SEO Slap?

[RedEvo]

maybe Google have had a break through with link spam, I hope so. What was the link profile of the site that's bombed like?

d

[Yellow Note Asset Finance]

Google had changed them on the 3rd and 4th June.

[OldWelshGuy]

Thanks.

Just for the record though, these guys have no social media links! Maybe a couple of stumbles but that is it.

The damage is often not who links to you, but who links to who links to you. If a lot of link juice was being passed from social media into the sites linking directly, or even 2 hops back, then it will impact. This is what makes life so difficult when trying to work out the cause of a change in the rankings.

EG. Google could devalue digg, or make it so that any site with a footprint of 'powered by pligg' no longer passesd PR. This would then take a while to impact on sites 2 or 3 hops away from them.

It is also what makes SEO fun

[ecigworld]

The damage is often not who links to you, but who links to who links to you. If a lot of link juice was being passed from social media into the sites linking directly, or even 2 hops back, then it will impact. This is what makes life so difficult when trying to work out the cause of a change in the rankings.

EG. Google could devalue digg, or make it so that any site with a footprint of 'powered by pligg' no longer passesd PR. This would then take a while to impact on sites 2 or 3 hops away from them.

It is also what makes SEO fun

A strange definition of fun.... Being Welsh too I thought i'd understand but, alas no.... Just stress at this end!

[Yellow Note Asset Finance]

There was a major change as of this month!

[nass]

... Who bothers to check the UK only box!

about 30% of UK users last time that stat was published I think...

[MarkD]

about 30% of UK users last time that stat was published I think...

That's interesting, many I have talked to seem to think otherwise...I'm sure you are right. That means a site could be losing either 30% or 70% of opportunities if the site does less well on the default or with the box checked....thanks for the info.

Anyway, as I said before think the default for the .co.uk version of any search engine should be UK... i.e. slanted to the majority if delivering quality results is the name of the game! Unless of course Nass can pull another interesting stat out of the air!

[LOS Design UK]

about 30% of UK users last time that stat was published I think...

At least I would say. I know I always do...and of course, 70% don't ;-)

[LOS Design UK]

The damage is often not who links to you, but who links to who links to you. If a lot of link juice was being passed from social media into the sites linking directly, or even 2 hops back, then it will impact. This is what makes life so difficult when trying to work out the cause of a change in the rankings.

EG. Google could devalue digg, or make it so that any site with a footprint of 'powered by pligg' no longer passesd PR. This would then take a while to impact on sites 2 or 3 hops away from them.

Hi OWG

Would you say that this approach is similar to the way they look at the IP C block for spam neighbourhoods?

It is also what makes SEO fun

Yeah right....

[OldWelshGuy]

No , not really, as the checking of 'c' class IP's is to determine the possibility of home grown link farms (albeit on a small scale) that are deliberately trying to game the search enigine. What I am saying is just a natural function of the ranking algorithm, in that there is less link juice to pass on as a result of anti spam intervention higher up. There is no penalisation of any kind to the site suffering, it is suffering purely because of a natural sub algo cdevaluing links.