1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

New SPAM sites...billions of results!!!!

Discussion in 'Google' started by Nintendo, Jun 17, 2006.

  1. Nintendo

    Nintendo ♬ King of da Wackos ♬

    Messages:
    12,890
    Likes Received:
    1,064
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    430
    #681
    I think there just trying to do PR, damage control, to try to make it LOOK like it wasn't so bad.
    SEMrush
    If they are correct, which I don't think they are...oh well, having 'BILLIONS' in the title is great for a news story!!! If it had been just 'thousands', this thread would of died before even geting started!!! :D:D Google would of probably done nothing, and the spammer would continue to get rich quick and driving the searchers insane, oh, and Google wouldn't have a new nickname, Spamoogle. :D:D
     
    Nintendo, Jun 23, 2006 IP
    SEMrush
  2. CrankyDave

    CrankyDave Peon

    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    23
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #682
    Okay, let's give Matt the benefit of the doubt just for a moment. Site: operater was pushing numbers 5-6 times too high. Okay, let's double that shall we? Let's make it 12 times... no let's make it 20 times... hmmmmmmm better yet let's make it 100 times.

    That's still 70 million pages.

    Almost forgot, everyone who saw the site operator pushing numbers 100 times too high for their site, raise your hand.

    That's what I thought. Benefit time over.

    Dave
     
    CrankyDave, Jun 23, 2006 IP
    Nintendo likes this.
  3. Nintendo

    Nintendo ♬ King of da Wackos ♬

    Messages:
    12,890
    Likes Received:
    1,064
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    430
    #683
    Bingo!! The rest of us have our site: number crashed in the dumps, but...oh, wait...if it's a spammer, then it's actually way to high, er that's what we'll say to the public!! :D:D:D:D
     
    Nintendo, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  4. anthonycea

    anthonycea Banned

    Messages:
    13,378
    Likes Received:
    342
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #684
    I think you have gone Wacko man!!!
     

    Attached Files:

    anthonycea, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  5. stringerbell

    stringerbell Peon

    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #685
    'Damage Control' is exactly what they're doing!

    I'm pretty new to this (had a website for 7 years that I never optimized), but I don't really believe that Google wants to get rid of these kinds of sites (well, I guess they wouldn't want there to be sooooo many of them that people start to lose confidence in their search engine). And, here's why:

    Google's stock price is around $400 a share - with earnings of less than $6 a share, or about 1.5%. If Google liquidated all their stock and put the money in the bank - they'd make more money! That being said, there must be an unbelievable amount of pressure to get revenue (and profit) up - or at least not let it drop - from the business community.

    But, Google makes most of their money on clicks...

    A good click-through rate (white hat) is what? 2 percent, give or take?

    What's a good click-through rate on a made-for-adsense (MFA) site? 20-30 percent?

    Judging from my own experience, about 99.99% of results returned by Google this last year have been completely useless and spammy. But, for argument's sake, let's say that just 10% of all traffic from Google goes to an MFA spam-site (if most of the results are MFAs, but they don't get the top results that the better sites get, 10 percent sounds about right, yes?).

    So, if 90 percent of Google traffic goes to sites with a 1 or 2% click-through rate - but 10 percent of it goes to sites with a 30% click-through rate - that means that the vast majority of Google's revenue is actually coming from spam sites! The VAST majority.

    So, do you really think Google's going to do anything other than make it appear that they want to shut these sites down (even though they really don't)??? Even if my numbers are WAY off - it would kill their stock price to do anything at all about it whatsoever... Sad...

    Cheers,

    Bob
     
    stringerbell, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  6. TheHoff

    TheHoff Peon

    Messages:
    1,530
    Likes Received:
    130
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #686
    I'm no scientitian, but I think he said "orders of magnitude"


    [​IMG]
     
    TheHoff, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  7. stringerbell

    stringerbell Peon

    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #687
    Ha! I hadn't actually seen Google advertising MFA sites before! Perfect!

    As I think about it more, it's getting really scary... Let's say my numbers above were ridiculously far off. Let's say that only one in every 30 times you click on a result from Google you end up getting an MFA site (more like one in three, but we'll go with one in thirty). And, let's say that those sites are only getting a 10% click-through rate (which is pretty low considering most of those sites hide ads where the navigation links should be - and they make those ads look exactly like navigation links to further fool you into clicking them).

    Even with numbers ridiculously low like that - Google's still making a third of all their revenue from the made-for-adsense sites (assuming a 1% click-through rate on the other 97% of sites that are actually legitimate)! Can you think of a single Fortune 500 company that would willingly lose a third of their revenue stream - just to make their customer's lives a bit easier?
     
    stringerbell, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  8. CrankyDave

    CrankyDave Peon

    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    23
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #688
    Yes, I stand correted.

    It would be estimated size as expressed as a power of ten.

    So 5 to 6 orders of magnitude would be 10 to the 5th or 6th power = 50-60

    I think

    Dave
     
    CrankyDave, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  9. wizardofx

    wizardofx Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    565
    Likes Received:
    10
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    140
    #689
    I am a scientist and have a BS in mathematics. So I
    can say with authority that 5 orders of magnitude is 100,000
    and 6 orders of magnitude is 1,000,000

    best regards
    wiz
     
    wizardofx, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  10. CrankyDave

    CrankyDave Peon

    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    23
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #690
    Thank you for correcting me wiz.

    Dave
     
    CrankyDave, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  11. pjbrunet

    pjbrunet Peon

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #691
    I agree. Besides, subdomains are cool. I'm using them myself now for my blog categories.

    This could be meaningless, but I use Measuremap (now owned by Google) and already I noticed that my inbound links/day jumped. These are clicks from my subdomain tag category pages.
     
    pjbrunet, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  12. pjbrunet

    pjbrunet Peon

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #692
    So what's the perfect whitehat:MFA ratio? ;)
     
    pjbrunet, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  13. pjbrunet

    pjbrunet Peon

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #693
    It's taken me 3 days to read this entire thread :(
     
    pjbrunet, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  14. Mong

    Mong ↓↘→ horsePower

    Messages:
    4,773
    Likes Received:
    730
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    185
    #694
    I think Google is overloaded with information.
    And overstressed due to hard work. :eek:
     
    Mong, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  15. Confuscius

    Confuscius Peon

    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #695
    I find it quite amazing that virtually any half savvy web explorer can find countless examples of the new "style" sites cropping up all over the place yet Google seem to be so far behind the game. A little more delving and you find that there are a range of "destination" domains being targetted through standard cloaking. What I find amusing is that the destination domain never needs to be indexed to be effective!

    For your delight and delectation try this:

    http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=&url=n87.org

    Vertical growth websites are clearly a new phenomenon. BTW most of the "pointing" sites have already been subject to about a 300,000 page bad data push each and based on my monitoring of their growth they should double in size approximately every 6 days. Let battle commence.
     
    Confuscius, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  16. Homer

    Homer Spirit Walker

    Messages:
    2,396
    Likes Received:
    150
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #696
    Lets also not overlook EPC. Well ranked, WH sites will always be many times greater than what BH sites are.

    H
     
    Homer, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  17. softplus

    softplus Peon

    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #697
    BBC = Bad, Bad Cpammer (english spelling)

    http://64.233.167.99/search?q=site:...n&hs=D9O&lr=&safe=off&start=990&sa=N&filter=0
    "Results 791 - 798 of about 240,000,000 from bbc.co.uk"

    5-6 orders of magnitude seems about right :D
     
    softplus, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  18. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #698
    Don't you just love minimum post counts? :rolleyes:
     
    minstrel, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  19. fryman

    fryman Kiss my rep

    Messages:
    9,605
    Likes Received:
    777
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    370
    #699
    fryman, Jun 23, 2006 IP
  20. lorien1973

    lorien1973 Notable Member

    Messages:
    12,210
    Likes Received:
    603
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    260
    #700
    lorien1973, Jun 23, 2006 IP