Home – New Forums Tech talk EMD’s getting smoked – latest algo update

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 56 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1119403
    Zava Design
    Participant
    • Total posts: 1,463
    Up
    0
    ::
    NickMorris, post: 134366 wrote:
    Its not about being and unbeing, its about who’s making a claim.

    “There is no God”
    In the absence of evidence that’s not a claim.

    #1119404
    Zava Design
    Participant
    • Total posts: 1,463
    Up
    0
    ::
    NickMorris, post: 134366 wrote:
    Maybe your research technique is as revolutionary as you claim it to be but just stating “I have done a lot of research” isn’t evidence that anyone should take seriously.
    I don’t claim it as revolutionary, just as pretty in depth. So far you’ve provided none of your own. Should we expect to see any soon??

    The way you have described it, it sounds like your research was haphazard at best. What was your methodology? How big was your data set? How did you isolate the EMD aspect to the exclusion of all other factors when you don’t have a clue what other factors there are?

    Data set was across about 20 different keyword groups, roughly about 12-20 keywords/phrases per group.

    And all aspects were the same apart from EMD v non EMD.

    You seem very skeptical of evidence from others on this issue – SEOmoz, Google and Matt Cutts but you don’t turn the same skeptical eye on yourself.

    Wow, that’s a big call from a mere few forum posts. You really have no clue how harsh I may judge myself. I’d avoid making judgements on someone with minimal information.

    SEOmoz has a vested interest in certain viewpoints. I actually do value their views in many areas, I am of the opinion that perhaps in the area of EMDs they may be a little outdated. I didn’t hold that opinion at first, took all that they said as gospel. But I proved myself wrong in this particular area. As I seek to do often.

    As to Matt Cutts, as I mentioned previously none of us have any idea for certain if he’s referring to EMD weighting now, or historically and carried over until now on old/aged EMDs (a bit like page rank).

    Normally I’d be happy to let you wallow in your own ignorance but I fear that your high post count might make you seem like some kind of authority to those who don’t know any better.

    Wow, and this probably reveals a lot about you. Seems in your eyes I’m not good enough or have worthy enough experience to have maybe done some research that could actually be valid. Seems since I don’t have an SEO blog, or am selling SEO expertise, or whatever else you think would make my viewpoint valid, that it should all just be dismissed.

    Seems my 15 years working as a professional in the web/digital industry, majority of that time working with clients of the calibre of the Commonwealth Bank, HSBC, Arnott’s, Toyota Australia, Panasonic et al… that gives me no authority in the matter at all, is that what you’re saying? I’m certainly not saying that gives me more authority than SEOmoz, or even you for that matter, but it seems you’re saying I have no authority on the matter. Is that correct?

    Meanwhile, I’ll wait patiently for any evidence from you that EMDs carry any weight. Anything will do, so we can actually stick to discussion on the subject at hand, rather than resorting to personal insults.

    #1119405
    Zava Design
    Participant
    • Total posts: 1,463
    Up
    0
    ::

    Or maybe if Nick’s too lazy too, or just wants to continue with personal insults and put downs rather than sticking to debating the actual subject, we can all share in a little research to see how much EMDs appear to matter?

    So everyone just search for a random keyword or phrase via Google, and confirm whether or not an EMD appears on the first page? Hardly scientific, but not a bad starting point on the actual subject matter.

    A few from me:

    how to cure acne – no EMD first page
    https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=how+to+cure+acne&btnG=Google+Search

    world’s best beaches – no EMD first page
    https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=world’s+best+beaches&btnG=Google+Search

    learn seo – no EMD first page
    https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=learn+seo&btnG=Google+Search

    #1119406
    Shane Walker
    Member
    • Total posts: 129
    Up
    0
    ::

    Hi websitedesigner! It’s Shane Walker here.

    The changes have rolled out in Australia but have not affected any of my sites. I believe that the reason is if you are doing all the correct things as per Google’s instructions having relevant and fresh updated content and correct SEO, then, this update should not affect any sites. The only thing it seems to be targeting is more rubbishing and spammy sites.

    Regards,

    #1119407
    Zava Design
    Participant
    • Total posts: 1,463
    Up
    0
    ::
    Shane Walker, post: 134376 wrote:
    Hi websitedesigner! It’s Shane Walker here.

    The changes have rolled out in Australia but have not affected any of my sites. I believe that the reason is if you are doing all the correct things as per Google’s instructions having relevant and fresh updated content and correct SEO, then, this update should not affect any sites. The only thing it seems to be targeting is more rubbishing and spammy sites.
    Yep, this is definitely true. EMD or non-EMD, if your content is relevant, updated frequently, and your content/markup structure is optimised well, then most Google changes won’t negatively effect you.

    #1119408
    websitedesigner
    Member
    • Total posts: 917
    Up
    0
    ::
    Zava Design, post: 134289 wrote:
    EMD’s haven’t had any additional value for a while now, so not really anything new.

    Sorry it certainly is new, I know guys who run niche sites who have had 70% of hundreds of sites wiped out of the rankings. The domains was still an important factor up to a few days ago.

    #1119409
    Aidan
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,125
    Up
    0
    ::

    Not meaning to get into an argument here but that method of checking for EMD dominance is a bit hit and miss to be of use as it assumes someone has setup an EMD and targeted the territory with one!

    It’s also not taking into account whether or not any EMD’s which do appear have other signals or not that help them to rank.

    Just for fun I googled for ‘binoculars’ here and in the US and sure enough EMD’s are ranking well but that finding means nothing without looking at why they are actually ranking.

    I also checked plumber in Sydney and sure enough, there’s one there too…

    #1119410
    websitedesigner
    Member
    • Total posts: 917
    Up
    0
    ::
    Zava Design, post: 134306 wrote:
    EMDs have had no greater weighting than including keywords in the page name for at least a couple of years, probably a lot more.

    eg.
    keyword.com
    domain.com/keyword.php

    Both carry exactly the same keyword weighting.

    Sorry that’s totally not true.

    #1119411
    websitedesigner
    Member
    • Total posts: 917
    Up
    0
    ::
    Shane Walker, post: 134376 wrote:
    Hi websitedesigner! It’s Shane Walker here.

    The changes have rolled out in Australia but have not affected any of my sites. I believe that the reason is if you are doing all the correct things as per Google’s instructions having relevant and fresh updated content and correct SEO, then, this update should not affect any sites. The only thing it seems to be targeting is more rubbishing and spammy sites.

    Regards,

    Really it’s not as simple as that. ‘Relevant and fresh content’ is subjective. This update is affecting a lot of sites that have proper content and content and has been updated regularly.

    I’m not sure why we are debating whether EMD’s help your rank when the rest of the SEO world has accepted that this is the change and Matt Cutts himself said that this is what the change was ““Minor weather report: small upcoming Google algo change will reduce low-quality “exact-match” domains in search results.””

    They clearly impacted search results, to think that an inner page with a keyword in the name would have the same result seems way off to me. Anyway I don’t care I’m out of the SEO game. It’s a bloody minefield!!

    #1119412
    Zava Design
    Participant
    • Total posts: 1,463
    Up
    0
    ::
    Aidan, post: 134388 wrote:
    Not meaning to get into an argument here but that method of checking for EMD dominance is a bit hit and miss to be of use as it assumes someone has setup an EMD and targeted the territory with one!

    It’s also not taking into account whether or not any EMD’s which do appear have other signals or not that help them to rank.

    Just for fun I googled for ‘binoculars’ here and in the US and sure enough EMD’s are ranking well but that finding means nothing without looking at why they are actually ranking.

    I also checked plumber in Sydney and sure enough, there’s one there too…
    Yay you found a couple of examples! I had actually continued to try more and more and was struggling to find any with EMDs on the first page. :)

    And you’re right, as I said above it is unscientific as we’re not looking into further elements as I did when researching. As I said, across a range of keyword groups I did tests with sites I optimised within each of these groups, where everything was equal (markup, copywriting, inbound links …etc) apart from the EMD.

    Now I’m quite open for someone to show me research of a similar vein that disproves this, but simply showing me as equally unscientific “evidence” as the above is great for the discussion (so thanks! :) ), but certainly doesn’t “disprove” the possible validity of my viewpoint. I’ve actually searched for research in this area, there’s nothing I have found outside of various claims that EMDs are important. Where’s the evidence? The real, scientific evidence?

    And yes, if I was taking this any further than a forum discussion (possible blog post after this reaction), then it would be good to lay out my methodology in detail. Maybe I’ll get time for that some day. But I haven’t found anything of a similar ilk countering what I found. And from the gist of this discussion, it seems there might be some value in my putting together a paper on this.

    And like I said (I’ll say it again): I believed exactly what the majority here seem to believe – the list of EMDs I own will attest to that – but then the results just kept staring me in the face that it wasn’t so.

    #1119413
    Zava Design
    Participant
    • Total posts: 1,463
    Up
    0
    ::
    websitedesigner, post: 134390 wrote:
    I’m not sure why we are debating whether EMD’s help your rank when the rest of the SEO world has accepted that this is the change and Matt Cutts himself said that this is what the change was ““Minor weather report: small upcoming Google algo change will reduce low-quality “exact-match” domains in search results.””
    Whoa, now you know that this isn’t true, and that there are many differing opinions on the importance if any of EMDs, and has been for some time.

    And as I’ve said twice, but will repeat a third time, you nor I have any idea if Matt Cutts was referring to all EMDs, or to those aged EMDs that did gain weight back a few years when it definitely did have an impact.

    ie.
    “Minor weather report: small upcoming Google algo change will reduce low-quality high PR domains in search results.”

    #1119414
    Zava Design
    Participant
    • Total posts: 1,463
    Up
    0
    ::

    (but I’m glad others are at least able to stick to debating the subject matter rather then resorting to personal insults – love discussions involving opposing viewpoints, hate slipping into the gutter with personal insults. Good going folks! :) )

    #1119415
    Zava Design
    Participant
    • Total posts: 1,463
    Up
    0
    ::
    websitedesigner, post: 134387 wrote:
    Sorry it certainly is new, I know guys who run niche sites who have had 70% of hundreds of sites wiped out of the rankings. The domains was still an important factor up to a few days ago.
    And did they have other non-EMD domains that they put in the same work in all other areas of SEO to compare their EMD domains to?

    Seriously, if they did I would love to know more about that data. As with any research/study, nobody’s perfect and someone else may have included some methodology or factor that I left out.

    #1119418
    Cesar
    Member
    • Total posts: 591
    Up
    0
    ::

    It’s been a while, but all I can I say is :D

    #1119419
    Aidan
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,125
    Up
    0
    ::

    The history of EMD’s in SERPs is indisputable it is the very reason why Google have introduced the change…

    As they say themselves, the change is aimed at reducing the numbers of low quality EMD’s showing in results…

    or in other words – “Hello guys, this is Google, we’re introducing a change to try do something about the low quality EMDs showing in results”

    So, there is no dispute at Google, or SEO Round Table, or SEOMoz or… or… about low quality EMD’s having too much SERPs real estate.

    The problem is big enough to be addressed by Google right now.

    Why would anybody argue that Google are wrong in their observation about their own index? Nobody here has a bigger dataset than them! Nobody here can say they have examined more results than Google has!

    Good luck to them in the cleanup, I’d love to see EMD’s fall away unless they are genuine brands.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 56 total)
  • The topic ‘EMD’s getting smoked – latest algo update’ is closed to new replies.