I'm not saying I disagree with you - I don't blindly purchase from big brands either. I'm simply saying that Google, like any website owner, can put whatever they want on their site and there's really not much you can do about it. You complaining over Google algo updates and what they are listing in their search results is the same as me complaining about stuff that is on your site. I can complain all I want, but it doesn't matter because it's YOUR site - the same applies with Google. If you're unhappy with how Google is returning search results, use another service. If you're unhappy with how Google is returning search results and how it's affecting your rankings and traffic, find other sources of traffic. Just really not sure what you're trying to achieve with this thread, other than complaining.
Facebook Pinterest Twitter Linkedin StumbleUpon Reddit Blog Commenting Guest Blogging Forums Bing Yahoo YouTube Purchasing Banners/Links (Media Buys) Purchasing Clicks (Pay-per-click) Link Exchanges Q & A Sites Web Directories Article Directories Photo/Video/Document Sharing Sites Social Bookmarking Sites To name a few.
I think the problem with Google is that they don't explain the reasons for there changes! They just said that will help the users!
The problem Google is going to have is that some people will soon figure out that if they are searching for products to buy, then they don't even need to go to google. They will just go straight to amazon or ebay. You don't even need google for "reviews", they're mostly fake anyway. Amazon has real feedback from customers who actually purchased the product.
First, only free sources could be compared to SEO. Secondly, you might be having success with social media and guess posting, but, it always depends on so many factors just like SEO! Anyways, People do trust Google, and SEO Traffic do convert the best.
First, Only 2 of the 20 resources I named were paid sources. Having success with any traffic generation method takes effort, just like SEO. I was just trying to be helpful. If you wish to focus primarily on Google traffic, that's your prerogative and I respect that. Me, I'll continue to put any working traffic sources I can into my traffic generation campaign so that I'm not 100% dependent upon Google. Good luck.
Where do you find them making fair results? They want money people who are spending on adwords are more often found on top google results. I am more impressed with facebook these days. And i am promoting products on facebook with great success. I don't care about google results anymore
wow, that quite a research about Penguin 2.0 effect. I didn't know GOogle could be so bias towards its competitors .... Bless you Google
The OP made a connection between Penguin 2.0 and Alexa. I'm not aware that there is a direct correlation between Google's algorithms and Alexa. But if there is, I'd be interested in hearing about that.
Did you look at the changes on Alexa? It is obvious one of two things happened? 1. The sites lost massive traffic after the Penguin 2 update. 2. Alexa's data became skewed for hundreds of sites since the Penguin 2 update. I would tend to believe it is #1.
"Correlation does not imply causation". DP was on an Alexa Rank decline long before Penguin 2.0 and Alexa is not really a reliable source (based upon people who use the toolbar and a lot of those are misguided people who believe having a high Alexa Rank means something). Webmaster Forums often make me think of things such as The Lone Gunmen. Tinfoil hats should be handed out at login.
You are assuming the argument being made is fallacious, and therefore the conclusion is a fallacy too. That is a falacy! When the answers are behind a corporate firewall, we correlate supporting evidence to attempt to establish a cause. Alexa is a source used by many reputable sites and agencies. It's not like I'm telling you global warming was caused by a decline in sea pirates. hehe
Your argument is based upon a joke of a traffic measurement service, measured by a toolbar used heavily by spammers in the misguided belief Alexa Rank means anything. So, no, I don't give it any credibility at all. Credible are direct analytics from sites, for example. The fact that you included DP in the list shows you made zero effort to find any evidence to further support your "theory", really you just tried to be sensationalist. You could have compared Alexa stats to stats offered by similar services (including direct measurement for some sites by Quantcast), but that wouldn't help you make a sensationalist conspiracy theory post, would it? It is a fallacy to ignore "correlation does not imply causation" (at least any good researcher wouldn't). If it makes you feel better, you can continue mocking rather than providing a credible argument to support your conspiracy theory.
Did you actually look at Quantcast for DP before you made this generalization? Dec 2012 - 703K Jan 2013 - 461K (same drop as Alexa with the software change) Feb 2013 - 574K Mar 2013 - 653K Apr 2013 - 649K May 2013 - 590K (Penguin kicks in) And look at compete for a very similar graph. So now we have gone from 703K to 590K, a 17% drop (45% drop on Compete for a similar period). Quantcast isn't exactly a perfect science either, but when you have more sources correlating the data, it gets more interesting. But believe whatever you want to believe. I'm not expecting expert answers on an open forum. Over on WMW you'll see a senior member and moderator telling you Alexa works pretty well for large sites.
While our traffic is down a little since Penguin 2, it's not a substantial amount (it's certainly not correlated to Alexa data, that's for sure). A rough guess puts it at ~5% less unique visitors as a result of the Penguin changes. But the visitors we *are* getting are actually higher quality (higher percent from US, UK, Canada, Australia, etc.) and a lot less from places like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh. Which makes sense really because this website isn't geared towards users in those countries whatsoever. Overall, the visitors we are getting are staying on the site longer (lower bounce rate, more time spent on the site, etc.) so whatever the change Google made seems to be a good thing (lower bounce rate and more time spent on the site is directly proportional to relevance of the search results people are clicking on). So yes... our overall percentage user traffic from the countries that tend to actually *have* the Alexa toolbar installed are down far more than what I would consider "high quality" users. See this post for pictures showing how skewed Alexa actually is to low quality countries (maybe they think having Alexa installed helps them rank, I dunno...) https://forums.digitalpoint.com/threads/i-cant-post-in-buy-sell-trade.2606754/page-3#post-18419318 Overall, I'm all for quality over quantity. Back to the thing about Alexa... the only thing Alexa is good at measuring is relative traffic of competitors in the same industry serving the same demographic of users. The rank itself is fairly pointless, but say for example if you actually know what the *true* traffic is of this site, you could make a pretty good guess on what the true traffic is of webmasterworld or a similar site.