Published: Oct 17, 2008 - 12:51 pm
Story Found By: NickWilsdon 1678 Days ago
Category: SEO
12 Comments
12 Comments
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.
Join us at an upcoming SMX event:


Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Digital Marketing Depot. Upcoming online events include:
Comments
Interesting discussion started by Dixon. I know Goog keep saying they arent using the GA data for ranking but this would be a good way of working out the average performance for each site type.
Have to be careful this isnt something ill now use as an excuse for slacking off the work for a site, interesting thought though from Dixon..
@SEOidiot If true, if it might be an excuse to ramp up the work rather than reduce it - in order to break through to the next "level". If a client isnt getting anywhere this is a justification for a budget increase. Would be good to hear from other people experiencing this "flatlining" and if they managed to break through (what did they do?). I like these kinds of discussions though that encourage us to look at situations in a different way, esp. if we have some shared experiences to back it up.
Thrust of Dixons argument seems to be regardless of facts if enough people believe something it tends to be true: "it’s only going to take a few people to say “hey - yeh - that’s happening to me” for the idea to stick." According to that theory, knol pages get an auto-ranking boost, META keywords boost rankings (common perception among non SEO savvy webmasters I bet), and AdWords/Adsense influences organic ranking. <div></div><div></div><div>Its a logical fallacy called argumentum ad populum: a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it.</div><div></div><div></div><div>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum</div><div></div><div>For example, most people used to believe earth is flat and is the center of the Solar System.</div><div></div><div><div></div><div>Thats not to say I dont think Dixons hunch is true or isnt worth discussing. Its also a pretty fun read. And course sometimes shared experience can unearth stuff like -6 penalty which turned out to be true. Still, bottom line is theres no substantial argument backing up the theory so far.</div></div>
I wonder if this is a response to various link building methods involving automation, such as tools, quizes, widgets, etc.For example, try searching for "Publishing Platform" or "Blog Platform" in Google. Wordpress.org is not #1, though we know it has 57mil links and the words in the title tag. Darren easily outranks Wordpress.org homepage with 320+ links. Then again, it could be anchor text, though.Possibly, this is just a consequence of them detecting the same link/nav blocks on websites, esp footers, and reducing their weight, though. Or it could be that more types of links became devalued. So it is not a "Glass Ceiling", but the strategies you use to get certain link types.That being said, I have heard rumors that even directory submissions do give absolute minimal value.For some reason, anything above is like trying to catch a black cat in a dark room, with no cat in the room. I guess Id rather focus on building links the natural way, similar to Nicks advice to ramp up the work.
"we know it has 57mil links"AnOnym, like you said, 57 mil links without the right anchor text only drives PageRank. Of course with 36,000 page index penetration, optimizing internal anchor text would obviously help."Possibly, this is just a consequence of them detecting the same link/nav blocks on websites"Hard to say without a "before" and "after" picture and in a poluted test environment with hundreds of factors at play.
I agree with Halfdeck... I am saying a cat has four legs... a dog has four legs... a cat is a dog at the moment, but kicking off the discussion is the point really. You can do some statistical analysis on yuor own sites... if the Google organic traffic is constant, but the paid is not, then there is a question worth asking.Dixon.
Excellent article, very well observed. Im not saying that I have previously considered my sites to have hit this glass ceiling but I have wondered whether variety would come into play if you became so dominant. One of my sites is do especially well for instance, and I wonder whether it will continue do as well as this or more in to the future if it continues dominate. If the site was Rolly Royce, I would be overlooked as Rolls is a super brand but as its a lonesome independant, Ive got to wonder, does Google think this is the best result, every time somebody does a search for a term in that industry? ...just a thought.Ben M
@rjonesxActually I wrote the title for this submission and put the question mark in there. I understand what you are saying but Halfdeck point is valid IMO. These days too many guesses are taken as "truth" - e.g. all the whole knol ranking advantage posts. Its responsible to point out where we dont have evidence. I felt my addition of the question mark supported that framing.Most of us know Dixon though and hes a very experienced online marketer. Id take his observations seriously and believe they are worth opening up to a wider audience here. My goal though (and the same can probably be said for Dixon and Halfdeck) is to publicise this in order to get more evidence. Public exposure can shoot down obvious flaws, reinforce through common experience and give us ideas for testing. There are lazy people in this industry though, who will take publication as proof. Worse still they will republish these kind of discussions without the cautions. Like Chinese whispers, the theory eventually becomes a fact. Halfdecks disclaimer is very useful for these folks. We should probably have it posted on every "theoretical" discussion thread :)
I had very similar feelings many times, as if my sites had a certain amount of traffic allotted by Google, regardless of perceivable ranking shifts.In fact, I see this not only for traffic, but for Adsense income, as well.Like, a traffic spike still brings in about the same daily total, as if that extra traffic brought down the value of clicks. And then a worrying drop happens in visitor numbers, where I fear earnings would also go down significantly, but "miraculously", clicks become so much more valuable, on aggregate, income basically stays the same. (Once its disappointing, once its a relief :-))
" I am growing very tired of logical fallacy arguments."<div></div><div></div><div>@rjonesx Im probably as tired of baseless claims driven by FUD. Not going to say much more than that since Nick spelled things out well. Also notice I voted for this post. </div><div></div><div></div><div>"Do you do that when you normally have conversations?"</div><div></div><div></div><div>tuh-mah-toh tuh-mey-toh who gives a shit as long as I get my point across? Your first point at least had some legitimacy. Your objection to terms I cut & paste off Wikipedia is shallow, like someone voting down a blog post because he doesnt like the blogs logo. You dont like Latin? Too bad.</div><div></div><div></div><div>That said, its Friday and you probably had a long week (I sure did) so heres to a relaxing weekend.</div>
Patrick(BlogStorm) agrees with the flatlining effect and suggests increases in content + links are the best way out of it. Not shocking conclusions but worth adding to this discussion.