Google Slower to Trust New Pages than One Year Ago?
-
It seems to me that Google is slower to trust (and rank) new pages today than in the past.
I used to be able to put up a new page and it would go right to the top of a competitive SERP.
For about the past year when I launch a new page it starts deep in the SERPs, sits there for a few weeks, then starts slowly moving up. These pages still eventually rank on the first page of Google - often at #1 or #2 after wikipedia or another strong site - but it can take a few months to get there, several months in a competitive SERP.
These are not "hot news" topics where freshness is an important factor. Instead they are product pages or general information articles.
Anybody else seeing this?
[ Just stabbing in the dark here... I am wondering if Google is relying more on visitor behavior these days and the delay is while they collect data?... Just stabbing in the dark.]
-
Thanks for the report, Jesse.
-
Thanks for the analysis. Your description makes a lot of sense. Maybe that is what Google is doing. Assessing to see if all of the boxes are checked.
-
The keywords that the articles target have a Moz KW Difficulty of about 50%. All of this is being done without any linkbuilding or other promotion. Just the ranking power of unique, substantive content on an authority domain.
A year ago these pages would have gone to the first page of Google within 24 hours. Now they still go to the first page but it might take 24 weeks.
-
Is it weird that I like this way better? It's making me work harder, but I think it's much more "fair."
-
Nice work on getting those quick rankings.
These types of results are becoming hard to get.
-
...in the past you'd see them have a big jump quickly and then start to fade back down...
Right... in the past a good page on a strong site would bust right to the top and Google would play "whack a mole". Now the good pages on a strong site will start deep in the SERPs and without promotion, they will climb slowly to the spot that you would have initially expected them to rank.
Instead of "whack a mole" google is saying... "prove the you deserve it". At least, that's what it looks like to me.
-
So I just 404'd an old page and changed it's URL and re-launched it last Tuesday. Today it has been indexed and is on page 3 for a fairly competitive keyword. That was much quicker than I expected.
Granted, I built a few links for this one last week and didn't let it just go without but I still find this relevant.
Also, I still feel like a few months back this would have happened by Thursday/Friday of last week.
Anyway that's my latest findings.
-
I'd agree. I think the reason is because there are so many boxes to tick nowadays if you want to have good rankings in the SERPs. Google is looking deeper into every website now (after Penguin 2.0) and this is clearly having an affect on how quickly websites are ranking for keywords on deeper pages.
On the flip side, whereas rankings would jump around quite a lot in the past, as Google as delved deeper into a website, hopefully once a new website has its rankings, there shouldn't be too much fluctuation which is great as you can put some budgets, strategies and plans in place.
-
It must depend on the keyword because in the past few weeks, I've had a couple of brand new domains hit the first page of Google very quickly. It's not for ultra competitive keywords, but it isn't for bad keywords that people aren't searching for either.
I've got well over 1,000 website that I do testing with, I'll add another 50+ this week to do some testing on.
Any particular keywords you guys want me to test? Give me something that is middle or the road, nothing too hard or easy, that way we should get some pretty quick results.
-
Good chance either some or all of these things happened:
a.) your competitors had built links through black-hat seo firms
b.) you are a victim/beneficiary of the Google Honeymoon (keep building links/content and don't be sad if you disappear in a few days back down the SERPs. You can gain it back quickly!)
c.) your content was stronger and your keyword/on-site SEO work was done proper
-
Social media plays a big part in getting noticed, crawled and indexed faster by Google, Bing and Yahoo. When launching a new website, try registering the main social networking channels (Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, YouTube, LinkedIn) and complete user profiles, including the URL of your new website. If you regularly update each social media channel, connect with other users, and post relevant content, you may find that your new site gets indexed faster.
-
I launched a dental website a couple of months ago and within a month, we had incredible keyword rankings ahead of many of the competitors in the same town. We had a brand new url, brand new content and everything. So in this case, we seemed to rank well in a short amount of time. Our content was nothing special, but unique of course. I am still scratching my head to figure this one out!
-
ABSOLUTELY!
I'm so glad I'm not the only one. Lately I've re-launched a few penguined pages with new URLs so the 404 would rid the black-hat action. The keywords have slowly regenerated whereas in the past you'd see them have a big jump quickly and then start to fade back down (if your SEM campaign didn't keep up of course.)
Anyway I definitely have been seeing this lately. Good topic. Makes me feel better.
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
-
Can You Get Better Ranking/Conversion by Reducing the Number of Pages?
I am seriously considering reducing the number of pages in a section of our website. We currently have 39 webpages. I'm considering reducing it to 6. The site architecture would make more sense giving recent design changes. And we could focus more attention on improving conversions from these 6 new pages. But I'm considering doing this mainly because I think it'll help us do a better job of communicating to and converting our audience. The new pages would be longish. The existing 39 pages are by no means stubs, but these new pages would be longer. Anyway, what I want to put out for discussion is the SEO impact. What are the good SEO reasons for reducing the number of pages? Can 6 well-done pages out perform 39 pretty-well-done pages? How many queries can one page rank for well? Is this SEO suicide? Honestly, there's a part of me that cannot believe I'm saying this, but I think my heart is in the right place.
Content Development | | justin-brock1 -
Google "blog" search
Anyone notice a while ago - the "more" drop down used to include "blogs" which really helped with finding like minded blogs for content marketing. Anyone finding this frustrating and or find a solution? I know they supply us with: http://www.google.com/blogsearch Any other hints? Your pal, Chenzo
Content Development | | Chenzo0 -
Does every keyword need its own landing page?
So we're doing a bunch of keyword research. We've identified the big traffic, higher competition keywords and we've identified tons (thousands) of long-tail keywords that would be appropriate. What I'm wondering is: does every keyword need its own landing page (or content page)? Obviously, we'll be building content for all the primary keywords we're targeting. I'm less mystified about that. What I'm more confused about is what to do about the long tail keywords. For there to be any measurable traffic increase, we need to rank well for thousands of long tail keywords. But it's just not realistic to create thousands of quality content pieces to target each of these long tail keywords individually. So how do you go about ranking for large numbers of long tail keywords? I saw somebody post about using an FAQ page to target multiple long tail keywords which makes sense but even with that I'm not going to have a thousand questions. How does one go after large volumes of long tail keywords? Thanks, --eric
Content Development | | EricOliver0 -
How much duplicate content counts as duplicate content to Google?
Hi everyone! I've had a look through some duplicate content posts and I can't see the answer to this query, so I thought I'd ask in case someone could help. I've been looking at a website that competes with the site that I work on. They have profile pages containing content that has been copied and pasted straight from the suppliers' websites. Their pages have all their own code framing the content, which is diluting the concentration of duplicate copy. How much duplicate content can a page have before it gets penalised or ignored by Google? Any suggestions very gratefully received 🐵
Content Development | | ceecee0 -
Starting a Blog. New Domain vs integrated in a shop domain?
Hi everybody, We are going to start a blog for posting about topics related to our online shop and its products. Our question is... what is better in terms of SEO.... Creating it in a new domain and linking to our online store when neccessary, or integrating it in our actual online shop and take advantage of our visitors? Thank you very much in advance! Best Regards
Content Development | | fogar0 -
Google Authorship for guest posts
I've set up google authorship on my site and my image appears in search result for posts.I run wordpress and my categories are also indexed but it doesn't show up for categories of posts? Is this possible? My other question though is that I do a lot of guest posting and want to get credit as a google author when I post on other people's sites. What code do I need to add at the end of guest posts so that I'm credited as the author via google authorship?
Content Development | | SamCUK0 -
Question about Google News Sitemap
I'm submitting my site to Google News, have a few questions for creating my sitemap. The majority of my articles (800) are in a category called 'Disability News' (which is one of my main keywords). Around half of these posts are we're automated RSS feed posts (first 200 words of an article directly copied with a link thru to the original). The past few weeks I've been posting tons of unique content so I was thinking about moving all duplicate content into a category called 'Syndicated News' and excluding that from my Google News sitemap. Is this advisable? or should I just leave it as is?
Content Development | | craven220 -
Do Older Post Dates Affect Click Throughs From Google ?
My Blog Entries appear in Google with a date, do those dates matter ? Will people stay away from an older date, say 2009 ? Is it worth removing the dates ? Or should I update the entry and change published date ?
Content Development | | jp_cp0