How about a discussion on Penguin 2.0?
-
Penguin 2.0 was officially released today. I'm sure we've all seen Matt's video.
http://searchengineland.com/penguin-4-with-penguin-2-0-generation-spam-fighting-is-now-live-160544
Ideas for building sharable, linkable content? New strategies? What to avoid, what not to do, etc?
Let's get a discussion going!
-
Amazing ..... this huge update (from what I read on other sites and listening to Matt) and almost nothing here on SEOMoz.....What is up with that.
-
Good point Maria. Google will be pretty unstable for the first little while. It's better to keep calm and carry on with good content
-
Daniel,
To your first point -- for my main keywords (which according to Google have been commercial in intent for the last few years -- i.e. the kw queries bring up only retail options) are now showing reviews from authoritative/journalistic sites. So for instance, "Men's Jeans" might have used to bring up all retail stores, now it might bring 8 stores (plus ads) and 1 or 2 "Men's Jeans" reviews from GQ or something to that effect.
But having said that, I started noticing this about a week ago...
-
Google penguin 2.0 rolled out today!
I saw many some changes on Google. -
A few observations from the many keywords and sites I monitor:
1. A lot of what I track is in reviews of various products. I've seen a big jump for Consumer Reports. In many instances they now have two listings and they are higher than where their one previously was. Anyone else seeing this?
2. I'm seeing a lot of new sites I haven't seen before, especially after the first page. In the top 20 of one of my main keywords there are 4 new domains that have never been there before...nor should they be. Horrible sites. One of them is [extremelylongkeyword2013] (dot) blogspot.com. It's pretty nuts to see that.
3. In every search, whether searching for the product or reviews of the product, sears, amazon and walmart are almost always the top three in some order. I'm even seeing Wikipedia higher than ever. This is a shuffle from what used to be.
4. I'm seeing a lot more about.com results than I did before.
5. I have noticed News results on almost every search, many unwarranted. Often the news results are appearing after the top 10.
6. No major shakeups on any of my own sites. Little bit of shuffling, some up, some down, but nothing major. Biggest winners I am seeing are consumer reports, sears, amazon and walmart.
-
I find that the first few weeks after an update the SEO world is awash with dangerous speculation. I'm excited to see some real data on sites that have recovered. Until then I'm going to try to avoid speculating.
-
To me it looks like larger authority sites are ranking better. I had a few top position drop to under position 5-10 (I deal with mainly local niches), and now see larger websites although not as relevant as mine doing better imo.
-
I'm with Jesse -- it will take a bit before we can tell anything conclusive, but I'll watch my site, and if I notice anything I will report and add to the discussion. I don't think it will be anything unexpected if you have been following what Google says and watching the trends within your markets for the past few weeks/months.
But we will see...
-
Will probably be awhile before we know anything concrete but my guess would be the same strategies of 1.0 apply toward 2.0. I'd imagine they just widened the umbrella, so to speak.
We'll see! I've got a close eye on a few sites I'm curious to see what will happen to...
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
-
Best way to go about merging 2 sites with significant search volume?
Hi everyone! A client of ours ('Company A') recently acquired another company ('Company B') - both brands carry weight within their industry. Company A's brand name currently registers over 6,500 searches per month, while Company B's brand name draws about 2,500 searches per month. While Company B is smaller, their search volume isn't insignificant. The powers that be plan to discontinue Company B's site at an unspecified date in the future, but it's on the backburner. We'd obviously like to transfer as much of their current ranking as possible, but we also don't want to confuse users. There's additional search volume for term variations such as 'Company B jobs' & 'Company B locations' that we'd like to capture for as long as there's still volume there. Would a microsite with Company B's look & feel (to make it easier to house pages built to capture careers/locations searches) justify its inherent cost, or would it be just as valuable to build a series of landing pages on Company A's site? (Obviously assuming that valid redirects would be in place once Company B's site is taken down.) Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wilcoxcm0 -
Hi. Has anyone seen a drop in their PA recently? We have over 40 clients and 80% dropped and it has been like this for the past 2 months. I wanted to check if other websites are also experiencing this drop or is it just us?
I'm specifically asking for drops happened in the last 2 months, because before that we had a normal trend. Some websites would go up in their PA rankings and some would drop. But seeing 80% of our clients drop like this is just weird. Just wanted to see if other market leaders are also having the same issue so I can stop attributing it something X-Filish! Our clients are all .EDUs if anyone was wondering. Also the maximum drop has been 4 points in a month.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AP_Search0 -
My "search visibility" went from 3% to 0% and I don't know why.
My search visibility on here went from 3.5% to 3.7% to 0% to 0.03% and now 0.05% in a matter of 1 month and I do not know why. I make changes every week to see if I can get higher on google results. I do well with one website which is for a medical office that has been open for years. This new one where the office has only been open a few months I am having trouble. We aren't getting calls like I am hoping we would. In fact the only one we did receive I believe is because we were closest to him in proximity on google maps. I am also having some trouble with the "Links" aspect of SEO. Everywhere I see to get linked it seems you have to pay. We are a medical office we aren't selling products so not many Blogs would want to talk about us. Any help that could assist me with getting a higher rank on google would be greatly appreciated. Also any help with getting the search visibility up would be great as well.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | benjaminleemd1 -
Panda 4.0 Update Affected Site - What should be a the minimum Code to Text Ratio we should aim for ?
Hi All, My eCommerce site got hit badly with the Panda 4.0 update so we have been doing some site auditing and analysis identifying issues which need addressing. We have thin/duplicate issues which I am quite sure was part of the reason we were affected by this even though we use rel=next and rel=prev along with having a separate view all page although we don't concanical tag to this page as I dont' think users would benefit from seeing to many items on one page. This led me to look at our Code to Content Ratio. We have now managed to increase it from 9% to approx 18-22% on popular pages by getting rid of unnecessary code etc. My question is , is there an ideal percentage the code to content ratio should be ?.. and what should I be aiming for ? Also any other Panda 4.0 advice would also be appreciated thanks Sarah
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SarahCollins0 -
Rich Snippets Ratings For Q&A Discussions, Articles,
Hi, I'm looking for how I can use a star rating for a q&a discussion or article/blog post to achieve a rich snippets search result. I'm thinking about a user rating for "Was this helpful?" 1 to 5 stars. As I look at schema.org and do and other reading on it, it looks like it's possible to rate only a set group of content types, blogs and discussions not included. However, I've seen rich snippets ratings in SERPs for blog posts, like this example https://www.google.com/search?q=erp+implementation+challenges&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=panorama+consulting+blog&client=firefox-a&hs=gId&hl=en&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&ei=QmCBUYLLCOfwiwKHhIAQ&start=20&sa=N&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45921128,d.cGE&fp=eb2f15e2a98a4631&biw=2144&bih=995 On page, it looks like they used some simple span tags. So, my question is, which content type category does that fit into for rating and is that strategy safe enough going forward? Also, are there more steps to making this work? It it is okay to have users rate the helpfulness of a discussion or article and get rich snippets, I'd kinda like to do it. Best... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Penguin & Panda: Geographic Penalities?
Has anyone ever come across information about a website appearing strongly in SERP's in one region, but poorly in another? (ie: great in Europe, not so great in N. America) If so, perhaps it is a Panda or Penguin issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Prospector-Plastics0 -
Link Building Post Penguin?
I really am lost as to what to do these days.. The problem with my industry is the whole idea of link bait isn't very lucrative. There are no bloggers either, so guest blogging also isn't a very good option. Seems to me like the best thing I can do is just publish content! So, publish a lot of quality content? LOL, sounds like that's right up Google's alley. Where do you publish your content, and what would you say has shown the best results for you personally? We called an SEO company, Arteworks, a few days ago (Friday), and they really didn't go into any details about how they build links. We called them because I saw a post that you commented on, here, and it recommended a few companies at the bottom of the post. (Arteworks being one of them) Really, this is where I get so dang confused... The goal is to build links like the old days, except only use unique content, diversify your pages, and anchor text? Sound about right? Or, should I only create content on my site? Thanks in advance for your time and advice!! Sincerely, Tyler Abernethy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TylerAbernethy0 -
Could targeting 2 geographic locations decrease rankings?
Hello, I think that us targeting 2 different geographic locations (San Francisco, CA and Salt Lake City, UT) is negatively effecting the rank of some of our main keywords. My evidence for this: Since December our main keyword (NLP) dropped in ranking for nlpca(dot)com from about 19th to about 40th. This is about when we started to really target 2 different locations. Other main keywords dropped a lot as well, like the important term "NLP Training" Also, our name, nlpca(dot)com indicates NLP California (CA stands for California in Google) The other day we bolded a sentence with the words "Salt Lake City, Utah" at the top of our content and in one of Google's Databases (the one I was looking at) we dropped in rankings for "NLP California" where we used to be completely sitelinked (where we took up a lot of space at the top of the search). Also, we shot up to 1st on my datacenter for both "NLP Utah" and "NLP Salt Lake City". At the same time, our rankings for the term "NLP" dropped off the map. It has come back up, but we've also targeted California again. A lot of our anchor text has the word "California" in it. We're thinking about building a separate site for Utah and just linking to it from the California website when we need to. Does it sound to you, in your experience, that targeting both locations in our case is what's causing a decrease in rankings? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW0