Big Mountain
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
 Offline
Posts: 2
|
 |
« on: February 10, 2008, 09:03:42 PM » |
|
When doing the tests with some of my blogs I seems to have noticed one thing which can be seriously important for Yahoo SEO.
It goes like this...
I do a post on the blog (well established blog with at least 100 pages indexed) and then for this keyword (usually an easy one) I am page 1 in Yahoo within 24 hours.
But then Yahoo sort of "junks" the blog post page and the page goes very deep, until Yahoo stirs the page for enough time and gets it back to almost the same position where it was during the first 24 hours after posting.
And with Google the same behavior, but without junking the page.
My bald statement - Yahoo is pretty much the same as Google, but it only has a time factor to kick off the "hurry up" SEO specialists. But then you still get the same results.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Tony Coner
|
|
|
|
ash
|
|
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2008, 09:14:34 PM » |
|
I'm not sure thats what i'd call cracking Yahoo.
You need to know how to rank highly in Yahoo, not just observe that initial rankings quickly drop and are then restored.
:wink:
The problem with Yahoo, as almost every other SE is the lack of users....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
rensquared
|
|
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2008, 03:59:57 AM » |
|
When doing the tests with some of my blogs I seems to have noticed one thing which can be seriously important for Yahoo SEO.
It goes like this...
I do a post on the blog (well established blog with at least 100 pages indexed) and then for this keyword (usually an easy one) I am page 1 in Yahoo within 24 hours.
But then Yahoo sort of "junks" the blog post page and the page goes very deep, until Yahoo stirs the page for enough time and gets it back to almost the same position where it was during the first 24 hours after posting.
And with Google the same behavior, but without junking the page.
My bald statement - Yahoo is pretty much the same as Google, but it only has a time factor to kick off the "hurry up" SEO specialists. But then you still get the same results.
Then right now you know how Yahoo works, and you can easily go around it?? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I'm for staying fit and health.. My blog
|
|
|
|
Matt Inertia
|
|
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2008, 11:00:46 AM » |
|
As far as i can see the only time a webmaster should be worried about Yahoo is when there site is MASSIVE and receiving millions of visitors through the search engines. That way not being on yahoo is worth thousands to them but I personally have never even considered Yahoo and get some good SERPs on it anyway.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ash
|
|
« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2008, 11:31:10 AM » |
|
To be fair, i've noticed a slight increase in traffic from Yahoo whilst MSN / LIVE is waning, traffic is practically zero and i rank well for some big phrases.
Google is by far the biggest search engine in the UK, and therefore this dictates that most (all) of my time is devoted to Google SEO.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MuNKy
|
|
« Reply #5 on: August 26, 2008, 12:45:21 PM » |
|
Tut tut guys, SEO is about optimising for ALL search engines, not just Google! So what if you only get a trickle of traffic from the other SE's, traffic is traffic and it all helps. Plus what would happen if Google became bankrupt and then closed down? If you are going to ignore a SE then i would ignore Ask as I dont know a single soul that uses it. I would most certainly not recommend ignoring MSN and Yahoo!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ctabuk
|
|
« Reply #6 on: August 26, 2008, 01:10:30 PM » |
|
Hmmmmmmm, the young grass hopper has been talking to webnauts and much learning he has. Correct headings, correct linking, using tags, but - and here's the biggy - Abachoo - and the rest of the Search engines feed from the main 4 - and what works on Google will probably not work on MSN - so if you do optimise for all SE's - are you not likely to trigger some sort of negatives on Google? Maybe it will go bust - but as long as movies come out with the text expression 'Oh heck man, google it' - then by all means follow all the suggestions for optimising for all sites - but bare in mind - you may - just may over do it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Inertia
|
|
« Reply #7 on: August 26, 2008, 01:18:54 PM » |
|
Content is king. That is my motto for all!
m2c
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ctabuk
|
|
« Reply #8 on: August 26, 2008, 01:23:23 PM » |
|
Content is indeed King - but so is a bank balance
371 84.32% Google
24 5.45% Yahoo!
20 4.55% Windows Live
17 3.86% MSN
8 1.82% AOL UK
440 100.00%
These are my main sites stats for August
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MuNKy
|
|
« Reply #9 on: August 26, 2008, 01:25:00 PM » |
|
Hmmmmmmm, the young grass hopper has been talking to webnauts and much learning he has. Correct headings, correct linking, using tags, but - and here's the biggy - Abachoo - and the rest of the Search engines feed from the main 4 - and what works on Google will probably not work on MSN - so if you do optimise for all SE's - are you not likely to trigger some sort of negatives on Google? Maybe it will go bust - but as long as movies come out with the text expression 'Oh heck man, google it' - then by all means follow all the suggestions for optimising for all sites - but bare in mind - you may - just may over do it. LOL Yoda you is  I'm going for all three. Main targets are 'web design suffolk' and 'web design ipswich' and i belive i am ranking on all three about the same (but better on Google of course). MSN seems to prefer spammy titles. But then again it is difficult to track how you're doing on all three as Yahoo and MSN take so damn long to update their listings. I need more links to get them to the top. Havent bothered yet as i'm going to do a big redesign (when i get the time). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ctabuk
|
|
« Reply #10 on: August 26, 2008, 01:31:22 PM » |
|
Firstly this is not a 'coming out' statement  but what i love about you is your ability to read exactly in which directions my thought patterns are heading. And I agree, and if you want to track all your results you can always ask me for a IBP report. The thing updates itself - no need to pay them renewal fees - I've had the full programme for 5 years now, and only ever paid once. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ctabuk
|
|
« Reply #11 on: August 26, 2008, 01:36:52 PM » |
|
Actually what you said about MSN was interesting - so I checked my book wesite
62 63.27% Google
14 14.29% MSN
12 12.24% Yahoo!
6 6.12% AOL UK
4 4.08% Windows Live
98 100.00%
MSN came second and virtually all of the results were page title orientated
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MuNKy
|
|
« Reply #12 on: August 26, 2008, 02:05:02 PM » |
|
LOL. Yeah i wanted to double check my stats but i cant remember the damn url, i've got it bookmarked in FF at home. I may start adding double keywords in my page titles as that seems to give a big boost in all three SE's.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ctabuk
|
|
« Reply #13 on: August 26, 2008, 02:49:19 PM » |
|
I have e-mailed you the IBP - now, strangely - I do well on Live.com and you are not showing - but you are well shown on MSN but for my main site I am nowhere!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SEOibiza
|
|
« Reply #14 on: August 26, 2008, 08:44:31 PM » |
|
do you know what I find odd? i see these conversations all the time, but by the time Ive cracked Google top 5 the same phrase has usually (with the odd exception) been a strong #1 on both yahoo & live for a good few weeks. its rare to get Google top 3, without #1 on the other 2. so obviously I don't bother with them, just Google. as for the OP having cracked the algo :  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
UK SEO and Internet Marketing Forums
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
