Sandbox theory.

[DarrenC]

Sandbox Tool (http://www.socengine.com/seo/tools/sandbox-tool.html)

I've never believed in the sandbox theory - but I'm starting to! One of my KW terms was No.1 for 2 years, allinanchor I'm still No.1 but the KW term dropped out of Google.

Now, in November I had a mad link exchange moment and was lucky to get a few good PR5,6 and 7 backlinks using this KW term, a couple of weeks later.. boom!

When I checked the tool above, it gave me a reading of 78% which according to the tool means my KW is in a sandbox. So the question is how long will it be before I come out of this damn sandbox and start to rank No.1 again?

I've heard 90 days..

[dazzlindonna]

More like 6-9 months.

[fryman]

Been there since June.... :(

But if a keyword was ranked for 2 years and now it isn't, I could bet it isn't a sandbox, that happens to new sites.

[DarrenC]

Yeh, I don't think it'll be a new site sandbox - to be honest I've had new sites start to rank in Google within 6-9 weeks, so I've not experienced that sort of effect.

Oh well, better start optimising for other KW terms instead til that term comes back :D

[Solicitors Mortgages]

fryman sounds right to me..
if you've been there 2 years its not a sandbox effect, but something else that you are being penalized for that has knocked you out of the serps

[leeds1]

I have the same

#1 for 100 terms for a year

now +20 places down

also allinanchor +20 places down across the board

same as seo-guy

dunno what it is

maybe I have overcooked the optimisation - I am going to undercook and see

still have cached date of 22nd Dec so something is very wrong

site command still gives 120k pages

PR constant at 6

any clues anyone ?

[candysmith]

Something must've changed in the algo for that to have happened.

or have you linked to or been linked to from a bad neighborhood?

[DarrenC]

I emailed Google a couple of weeks ago, and replied that the domain wasn't penalised -why would it be, all of the other optimised KW's are doing great, just one KW that is not ranking.

Just coincendence that I have a number of PR5,6,and7 links pointing to the domain for this KW term a week later the KW term disappears! I've just had these links changed to another anchor text so I'll let you know what happens!

[Old Welsh Guy]

Candy, you can not be hurt by bad sites linking TO you, only by linking TO the bad sites from your own. If it was possible to hurt a site by linking to it from a bad neighbourhood all the black hats would be setting up bad neighbourhoods just to bring down the opposition. So forget about that.

The sandbox does NOT only penalise new sites in my experience, the sandbox works on links, and un natural linking patterns on sites of any age. I have seen a site 2 years old be sandboxed when it was redesigned. Without saying too much, you can trip a sandbox on a site that has been up for a few years by adding a load of content suddenly or by starting an aggressive links campaign.

Sandbox = Link patterns, and nothing else IMO (although there are many people who understand it a lot better than I do) lol

[DarrenC]

OWG - I totally agree. I think that is what has happened in this example. The number of pages indexed in Google jumped by over 4,000 - then the link exchange, where I concentrated on one specific keyword term.

I'm very careful with who I link TO so I don't think it's a bad neighbourhood issue more to do with the sandbox IMO. Meanwhile it's still no1 in allinanchor etc. so hopefully it'll come back one day lol

[tomsk]

Perhaps more and more people are looking at the sites and starting to use seo techniques and starting to gain positions on the keywords your are targeting.

I for example have been trying to get top spot for a key phrase that this guy has been number one for ages, we went from nowhere to position number two. My point is as others do better others will loose.

[DarrenC]

Tomsk - of course there will be competition for any competitive keyword, and if the KW term had fallen a few pages I could understand this, but to still hold '1 for allinanchor etc. and be COMPLETELY dropped out of the Google index for this keyword is above the norm.

Don't you think?

[tomsk]

Can you pm me the keywords? so I can take a look for my own curiosity.

I keep stopping by at your forum good to see it going from strength to strength.

[DarrenC]

Thanks Tomsk - I've pm'd you the KW term.

Thanks for your comments on the forum, only 28 members but still have racked up a good number of posts so far.. Early days!

Darren

[leeds1]

some of my kws are making a small comeback but nothing like they were

but it's my whole site that's knackered

and allinanchors are bust also

the only bad neighbourhood would be from the coop network

I had maybe 100k of links pointing to various places in my site

all taken off now - so maybe there was a bad 'un in there somewhere ?

[DarrenC]

Leeds1, who knows, all you can do is look at each reason individually, dup penalty, over optimised, bad neighbourhood, sandbox, 302 directs to your site, etc. It's frustrating for sure!

[SportsOutlaw]

I tried this tool yesterday and today, and both times it went to page cannot be found. Maybe I am in their sandbox as well. :)

[Catfish]

Do you know anyone who has not been affected by the sandbox and targets competitive keywords with CPC ranges of $1 + at Overture? Someone who has added links "correctly". If I could find a couple people that met this criteria, I would be more apt to consider the "link pattern" theory. From all that I have read in forums everywhere, people are complaining about the problem who don't even do link exchanges. The hard part is that most people can't agree on what the "sandbox" is in order to know if they are being affected by it or some other problem IMO. I do SEO for over 60 sites. 14 of them are sandboxed. The rest rank excellently using the same off and on page techniques. I just had two sites escape the sandbox for no apparent reason. The two sites have the same "linking patterns" as my others. Very preplexing but at least I have hope now that I have two that are free :)

[ohcnetwork]

The sandbox does NOT only penalise new sites in my experience, the sandbox works on links, and un natural linking patterns on sites of any age. I have seen a site 2 years old be sandboxed when it was redesigned. Without saying too much, you can trip a sandbox on a site that has been up for a few years by adding a load of content suddenly or by starting an aggressive links campaign.
This doesn't seem very reasonable to me. There are many instances that the website adds a lot of content. For example, you acquire a forum and integrate it into your website; this adds a lot of content. You launch e-commerce site, and if the site offers tens of thousands of items, then this adds a lot of content as well.

Also, if the theory, "Any IBL does not hurt" stands, should you get sandboxed if you get a bulk of IBL? If sandbox works like that, your competitor can get you a bulk of IBL so that your established domain gets sandboxed, can't he?

New websites getting sandboxed seems at least consist and seems to follow other principles of how Google treats IBL. No?