My friend said "sandbox does not exists, everyone who said it does exists are dumb.

It does exist, my site has just come out of it!

 

Im still sceptical, ive done over 100 websites and none of them have ever been in the "sandbox".

 

I'll say, you are lucky!

 

Tell your friend to explain then how it could have happened that almost 7 months to the day my site was indexed all of my pages on google shot from 150+ to top 10 including several #1's with the same inbound links and meta tags they'd been holding for months, and no content changes. There's a filter, there's no doubt about it.

Ian

 

I asked my friend with your question and he said "Just a dumb person who painful with unexpected results then blame for all, even created "sandbox" to protect themselves and claim that why their site not have good serps"

I asked him back "What about MSN? Why all new sites have been there with good serps and dropped in others? Yahoo and Google is an example" He said "Google and Yahoo is better search engine than MSN, they crawled and indexed many more pages than MSN does so it would be easy for new site to rank well in MSN because of much less page indexed in MSN."

I think about stay away from him for a while. He has too much confident by his successful website. I've to do my seo for my site until it successful to claim that

1. I can do seo myself.
2. Sandbox does exists. Filter does exists.
3. To let him know that he is not a "god of search engine optimizer" as he believes.

Good luck with your sites.

Cheers,
Sxperm

 

The sandbox if anything is just a small filter on new sites to make sure they are not old domains with ads on them or new domains with adverts on them.

Dynamic content seems to be the way forward. As I said earlier im still sceptical, my newest site had 1 page in the Google index for nearly 2 weeks but now it has everypage, basically just keep getting new links based on the content of the homepage, add a few links to each of your internal pages and your sorted...

 

Immorta, no disrespect but i don't see how any of your last post has anything to do with the sandbox.

 

I think If Matt Cutts can openly commit that a filter as we all believe do exists, then if it would have been untrue, dont you think Google would have fired him rightaway

 

Personally, my current theory is that the sandbox is two or more filters. At roughly the three month mark, something seems to be lifted on all of my sites letting them jump into the 150-ish range of rankings. I've experienced that on about 10 sites. I'm hoping the other filter is something that gets lifted at 6 months, which seems to be the time a lot of people are reporting, but none of my sites have hit that mark yet. The big daddy changes could mess with that too.

My guess is that the variance people give in the times they list here is either because it takes them awhile to get indexed (i.e., they say their site is 8 months old but they didn't have any links at first so it took 2 months before Google found it) or because they don't do anything to trip the filters until several months in. If it's a three month and a six month filter, that doesn't mean that they start counting immediately when you get indexed - you could trip the filters only when you start link building. So if a webmaster puts up a site, waits 4 months, and then starts building lots of links, the sandbox may take them 10 months. This is just an educated guess, but it would explain what I've seen.

If you think there's no sandbox filter, it is very difficult to explain why all of my sites went from no rankings at all to ranking in the 150-200's at roughly the 90 day mark. Other people here have reported the same thing. Your friend really just doesn't know what he's talking about. Many people think there is no sandbox because they target either obscure terms or noncommercial terms. I know for a fact that there are terms with lots of searches on which you can rank easily and instantly, but they are all noncommercial in nature.

Here's one more example of how I've seen that "commercial" thing play out: I rank in Google for the term "political discussion" in Google but can't rank for the term "political forums" using the same methods on the same site. There's plainly something going on there - my guess is that Google has flagged the term "forums" as something to be sandboxed. Even if you think one phrase is more competitive, it doesn't account for a difference of 80+ spots, and the fact that until 3 months in I didn't rank at all on "political forums" but ranked instantly on discussion.

 

I still have major doubts, I have never had a run in with the sandbox and doubt I ever willl... If your site is stuck in Google then there is something wrong and it needs fixing, find the error and your sorted, there is a logical explanation for everything.

 

Can you show us some examples of any sites you have launched recently that are ranking well for competitive or money terms in Google...

 

I can give you a list of about 6 but it proves nothing.

 

Stop talking poppy-cock Immorta, or detail your basic link development for these sites please.

By looking at past posts in this thread it looks like you don't even understand what the sandbox actually is.

This isn't about getting indexed - it's about ranking for terms.

Pete

 

Of course it proves something, it proves that what your saying is true.

I have yet to see proof anywhere that a brand new domain will rank for anything competitive after a few weeks without being held back for some time, how long that is varies.

What your saying is, that your new sites are never held back and you have never experienced the sandbox, filter what ever you want to call it.

I will put money on it that the sites you are referring to do not target competitive keywords.

I really hope im wrong because we could all learn something from you.

 

Nothing to learn its just basic seo work on the sites, making sure they are coded correctly, all scripting is dumped off page or removed using css, few links for the main keywords gained every day.

Basically I never over optimise a website too soon, let nature take it course, if I need to really optimise a site quickly and get loads of traffic then use PPC, banner ads and exit traffic to fill the gap, over optimisation of a website to the point of getting it penalised for spam is about the only thing that can make Google look at your site closer than it needs to.

 

Give me an example of some competative keywords and I will see what I can rustle up, im sure your description of competative is quite different to mine...

 

"Competitive" should mean something commercially oriented and with a significant number of searches each day. I've ranked in the top few for terms that are not commercially oriented and get several hundred searches per day, and that have multiple other older sites targeting the same word.

Try the generic name of any commercial product. "Sleeping Bags" is a good example of something like that, as I believe it was what that McDar experimental page was ranking for. If you try to start a brand new site ranking for that term, my bet is you'll hit the sandbox. I'd love to be disproved though, so if you manage to get around it with something like that by all means let us know.

 

Dude, honestly no offense, but you kind of sound like you are full of crap, either that or you are talking about something totally different and there is some misunderstanding on the our definition of the "sandbox"

I work on hundreds of sites also, and it pretty obvious that if you do a,b,c on a site thats registed 8 years ago, and you do a.b.c on new site you get totally different results.

So what you are saying that you can buy a new domain, and make it rank for desirable terms say within six months?

Please list some searches, or sites that show this. I would really like to learn more.

 

OK here is one example of what i would call competitive key words.

Spanish Property

All domains that rank on page's 1,2,3,4 ... are all registered on or before 2003.

There are a ton of other sites with the same or even more quality inbounds and good content etc etc that are stuck in concrete on the 150-200's results like what kneukm03 mentioned in his post.

No-one is getting in or close.

It is all about age age age IMO the more competitive the terms the older the domain must be to be trusted (amongst other things)

Having W3C compliant code should be a rule of thumb, however it has nothing to do with the sandbox. All my sites validate its something that bugs me if it isn't.

What is your definition of a competitive keyword(s)

Tartan Monkey

 

i think its very rare to find a domain ranking for anything good that is less then 2 years old

and the more competitive the term , the older the domains seem to get

look at the age of the top domains for the term "mortgage loan" thats a very competitive term to me