Google update January 2015
-
Hello,
In January 2015, google changed its European Algorithm. The change decreased the ranking of some of our keywords but not all. See article for more evidence in google changing its algorithm.
https://www.seroundtable.com/google-update-maybe-19760.html
The biggest change was the keyword phrase ‘Wholesale Silver Jewellery’ which we ranked 1 in SERP, but now we’re nowhere to be seen. However, the change didn’t affect our keyword phrase ‘Wholesale Jewellery Silver’, ’Wholesale Silver’ and ‘Wholesale Jewellery.
We’ve been through our data and see that all of our ’Silver Jewellery’ keyword phrases are no longer showing in the SERP. Further research has shown that our competitors were also dropped down the rankings for the same keyword phrase.
Our question is: Why has this update affected certain keyword phrases, such as ‘silver jewellery’ but not ‘jewellery silver’ and how should we over come this?
Additional Information
If you type in our company name ‘Mainly Silver’ or ‘mainlysilver’ were still showing in SERP, however if you type ‘mainlysilver jewellery’ we’re no where to be found.We’ve even checked ‘site:mainlysilver.co.uk silver jewellery’ in google search and it returns with ‘no results found’. If you switch the keyword phrase, all our web pages are showing up
Our website is - www.mainlysilver.co.uk
-
Glad you're seeing the site back in the rankings. I would definitely keep digging, though. A 14-month disappearance is not something you want to chalk up to an error, because you could easily relapse days or weeks from now.
In other words, it's good news, but don't let your guard down.
-
Hello Dr. Peter J. Meyers,
Thank you for all your suggestions in this matter. We would like to update you and let you know that with the recent update to a google algorithm, our keyword 'Silver Jewellery' is back! We believe this was due to an error because our competitors now have the keyword too.
Unfortunately we believe we've lost some sales over the past 14 months due to this error but we're happy we are back.
Thank you,
-
So, first off, my apologies - I completely missed the 2015 and thought this just happened last month. You can tell that I'm one of those people still writing "2015" on my checks
Unfortunately, a 13-month lag makes tracking down a difficult problem even more difficult. Talked to a few SEOs, as this is such an odd case, and we generally agree that the typical culprits are:
(1) A targeted penalty due to link-building (usually, anchor text over-optimization)
(2) A targeted devaluation due to on-page over-optimizationI'm just not seeing evidence for #2, for the most part, and this does not look like a Panda issue to me. Typically, Panda has wider impact now and wouldn't be targeting specific phrases. The profile just doesn't fit, in my experience.
The redirect problem is suspicious, but so many months after you redirected and then reversed it, it's going to be really tough to sort out. I'm seeing something very weird, though. Run the site: operator in Google on your old site (since it's still live):
site:jewellery-collection.co.uk/
There are two URLs for what seems to be the home-page, one http: and one https:. Click on the cached version of the https: site, and it's a completely different site, for elf925 Jewelry. Something very odd it going on there.
Given that reversing the redirect hasn't helped you in over a year, I think I'd either go ahead and re-consolidate these sites or kill the old one completely. You could try a rel=canonical on the old site, if you're concerned about doing another 301-redirect. This legacy site could bite you in more than one way, though, so I think I'd take it out of the picture. After a year, you may need to try some more radical solutions.
-
Hello Dr. Peter J. Meyers,
Thank you for taking an interest into our problem. Unfortunately, we don’t believe that article is the problem. The sponsored link was added a few weeks ago but the phrase specific targeted action happened a year ago in January 2015. Before then, all our anchor text were branded names.
https://www.seroundtable.com/google-update-maybe-19760.html
We previously believed it was due to Panda and we waited for the update. However, the update in July 2015 had no effect on our issue.
We’ve inspected our search console and we’ve found no manual actions or issues.
We’re still ranking number one on all other major keywords such as ‘Wholesale Silver Earrings’, ‘Wholesale Silver Ear Studs’ and ‘Wholesale Jewellery Silver’. The issue is only when silver becomes before jewellery but not the other way around.
Possible Thoughts
We previously went under a different URL (www.jewellery-collection.co.uk). When we moved to our current url (www.mainlysilver.co.uk) we preformed a ‘meta refresh’ on the old url in 2014. As soon as we realised something went wrong with this phrase penalty, we removed the ‘meta refresh’ and added a landing page on the old URL.
Before we joined, the previous SEO guys resourced the link building work to India and as a result, has created us a massive directory link profile to old URL (www.jewellery-collection.co.uk) but they weren’t spamming. The anchor text were all brand names too.
When we did a "meta refresh" redirected from old URL to new, Google forwarded all the inbound links of the Old URL to New URL in the Google Search Console.
This issue has also affected one of our competitors www.925jewellery.co.uk with the specific phrase penalty (silver + jewellery).
I still don't understand why only "silver + jewellery".
We really appreciate your help in this matter.
-
You've got some recent links that are dubious (got a second opinion). Check out this one:
http://www.getgawjus.com/2016/02/fashion-files-springsummer-2016-trends.html
This has the appearance of a sponsored link, it's on the text in question ("wholesale silver jewellery"), and the link isn't highlighted (which makes it appear as if it's more for Google than users).
Are you seeing any manual actions in Google Search Console? This has all the appearances of a highly targeted action (based on specific phrases), and those are quite often related to link-building.
-
Google confirmed a core update around January 8th in the US, but I don't have data on international roll-out and most of the analyses of what happened at this point are very speculative.
Your "site:" search issue is very odd. As you said, Google is flat-out denying the existing of pages it clear has in the index. It doesn't seem to be a change in query interpretation or spelling. Whether I use the British or American spelling of jewellery/jewelry, I run into the same problem.
My gut feeling is that this looks much more like a phrase-specific penalty. Normally, this would occur if you were abusing exact-match anchor text (linking from hundreds or thousands of sites with exactly the same text). I'm not seeing any evidence of that. Your link profile isn't very strong, and there are maybe a few too many directory links, but most of the anchor text is brand-related and I'm not seeing anything that looks particularly spammy.
I'm going to run it by a couple of people - it's an interesting case and a bit of a stumper.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Rel canonical on other page instead of duplicate page. How Google responds?
Hi all, We have 3 pages for same topics. We decided to use rel canonical and remove old pages from search to avoid duplicate content. Out of these 3 pages....1 and 2 type of pages have more similar content where 3 type don't have. Generally we must use rel canonical between 1 and 2. But I am wondering what happens if I canonical between 1 and 3 while 2 has more similar content? Will Google respects it or penalise as we left the most similar page and used other page for canonical. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
How do you get a url to show as a tagline in google mobile search?
When searching in google via mobile, I am seeing urls changed to taglines. I have attached pictures that show the url in a web search, but a tag line from the mobile search. Does anyone know how to get a tagline to show in place of a url in a mobile search? Any advice would be appreciated! uLkYWRx.png wljXRI3.png
Algorithm Updates | | David-Kley0 -
Https & Google Updated Guidelines
Hi We have https on aspects of the site which users directly interact with, such as login, basket page. But we don't have https across the whole site. In light of Google adding it to their guidelines - is this something we need to put into action? Also same question on the Accessibility point Ensure that your pages are useful for readers with visual impairments, for example, by testing usability with a screen-reader. Are we going to be penalised if these are not added to our site? Thank you
Algorithm Updates | | BeckyKey0 -
What are top 3 directives to prepare for a Google algorithm update?
Company's site fluctuated in keyword rankings last Friday, due to Unnamed algorithm. Our directives are on-page optimization and continual content generation. What are other directives to take?
Algorithm Updates | | ejcruz0 -
Was there a recent secret Panda update? Help.
Our site http://www.entrepreneurhandbook.co.uk has had a fairly significant drop in organic traffic this past week. Going from 3.8k to 3.k Can't see any reported updates on the major SEO websites, we'd had steady growth all year then appear to have back-peddled. One post in particular, our UK venture capital list was page1 for a number of VC related keywords such including 'venture capital' (google.co.uk) but it's completely dropped out of the index for that one and others. Does anybody have any ideas? We haven't done any link building at all, we've focussed entirely on on-site SEO and high quality in depth articles/posts/lists and historically we've always seen small increases at every algo update. 2CG25iv
Algorithm Updates | | entrepreneurhandbook0 -
Have you seen what happens when you Google Academy Awards 2014?
Hi All... Just wondering if it is a new feature on Google's side (knowledge Graph)? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | BeytzNet0 -
15% Drop in Traffic. Anyone have theories about the most recent update?
Analyzing our traffic, looks like we were hit site wide, with some article pages that don't have great engagement seeing more damage than others. We've been talking to other sites, and sites that have never seen any penalties and do everything right have also seen about 15-20% drop in traffic. The sites we know that weren't affected are brands (sites you would recognize by name). The only conclusion I can draw from everything (looking at mozcast metrics 'big 10' is that branded websites saw a boost. Does anyone else have any theories about what this most recent update was about?
Algorithm Updates | | nicole.healthline0 -
How could Google define "low quality experience merchants"?
Matt Cutts mentioned at SXSW that Google wants to take into consideration the quality of the experience ecommerce merchants provide and work this into how they rank in SERPs. Here's what he said if you missed it: "We have a potential launch later this year, maybe a little bit sooner, looking at the quality of merchants and whether we can do a better job on that, because we don’t want low quality experience merchants to be ranking in the search results.” My question; how exactly could Google decide if a merchant provides a low and high quality experience? I would image it would be very easy for Google to decide this with merchants in their Trusted Store program. I wonder what other data sets Google could realistically rely upon to make such a judgment. Any ideas or thoughts are appreciated.
Algorithm Updates | | BrianSaxon0