There is no such thing as a sandbox effect. I have sites that were ranking in the top 5 SERPs within 2 weeks for competitive keywords.
So google was lying when they said it exists? Define competitive? Do you have an example you could share?
I don't think Google lies, I just think that we are discussing two different phenomenon. As for an example, I'd rather not, I have nothing to prove. My point is what may be true for one site, is not true for all sites.
The sandbox does exist. The sandbox DOES NOT MEAN you cannot rank, it is simply an aging filter on backlinks that applies to certain competitive keywords. It is possible to rank with on-page factors - although it is extremely difficult for a highly competive keyword. I have never seen an example of this, which is why I asked, and to date, no one is willing to give an example. Some people think a keyword with a 1,000 overture is highly competitive. I have seen some new sites rank in the top 10 for a very short period of time - and then they drop out of the top 200.
Those new sites you see are in all likelihood replacing the spammed out sites Google banned already and these new ones wont be around long much longer in most cases... But hey its your business and website ...no need to listen to us fools here
Ohhh PLEASE show me where Google admits there is a sandbox other than the Adwords tool??????? I'll paypal you $5.00 if you can show me that printed anywhere within the Google.com domain name.
lol, in addition to reps discussing this at various trade events, you can try Matt Cutt's blog unless you don't trust the guy who helped design the algorithim. You coud also try reading their patent. Rand Fishkin has also posted about it. $5, are you for real?
Hmmm thats not Google but if you can show me where Googles puppet mouthpiece admits it in his blog I'll send the money. I keep to my word! As for reps at trade events..I do not go to those... waste of time...and a tax write off for most who are screwing other taxpayers...why should anyone pay taxes for me or anyone else to go to a conference? If they were that worthwhile then people would not need to write them off now would they? The ROI would be so great... one would not mind paying... Besides I hate hypocrits and in most SES events you have black hat seos hanging out with search engines that despise black hats supposedly. I await the proof and it must state "sandbox" or other form of the word. Peace
I don't have it bookmarked, and as I said, google doesn't call it the sandbox and won't disclose what they do call it, but said they have something in their agorithm which could be construed as the sandbox. Google is always very careful about what they disclose on their algorthim - but its not a huge secret. I'm not going into personal conversations I've had (I live close) - and nothing was really discussed that you can't find if you search online. Just do a search for "Matt Cutt's confirms the sandbox" or go through his blog. It's probably been at least 6 months since he posted about it and I think much of what he posts goes through their legal department. There are also some interviews with him where he walks around the issue. If you don't want believe it exists, it's ok with me. If you have sites under 3 months old that are ranking for highly competitive keywords, then keep doing what you are doing. I've had some keywords get into the top 10, but its never before day 91 - out of the first 1000 to top 10 in a single day.
Hehe sucks to be in cali....hey is that a google u2 drone over your house??? lol Seriously I know all too well that there is an aging delay but as far as all sites being tossed into an imaginary sandbox thats not reality. The more competitive the keyword term or the likelihood of the term being associated with spammy sites or others looking to make a quick buck the longer the aging delay. As was posted earlier good quality links,,great press & publicity can make a site show in the SERPs faster than others but those terms that are ultra competitive wont show too much sooner than normal... Trust has to be established and I would imagine also that some publishers of new websites who have other websites preexisting that are trouble free would see a quicker end to the delay than some webmaster that has never published before. PM me your paypal anyway....what the hell you deserve it for putting up with me.
Domain age ... whois change date ... quality of backlinks ... are authorities linking to you or are all of your links coming from spam blog comment postings? Case in point ... we created a satellite site from an old registered domain for a client and obtained .edu links for it. It was sandboxed only 45 days. The small details.... as mentioned above...determine everything.
Anything after that would be a lie, since you don't know crap. The Random SEO site was built to honor the idiocy that spews from mouths such as yours. Tell, oh brilliant one... what exactly am I spamming, since there are no ads or targeted keywords on the site? The sandbox wasn't admitted to in the blog, but it was discussed at SES by Matt, to Rand Fishkin. Rand is the one who blogged about it. I personally don't take casual conversation as gospel, but it is a hell of a lot more authoritative than your ramblings. You strike me as of those seo leeches, who tries to learn what they can while giving as little back as possible. If you want a link to where it was discussed, $5 ain't going to cut it. $500 and you can have it, otherwise find it yourself. Or, do as you normally do and convince yourself that you're better than everyone else here and are only blessing us with the pleasure of your company, and that you don't need the damn link anyways. -Michael
Awwww mikey did I hurt your little feelings??? lol grow up you pompous arrogant immature brat!! Can you read the content on your own site...google can, and it spells spambullshit...a brilliant smart seo such as you claim to be... would know better than to be caught playing with a piece of crap site like that. Is your immatue attitude something you are proud of or are you a bit threatened by competitors??? Get a life and find someone else to try and intimidate...again I dont give a rats ass for cyber punks ..............of which you are starting to become the head of the class Barry Schwartz needs his head examined if he made you a moderator..... And tell him Clint Dixon said so!!!!! PS - It is you who thinks they are better than others.....check your tone and anger as its showing a side of you that you might not want others to see.
I think we are on the same page. I said the sandbox only applies to certain keywords that google deems competive - and only on new domains. Google grandfathered older domains (without any content) so that they would not be subject to the sandbox as long as there was no change in ownership. It doesn't apply to established domains when they change ownership - at least if the sector doesn't change. I found this out when I developed a site that I had owned since 1999. I made the mistake of changing the register information to a business name with a business address because it had been under my home address and dealt with a product that is expensive and I didn't want to have someone coming to my house looking for a score. Anyway, the domain was sandboxed even though I still owned it. I asked someone who would know what the hell happened and found out my mistake in changing the registrar information - it looked like the domain name had changed hands. The whole idea of the sandbox originated from problem sites (originally sex related sites) which were using throwaway domains for cloaking and other black hat SEO. Since these people could go onto the secondary market and buy up old domains, google made the decision to grandfather the domain names as long as there was no change in ownership. Then they expaned it to deal with all the MFA sites which generally target competitive and higher paying keywords. You can still get around it by buying established sites, but it is going to be more expensive than paying $7 for a throwaway domain. The system isn't perfect, I don't agree with it, but google does whatever they want. Sandbox or not, it shouldn't change the way you build a site. You still build backlinks, but just don't get discouraged if you don't start ranking right away - it justs add more time and probably weeds out people who aren't serious about building quality sites. Buy a beer on me. I don't sell any services or products - never sold a website or even put a link on DP. You'll never see me pitching an e-book or posting about how much I make or don't make. I don't claim to be an expert on anything related to SEO - but I do know a few things from doing it for so long, talking to people who know more than I, and running a lot of experiments. My opinions are at least worth what I charged for them.
Great post and great research. I had always wondered if changing the owner registration effected the methods of Googles filters... So then if I buy an established website are you of the feeling that these will be sandboxed as well?/ As for seo I do it the way I always have as well...I've known there is a delay for sometime now and as I ask webmasters are you in business for a year or ten years??? If one takes the long term view to being in business for quite sometime then waiting a few months for google to trust ones website is not that long of a period of time. Hell in the real world it takes most bricks & mortar businesses five years to become somewhat established and profitable. As for the bragging...there are more than enough here who do that...some who shouldnt lol Peace and looking forward to your reply on the sales related angle.
Oh, that's absolutely brilliant coming from a guy who makes money off of pushing spyware on unsuspecting teens, and plagiarizes others on seo boards, claiming the work was original. You certainly are a piece of work, Clint. Just out of morbid curiosity, where the hell did that come from? -Michael
@ mjewel, you thinkt hat google's bot also spiders whois information to check and see if registration info has changed. I just cannot believe this... What would be the point and that would have to be a waste of resources.
Hi I am not going to respond here to those allegation due to the fact I have no idea where you came up with these BS allegations. I have responded to you via PM If a site I purchased is downloading spyware I will delete it from my account but as for me doing so intentionally I have not done so and would find little use in doing so as I have no idea of how to cultivate the data.. I work on building revenues via Adsense & YPN Not into spam or spyware. Peace
Tell me if anything in this article sounds like it might relate to you: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Spyware/?p=841 -Michael
Unfortunately I do... I was mislead during the sale of the site, including the revenues the site produces from Zango. I would say also I never saw that article prior to now and I nor anyone else can read and digest all of the information published daily on the internet. I thank you for pointing it out. If you have recommendations for replacement I would listen to those as well. Again I don't BS or lie...I am strong and opioniated but not out to cheat others or deceive people. Here are my Zango riches in case anyone thinks otherwise,,,that article was dead on lol !! Year: 2006, Syndication Report - Viewed by month Month Installs Payout 2006-08 1 $ 0.40 2006-07 6 $ 2.40 2006-06 0 $ 0.00 2006-05 0 $ 0.00 2006-04 0 $ 0.00 2006-03 0 $ 0.00 2006-02 0 $ 0.00 2006-01 0 $ 0.00 Total: 7 $ 2.80 I can retire on this money in a million years with some good interest rate savings account Thanks for the heads up