- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
😎
Hello all….I have been absent from this forum for a long time, due to personal affairs in my life my casino business had to take a back seat for a while.
I am writing/venting about Google. Google is “it” for search engines these days, as it feeds Yahoo, Aol, itself of course, and Alexa.
Thankfully it is free to be apart of or else I would be no where…
But, I thinkk there are some issues, particularly with Google in regard to its ranking.
Case Study: Check out Google for keyword “online casinos” which is perhaps one of the top, if not the top, keyword for searching out our sites…
Look at the top 10 for this keyword. Then, recall Google’s big policy about “reciprocal” linking.
http://the-online-casinos.com is ranked in the top 5 with all of 50 Links in Google according to Marketleap.com
http://online–casinos.info is ranked in the top 10 with just about 250 links in Google according to Marketleap.com
http://online-casinos-royale.com is the ringer…It has topped out at #1 for a couple months now, but it does not allow archiving of its homepage…
Obviously this site is using a cloak!
Can anyone answer these questions with the above in mind:
1.) How can Google not notice this Cloak?
2.) How can Google allow sites with relatively little linkage take such top spots in its rankings?
3.) Why does site rank change almost daily – a look at the top ten on a daily basis will reveal the same basic ten shuffled around a bit….????Some say top rankings in Google are luck…I don’t think its luck, there is a formula for success, I’m sure, since Google operates on an algorithim. If it was luck, Google would simply pick any random sites for its ranks…
What do you all think?
-Brendan
Hi there, :bigsmile:
how have you been? Long time no see.
I have no answers to that, I have been shaking my head at google results for some time. :hmmm:
It’s also overdue for the dance.
Maybe we’ll have two dances in March?:sarcasm:
Originally posted by bpmee
😎Case Study: Check out Google for keyword “online casinos” which is perhaps one of the top, if not the top, keyword for searching out our sites…
Look at the top 10 for this keyword. Then, recall Google’s big policy about “reciprocal” linking.
For the three questions…
1.) Cloaking is hard work. If you do it right, Google won’t know the difference. It isn’t worth it for them to spend the resources to make sure *every* website isn’t cloaking. I think they’re also more focused on results. (e.g. spam cloaks will be gone fast.)
2.) Obvious indication that links aren’t everything
3.) Google spiders and refreshes popular sites every few days.
Linking schemes aren’t worth the work. Cloaking might be worth the work for some, but it will probably be fleeting if you aren’t an expert. As far as the work it takes and the number of expert eyeballs looking at you, those wouldn’t be good keys to cloak in my opinion.
Can’t see any cloaking on those sites.
Using doesn’t mean they are cloaking. We should all be using that meta tag, it is our content not Google’s.
The total number of links is not a factor. Download the toolbar from Google and pay close attention to the PR number of each linking page.
The top 10 do change quite abit and they have for awhile. I now consider it to be normal.
