of keyphrases - anyway go and have a look.

With regard to this experiment we are waiting for the "update" before we decide to alter things but what you suggest is well worth looking at - so keep tuned and put your penny's worth in when we start moving.

Some of what you say will be proven or otherwise when it does.

:)

[mcdar]

Have you seen sleeping bag sales increase quite a bit?

Hi Schlottke,

We had 5 hits from Google for the search sleeping bags last week. That is about 5 more than I would expect, being on page 3 of the results.

Caryl

[mcdar]

I would still think, without doing any real research, that if we were 8th for less than 100 links before we all changed our sigs, that we should have been catapulted straight into #1 with the addition of 3500 addition new links. I'll bet when the PR/BL update finally arrives that we only get credit for about 350 links from the forum.

Bob,

To assume that we would jump to number 1 in allinanchor with the addition of the 3500 sig links, would assume that no other site ahead of us had more than 3500 links with the same anchor text, wouldn't it?

The site in the number 1 position for the search as well as number 1 for allinanchor, has more than 6000 links (extensive crosslinking) from ~8 other sites. This used to be real visible before Alltheweb change how they reported backlinks.

If you would like to investigate this you can find the "other sites" by viewing the source of the #1 site and scrolling all the way to the bottom. Then you have to scroll right for about a mile to view all of the alt tags to the invisible spacer gifs they have there.

Most of these links don't count much toward the total links reported by Google but I am certain they are instrumental in getting them to number 1 for allinanchor.

Caryl

[mcdar]

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
_______________
NOTE: Due to size constraints, the entire report can no longer appear in a post.
You can view the entire report here... Complete Report (http://www.mcdar.net/update.htm)
________________
Last 10 days

Position #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Position #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #27 allinanchor: #5 - 05/16/2004 [11 datacenters #31]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #5 - 05/17/2004 [5 datacenters #33]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 6 DCs
Position #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/18/2004 [2 DCs #25, 10 DCs #27, 4 DCs #29, 6 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs
Postion #28 allinanchor: #4 - 05/19/2004 [8 DCs #27, 6 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 6 DCs
Postion #29 allinanchor: #4 - 05/20/2004 [9 DCs #28, 2 DCs #34]Note: Allinanchor #5 on 2 DCs **27 DCs are NOT responding**
Postion #27 allinanchor: #4 - 05/21/2004 [10 DCs #26, 2 DCs #33] Note: Allinanchor #5 on 2 DCs **31 DCs are NOT responding**
Postion #27 allinanchor: #3 - 05/22/2004 [1 DCs #25, 7 DCs #26] **31 DCs are NOT responding**
Postion #26 allinanchor: #4 - 05/24/2004 [1 DCs #24, 10 DCs #25] Note: Allinanchor #3 on 3 DCs & #5 on 7 DCs **29 DCs are NOT responding**

_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
56 - 5/18/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date

__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
3100 - 5/16/2004
3350 - 5/17/2004
3500 - 5/18/2004
Unchanged from previous date
3510 - 5/20/2004
3620 - 5/21/2004
3650 - 5/22/2004
3640 - 5/24/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004
108 - 5/16/2004
181 - 5/17/2004
230 - 5/18/2004
232 - 5/19/2004
254 - 5/20/2004
298 - 5/21/2004
318 - 5/22/2004
435 - 5/24/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004
Unchanged from previous date
#2 - 05/21/2004
Unchanged from previous date
#3 - on 17 DCs and #2 on 14 DCs 05/24/2004
__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

[leeds1]

I've been thinking about this 10 place drop that happened on the 15th which is still there and remember something about link text that was all the same.

Do you think there may have been a penalty on this at all ?

ie: you have sleeping bags in 3500+ links - no variation.

I see most of the 1000s of additional links started to be picked up on 9th

May be if you DON'T start climbing in a couple of months you should either
a) change the anchor text of some of the links
b) take out 1000s of links (after all, you can add them back in)

Is this feasible (the penalty I mean) or just me summising ?

[mcdar]

leeds1,

It is very important, when analysing results, that you consider to bigger picture as well.

This "10 place drop" has NOT only happened to our page, but to a great many other sites as well!

Some changes in the serps are due to Google changing things now. The fact that Google is obviously making big changes at this time (29 datacenters down today) and many SEOs reporting that their sites are being bounced all over the place, is a good indication that the change is due to Google changes, not ours.

We will only be able to analyze this when Google stabilizes again!

To make any knee jerk changes right now (considering all I mentioned above) or even try to attribute something we did as effecting this situation would be foolish.

There are too many variables, happening all at once, to be able determine cause and effect right now.

All we can do at this point is be patient and wait.

[mcdar]

Dazzlindonna has brought up a good point in another forum having to do with the "sandbox" keyword -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa search that I wanted to bring up here, since we have added this search to our experiment.

I just noticed something. I have several newish sites that aren't yet ranking. These sites don't yet have many backlinks to them (maybe 10 or so). If I pick any keyword phrase that I would expect to rank well based on on-page factors only, and use the "keyword phrase -asdf -asdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf " type of search, every single one of them ranks in the top ten. Just got me to thinking that maybe this gobbledygook type of search is only bypassing the value of incoming backlinks, and is ranking the sites on on-page factors only. Anybody else able to reproduce this? (Remember, pick phrases that you would expect to rank well because you've optimized the page well for that phrase.)

[My response:]


Hi dazzlindonna,

YES! I have a site that is reacting the same to the "keyword phrase -asdf -asdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf " type of search!

I put this site up in January. There are only 9 links to the site. (been there from the beginning).

This site comes up NOWHERE in the regular serps. Allinanchor:#13, allintext:#13, and allinurl:#3.

If I use the "keyword phrase -asdf -asdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf -asfdf " type of search the results are...
Regular Search#17, Allinanchor:#17, allintext:#17, and allinurl:#3.

NOTE: With only 9 backlinks, this site should NEVER be in position #17 for this search!!!!

I really am starting to think that this nonsense search is doing that exact same thing as the single -asfdf did after Florida.

It is simply removing the effects of Backlinks on the serps altogether and ranking solely on on-page factors.

I never thought to check the string on the other site I had and now that I have, I have my doubts that it "just removes the sandbox" effect.

[leeds1]

Hi

I didnt suggest doing anything now - it was just an observation :)

In terms of the nonsense things - I reckon G is doing something but I doubt if the -asdasd effect is just backlinks - it probably takes off a filter for (perhaps) everything G has in it's algo

As you point out it was the same case after Florida.

There is some delay with backlinks (as we have seen with your experiment) but probably not with the -asdasd effect.

[Rational]

McDar,

I have to disagree with you here.

1) I too think that the -dsa search does the same thing as it did after Florida: allegedly it showed pre-Florida results at that point, and the pre-Florida results had everything to do with backlinks.

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=5181&postcount=428

2) It cannot be that the -dsa seach ranks only based on on-page factors. My sites have usually only a few occurences of the targeted phrase. The highest ranked of my new sites probably has a keyword density of less than 0.5%. It is now #20 in the regular search, and #5 in the -dsa search (this is more or less where it should be when evaluating the competition closely). There are more than 2 million sites in results, and the top 100 is pretty competitive.

When this has been said, I don't know whether the -dsa search really shows what I hope it does. It may be that it is too easy to say that simply searching with enough non-existent exclusion parameters removes the sandbox filter alltogether, and there are definitely some instances -- like the one you mention -- that should have been higher up in the normal SERP than they are (if the sandbox removal filter really works).

John Scott's Bluefind is the only site I have data that goes back one month for. April 25th his -dsa position was #13 and in the normal search he was around #203. May 24th his -dsa position is #25 and in the normal search he is #28.

There are a lot of variables we don't know the importance of which me skew the results; dilution of links because they come from the same site, same c-class, too many too quickly, from non-related sites, ... and variables we know little or nothing about, like why hasn't your site from January 9th moved more up in the normal search?

I think the only way we can learn more about these issues is by continuing to experiment and test like in your experiment here.

For example; one way of testing yours and Dazzlindonna's hypothesis (that the -dsa only ranks based on on-page factors) is to monitor the -dsa SERP position over time while not changing the on-page factors. If you start out in the 200s and slowly move upwards as new links are added, it is much less likely that the -dsa is based on on-page factors (the opposite would mean that the site's upward trend was due to de-optimization of on-page factors of the sites previously above you in the SERP).

[compar]

If what you Guys are speculating is true then the "-das" search should work with any site regardless of the age.

Has anybody got a site that has been stable in 30 to 50 place and hasn't had any links added in the last three months. If so please test the "-das" search on it and let us know what happens.

If you Guys are right it should have the same effect on any page regardless of the age of the site or the age of the links.

The other thing about your theory is that the result should not always be to advance the page. If the page has poor on-page elements then bypassing the links should drop the pages SERP placement.

I personally don't think your theory is right. I don't know what is happening, but I don't think this search simply bypasses or ignores all links.

[compar]

I've been thinking about this 10 place drop that happened on the 15th which is still there and remember something about link text that was all the same.

Do you think there may have been a penalty on this at all ?
Nobody knows anything for sure. But think of the consequence of your suggestion. The first thing changing or varying the anchor text would do is drop the allinanchor: rating.

And yet much of the evidence from this experiment suggests that there is a close correlation between allinanchor: scores and SERP placement. So if we suddenly changes all the anchortext on the forum links for instance I would expect our allinanchor: score to go back to where it was before we put these links up.

I think it is the opinion of most of us invovled in this experiment that that would not be a good thing.

[mcdar]

Sorry, I think one thing I said was mis-interpreted.

The page/site I was talking about should never be rated that HIGH in the serps, with only 9 backlinks. It may not even qualify to belong in the top 100!

It is this reason alone that has caused me to re-think this theory.

Bob,

I do have another site in a very similar situation. It has 5 backlinks and is 4 months old. It is # 99 in regular serps, #3 in allinanchor:, #3 in allintext, and #1 in allinurl:.

Using the -dsa... it is #3 in regular serps, #3 in allinanchor:, #3 in allintext, and #1 in allinurl:.

AGAIN, this site/page does NOT warrant being that high in the serps based on 5 links!

Something is not adding up.

Caryl

[mcdar]

Here is the information:

The site is www.sleeping-bag-shop.com the search is sleeping bag (singular).

Currently: The regular results put our experiment page at #25 for that search term. The site mentioned above is not found at all.

If you search for sleeping bag -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa, the experimental page is no longer appears anywhere in the 806 results returned. The site mentioned above with 9 Backlinks is then in #17 position.

What is the explanation for this?

[hulkster]

If what you Guys are speculating is true then the "-das" search should work with any site regardless of the age.

Has anybody got a site that has been stable in 30 to 50 place and hasn't had any links added in the last three months. If so please test the "-das" search on it and let us know what happens.

If you Guys are right it should have the same effect on any page regardless of the age of the site or the age of the links.




FYI FWIW: my RoShamBo page (http://www.komar.org/xmas/2002/cool_pics/rock_paper_scissors/) is currently #33 for a regular Google Search ... and a whopping #32 for a sandbox'ed Google Search ...

alek

[mcdar]

Here is another example:

Site www.mcdar.com search: camping equipment

regular results #156, allinanchor:#24, and allintext:#23

Results with -dsa...
regular results #22, allinanchor:#22, and allintext:#20

No links added or any changes to page since late march.

attached find the daily results returned for this search since April 11th

Daily Ranking (http://www.mcdar.net/camping.htm)

[Rational]

I do have another site in a very similar situation. It has 5 backlinks and is 4 months old. It is # 99 in regular serps, #3 in allinanchor:, #3 in allintext, and #1 in allinurl:.

Using the -dsa... it is #3 in regular serps, #3 in allinanchor:, #3 in allintext, and #1 in allinurl:.

AGAIN, this site/page does NOT warrant being that high in the serps based on 5 links!

Something is not adding up.

Since your site is #3 in allinanchor I don't find it too strange that it is at #3 in the sandboxed search as well. You know, however, the cometitiveness of this particular SERP better than anyone, and if these 5 links do not warrant such a position then maybe we also need to investigate the allinanchor better?

How are your competitors in this SERP? Are there many targetting 'sleeping bag' in singular (also in their anchor text)?

[Rational]

Here is another example:

Site www.mcdar.com search: camping equipment

regular results #156, allinanchor:#24, and allintext:#23

Results with -dsa...
regular results #22, allinanchor:#22, and allintext:#20

No links added or any changes to page since late march.

attached find the daily results returned for this search since April 11th

Daily Ranking (http://www.mcdar.net/camping.htm)

Again the correlation between the allinanchor and the sandboxed search seems to be as it should. However, your results in the normal search seems off.

I took a look at the daily results, and noticed that on April 27th you had come as high as #28 in the normal search results. It is difficult to read very much into each placement since the ranking vary very much from day to day -- however the trend after April 27th seems to be downwards, even though you had a #39 as late as May 11th.

Has there been a lot of movement in this SERP generally, or is it your site in particular? And, how many links with 'camping equipment' as anchor text are we talking about here? My experience is: the larger number of links, the more stable is the SERP and the sites' movements. And where are the links from? Maybe, as was suggested here earlier, some links - for various reasons - never are given their full effect.

I hope you'll be able to monitor this search closely the next month -- both the -dsa search and the allinanchor search as well as the normal search, so that we maybe with some time and more data can find out what is going on.

[Rational]

FYI FWIW: my RoShamBo page (http://www.komar.org/xmas/2002/cool_pics/rock_paper_scissors/) is currently #33 for a regular Google Search ... and a whopping #32 for a sandbox'ed Google Search ...

alek

This is very interesting, Alek. I think that by comparing those sites that do stabilize on (or very close to) their sandboxed search result position with those that possibly won't, we may be able to isolate the variables that cause this to happen -- and thus avoid them.

...and thereby, as a nice side effect, create a much more predictable world of SERPs and happy SEOs ;)

[hulkster]

This is very interesting, Alek. I think that by comparing those sites that do stabilize on (or very close to) their sandboxed search result position with those that possibly won't, we may be able to isolate the variables that cause this to happen -- and thus avoid them.

...and thereby, as a nice side effect, create a much more predictable world of SERPs and happy SEOs ;)

I forgot to mention it, but that Rock Paper Scissors site (http://www.komar.org/xmas/2002/cool_pics/rock_paper_scissors/) has been around since the end of 2002 - I've never really tried to "do" anything with it, but maybe these forum links will help it! ;-)

alek

[mcdar]

Here is the information:

The site is www.sleeping-bag-shop.com the search is sleeping bag (singular).

Currently: The regular results put our experiment page at #25 for that search term. The site mentioned above is not found at all.

If you search for sleeping bag -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa, the experimental page is no longer appears anywhere in the 806 results returned. The site mentioned above with 9 Backlinks is then in #17 position.

What is the explanation for this?

Rational,

The two examples that you commented on do not interest me as much as the example I have quoted above.

The example I have quoted above, removes the experimental page (the focus of this thread) completely from the results!

If using -dsa... simply adds full value to the links you have to a page, then reason would have it that it would displace current positions not replace them entirely.

Why would adding -dsa... remove our experimental page from the results entirely?

[leeds1]

I have had a load of links added

normal google uk = 8th - -aasdfetc = #1

I have been steady at 8th for sometime - I have had many PR7 links added (and cached) but no change

I have a smallish site but no effect on the backlinks (different domains etc)

There is something else happening with this -adasdas etc

I have not seen my site drop at all in recent weeks - my on page is consistent (thanks foxy) but have been adding links

If I do -adsasd I am #1 but I cant see us displacing that one

As I say, there is something else - like Florida with the -asasdasd

As it is a summers day over here - I'm back to the outdoors !