Google versus Yahoo Results

I have been optimizing a local real estate site for about 6 weeks now. Since it is a local site and our prime keyword phrase is very regional -- Kitchener Waterloo real estate -- I didn't anticipate any real problem driving it into Google's top ten with a modest number of backlinks.

The fact is that the page now ranks #7 for the allinanchor: search, but Google hasn't included it in the top 1,000 pages in the SERP yet.

When I took on the project the site only had one page indexed because all the URLs included php IDs and ? etc. I had that changed and Google now has 134 pages indexed according to their allinurl: search.

I used McDar's Google Yahoo Quick Check tool this morning and it confirms that Google doen't have the page anywhere, but Yahoo has it at #8 in their SERP.

So I guess Yahoo's sandbox must not be as deep a Google's. Based on the work done to date, and on the relevancy of the site to this keyword phrase, this site deserves to rank top ten. I would have to suggest that Google's sandbox or dampening factor may just be costing their users relevant search results.

 

Hey Bob,

I hate to bring this up, BUT...

The link above does not work for me - just like the problem yesterday, I suppose.

Do you think that might have anything to do with it?

Caryl

 

Thanks for this. I had a typo in the link in my post. Try it now it will be fine. I don't host this site so it can have no relationship to the problem yesterday.

 

But Yahoo! too has a sandbox effect! I have seen a few of my sites slipping waaay down after appearing on top 10's very recently.

 

Okay Bob, I got it now! Thanks

 

How or why do you attribute that to a sandbox effect?

A sandbox, as I understand it, is where the sites are kept in waiting until Google or Yahoo promote them to their full value. Why would Yahoo put your site up and then take it down again? I don't think that can be called a sandbox effect.

However, I will be keeping an eye on this site's placement in the Yahoo SERP and will report back if anything happens.

 

Bob,

I just did a search in Google for site:www.kw.yourdreamhome.com and Google returned zero pages for this site?????


EDITED: Nevermind on account of stupidity....
site:www.kwyourdreamhome.com shows 137 BLs

 

Is it possible that Yahoo's sandbox gives sites more rank than their normal indexed search? If so, one would not be crazy to think that Google might be the exact opposite.

IMO the sandbox is not as solid as the main index so the sandbox results might be better in some cases, and worse in others.

 

What could be the possible motivation or logic in doing that?

 

"What could be the possible motivation or logic in doing that?"

If they wanted to do it backwards??

 

Gee I wish I'd thought of that. I'll just have to practice thinking outside the box

 

It seems that Yahoo is a fair company that does not depend on so called "Page Rank" or other mostly unknown factors to come up with search results.

Trying to figure out Google will put most SEO experts in the mental ward, I have found that Google is the fastest gun in the west to pick up new content.

Finding fresh new content is what Google is great at. But to try and figure SERP's based on Page Rank is something that really is not related based on a newsletter from a search engine optimization software outfit I looked at yesterday. They mentioned that Page Rank and listings in the search results are not related in the way that most folks think they are.

 

That's not new Anthonycea. We have been saying that on this forum since day one. And I was preaching that on other forums long before Shawn put this forum online.

PageRank is a measure of the number of links to a Page and the PageRank of the pages those link are from. Today it has little or no direct impact on the SERP placement. What effects SERP placement is the relevance of the links as determined mainly by the anchor text.

Now the coorelation that does exist between PR and SERP placement is this. The site with the higher PR generally has the higher number of inbound links, so the chances are it will have more links with relevant anchor text and hence be placed higher in the SERPs. But it is relevance, not PageRank, that gets you in the SERPs.

 

Me and you do not believe in the same religion Bob, but I like your "preachin" style, keep up the good work and try to find Shawn when you get a chance.

I think someone kidnapped him, they may want some ransom, I will throw in a buck or two to get him back.

 

Statement from "Compar", Bob give us a lesson on the following from your last post.

relevance of the links as determined mainly by the anchor text.

Why not give us some (code examples) or a little lesson on how this works for some of us unwashed out here.

 

Most sites that are in the sandbox have an inflated ranking because new sites/content have more weight. This is because fresh content is deemed more important than old content.

Here's a sandbox link...
http://www.seochat.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=101

 

I don't agree with that explanation of the sandbox effect. In the case of the real estate site I'm working with it has never been ranked even in the top 200 by Google.

Also the article you point me to declares there is no Yahoo sandbox.

I think the sandbox effect is applied to new backlinks as opposed to new pages. In the case of the real estate site clearly its backlinks and the fact that the SEs can find more pages are what has driven it up in the Yahoo SERP.

But these thing have had no impact on Google because I think Google has the new links in the sandbox.

 

there would be no sandbox if that were the case, since a lot of new sites constantly add fresh content from day one. One of my sites has added 10 new pages daily for the last 6 months. This forum ads dozens daily..

 

Compar, you are still falling behind in the forum wars, I asked you to look at my question in my Post # 15 and give us an example. Can you review post # 15 and answer?

 

I certainly can do that but the answer is pretty fundamental and I don't want to inadvertently insult anyone's intelligence. It's not that I mind insulting people. I just don't want to do it by accident.

Ok, I think the answer to your question is this. A link in html code looks like this <a href="http://www.somedomain.com">anchor text</a>. Now the classic old links use to look like this <a href="http://www.somedomain.com">Click Here</a>.

The "Click Here" was used as anchor text, but this was useless to the search engines or anybody else because it gave no information about the the location that the link leads to. Some people overcame this by saying "to see my great site 'Click Here'", and while that was some use to the human viewer it was still useless to the SEs.

Some other would say "see my great site at http://www.somedomain.com " and as you can see by this example the URL is clickable, but this still doesn't tell the SEs what the target site is about, unless people have URLs in the form www.my-prime-keyword.com, and then the SEs can read the keywords out of the domain name and make a judgement about what search the target page might be relevant for.

So if you are trying to promote a page by getting backlinks, or even with internal links or navigation within the site itself, you should always use your prime keyword phrase as the anchor text.

Thus endeth the lesson. Are you satified now Anthony?