SEO sites were blasted by Panda

[EGOL]

Just noticed that lots of SEO sites were blasted by Panda...

http://trends.google.com/websites?q=webmasterworld.com&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0

http://trends.google.com/websites?q=seomoz.org&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0

http://trends.google.com/websites?q=digitalpoint.com&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0

http://trends.google.com/websites?q=forums.seochat.com&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0

[flowsimple]

Interesting thread. So now after the more recent Panda update, is that another dip I see in those same graphs There's gotta be something with wrong with the data. Most of the data I've seen from Google Trends and Compete is laughable.

So any further updates? How has Panda affected SEO websites? And why? Is it all the incestuous linking? Thinking out loud here... is it possible that Google has some way to benchmark what the mean/median/average links there are per industry and THEN it uses those to figure out what a websites link count is worth? (Know what I mean?) eg. SEO industry mean = 300 real links, so above 300 higher authority, but dentist websites mean = 60 real links, so different way to measure authority? Point is, links and their worth could also be classified and measured by industry.

[EGOL]

waiting for the new profile photo

[SteveOllington]

If it turns out to be right, I'm going to get myself a deerstalker hat, start smoking a pipe, and walk around calling everybody Watson.

[Websensejim]

Yeah, looks like Google Trends data is not to be trusted (like most other G products). I just looked at those graphs for some heavyweight trusted authority sites including the BBC and guess what - same big traffic drop  LOL

Steve O, I think you may be on to something.

[EGOL]

I have not heard of any sites that were hit by Panda being released from the problem.  If people were getting out they would be yelling YEEEEHHAAAA! in the forums.  So, until that happens you can only guess at what might be holding your site back.

I would focus for now on an overall improvement in content quality.   That is always a great investment.

[toeplly]

I am Managing SEO for Multiple Websites, One Health Website Traffic Goes Down Up to 60 % , Before Panda We are getting 3500 Daily Visits and Now It's 1700 Per Day, Help me Out, What Steps Should I Follow to Get my Traffic Back ..

[vaibhav45]

Our Site learnhub.com & Jumbotest.com saw 30% increase in Traffic after panda update.

[meshach]

Interesting thread! Has anyone got any third party to confirm? SEOmoz have anything to add?

[SteveOllington]

Eureka! (Possibly... I think/hope).

Trends uses four sources right?

Sooooo, if you think about it, all it would take is for Trends to stop using just one of those sources and wham! There it is, the drop!

Now, I noticed people recently saying that GA had removed benchmarking, which will be replaced by something better later. Since GA benchmarking is part of the permission-al "opt in" data that makes up Trends, and the fact that it disappeared at the same sort of time... logically you could conclude that Trends suddenly stopped getting data from that source.

That would explain everything!!

I should have been a detective

[bemcapaz]

I think maybe they do spot but its not in their best interest to just release it to the world for free

[EGOL]

Why did they all move the same direction on the same date - the panda date?

[AlanBleiweiss]

I'd like to say "you can only trust numbers if you have access to an individual site's anlaytics.  Except every analytics program is suspect.

Oddly because they're all suspect, I use data for finding trends in the data.  Which brings us full circle to Google Trends.  Apparently Google can't even spot accurate trends.

[SteveOllington]

"Especially Compete"... haha, worse then Alexa?

[SteveOllington]

Yeah even if the numbers are way out with the different source, you'd expect to see some reflection with the trending. I wonder what's wrong with Trends then.

[TomCritchlow]

Yeah, all of these data providers are a little suspect. Especially compete!

[EGOL]

Thanks Steve,  I don't see an end-of-February drop for any of those sites in that data.

[SteveOllington]

Yeah they do admit they estimate, based on their sampling. But I believe they mix panel with tool bar and ISP data, so I would have assumed their estimates would be kind of close but maybe not then lol.

Where do you use? I guess none can be trusted really can they?

[AlanBleiweiss]

I've never trusted compete.com data - every test I've done with their data has ranged from "wildly under-reported" to "wildly over-reported", with the occassional "lucky guestimate" thrown in.

[SteveOllington]

Some of those same sites through compete.com:

http://siteanalytics.compete.com/webmasterworld.com+seomoz.org+digitalpoint.com/

As they use a combination of data sources I guess we'll have to stick with them...

[SteveOllington]

Damn, so Trends should be avoided due to false information for a while or...?

[EGOL]

Thanks for looking into this, Tom.

I have been doing a little research myself..... I can find lots of sites that show massive traffic losses on  the dates of panda updates.  However, I am not finding any sites that show substantial traffic gains - at exactly the same time - which is what we would expect to find.  Right?

So, I am now starting to think (like others in this thread) that the data being presented in Google Trends is suspect.

[TomCritchlow]

Hmm - not sure I'm trusting those graphs. SEOmoz didn't see any change one way or the other with Panda...

[Gyi]

Perhaps someone from Moz can fill us in...

[EGOL]

lol.... you are checking all of the low quality sites...     J/K

There are lots of sites that do not show a drop at end of February.

A lot of sites are down at end of April because of college courses ending.

[bemcapaz]

Maybe they changed their metrics? Every site im checking o google trends is showing a huge decline in the number of visitors.

For instance I tryed

Mashable

Techcrunch

Yahoo (not as big as the others but stil...)

They all have a similar graphic as the ones mentioned on this post, so if the visitors are leaving from everywhere , where are they going? To splogs? hehe

[AlanBleiweiss]

yeah unless we can get input from site owners, I am not convinced those are reflective of actual traffic.  Just not sure.

[SteveOllington]

WOW!!! That's a hell of a find. It's not like it could be some huge coincidence either, that many sites all hit at exactly the same time. How do we find out more?

[EGOL]

I hope not!

[TaitLarson]

Interesting theory!  I just checked us on in trends.  It says we got whacked too.  Still I'm seeing pretty good traffic to our site.  I wonder if those graphs are not as bad as they look.

[MarieHaynes]

So perhaps this is Google's way of leveling the playing field and taking away some of the advantage that sites with knowledgeable SEOs have?

[EGOL]

SEO sites get lots of links from SEO blogs.  Very incestuous linking in this niche.

[MarieHaynes]

Do you think it could be to do with the backlink pattern?  I mean, if Google can tell that there are an abundance of manufactured links then this would make sense.

[EGOL]

Maybe any site that smells like it has been touched by an SEO got whacked?

I checked other SEO sites and all that I have checked have been whacked.

[AlanBleiweiss]

And so much for BlackHats having an upper hand in the game

http://trends.google.com/websites?q=blackhatworld.com&geo=all&date=2011

Or those who believe it's all about backlinks

http://trends.google.com/websites?q=backlinksforum.com&geo=all&date=2011

[MarieHaynes]

Very interesting!

I just spent time looking at my competitors.  Some of the really big guns took a drastic hit as well.