- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The sandbox is proven as much as it possibly could be without Google issuing an official statement of it’s existence:
http://www.seomoz.org/blogdetail.php?ID=328The jury is still out on Google Bowling:
http://forums.seochat.com/showthread.php?t=39323&page=1&pp=15webber286 wrote:The sandbox is proven as much as it possibly could be without Google issuing an official statement of it’s existence:
http://www.seomoz.org/blogdetail.php?ID=328The jury is still out on Google Bowling:
http://forums.seochat.com/showthread.php?t=39323&page=1&pp=15This isn’t proof. Just more Google gossip and hearsay. The exact stuff that gets everyone worked up. I am not saying they don’t use or test algos like this, but how can we seo towards ghosts of algos that may or may not exist and yesterdays algos become tomorrows ban. I bet it’s more of how long has this page been on this site, not how long has this site been online period.
Spend enough time on the SEO forums and you will have all the proof you need. There are a gazillion examples of sites experiencing very similar effects (ie: the sandbox). The exact cause of the sandbox and the algorithms behind it is of course a closely held secret by Google, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
It’s not gossip and hearsay; it’s an observable phenomenon that webmasters have seen that relates to how their sites rank in Google.
I’ve observed the sandbox effect on some of my sites, and I know other webmasters who have observed the effect also.
Clearly define the sandbox for me then.
The sandbox is a probationary period for new sites that affects their ranking in Google. Newer sites tend to rank poorly compared to where you would expect them to rank based on link popularity and other factors. The consensus is that the sandbox lasts from 9 to 12 months.
Matt Cutts is on record as confirming that there is a probationary period before new sites rank well in Google.
This is what is commonly called the “Google sandbox effect”.
The Google sandbox effect is clearly defined in a number of reputable SEO forums and blogs.
I read Matt’s blog. I didn’t get that.
Wayne-
Here’s a thread at Threadwatch quoting Matt Cutts regarding the probationary period:
Some guy at some show heard someone say.
(this is a near word-for-word quote)
They’ve been amused by the term
I asked him if they would continue using it and he said “definitely” or possibly “almost certainly”… He noted in words I cannot remember exactly that they felt it was having a remarkable effect on the quality of the index.These are lines from your link.
This is the smoking gun all seo forums refer to.
As I pointed out in my earlier post, I’ve personally experienced the sandbox effect on my own sites, and I know other webmasters who have also experienced and observed the sandbox effect on their sites.
You can call gravity hearsay and gossip too if you like, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s an observable phenomenon that many people have experienced.
So are Aliens. Gravity in fact does not exist, it is a theory. You can’y point to gravity and say there it is.
FreePokerLeague, I would be interested to hear your explanation of the sandbox phenomenon and why you think all of the SEO pros are wrong. There is certainly room for debate, but so far all you have had to say is where is the proof. People can’t explain or proove how the pyramids were built, but we can all observe that they do exist. There is something happening to everyone’s sites, and the sandbox is the prevailing theory, what is yours?
That normal measures catch up to sites after a while then through fixing what’s wrong your site rises.
