Becoming an authority - recovering from update florida/austin

Hi all,
Like many search engine marketing companies, some clients have been negatively effected by the Florida/Austin update (read disappeared from the
serps). I have carried out my own research and have read many reports and analysis on the Florida / Austin algorithm here and elsewhere. I'm
increasingly seeing more references to Localrank and Hilltop as the most likely factors regarding the new algorithm and these articles and reports
back up my own research.

I'd like to make perhaps some practical suggestions, or at least things to try out, for those affected by Florida/Austin.
Disclaimer: These suggestions are essentially for trial purposes and I do not claim to hold the definitive answer.

Becoming an authority
==================

Localrank is essentially all about the inter connectivity of pre-florida SERPs for a given keyword. It is believed to be based upon the top 1000 pages
of the old serps, although I suspect it is likely to be less. What this means is that the results of the top pre-Florida SERPS (old algorithm) get put
through a new filter which then forms the basis for the current SERPs. The localrank is calculated, in layman’s terms, by the amount of incoming links
a website has from websites that were previously ranked well in the old SERPS. In other words, are websites on your theme/keyword that were previously
well ranked, linking to you?

There is then a calculation based upon the old algorithm SERPs (OldScore) + Localrank (LRscore) to determine the Florida/Austin SERPs (not clear
whether they are multiplied or added).

Evidence that theming/localrank/Hilltop is factored in to the current algorithm is pretty strong imo. There are the odd exceptions but they may well
apply to ‘weak’ themes (weak meaning not commonly searched for terms).
Portals, large websites, sub domains of authority sites, High pr sites (7+), resource/info sites and professional spam sites are rising to the top.
On ‘weak’ themes there is a correllation between the number of internal pages indexed and the fact that the internal pages that are ranking well, have
the exact phrase as the file name.

As mentioned, I’m seeing a great deal of websites at the top of the current serps that have lots of incoming links from not only similarly related
sites but even their competitors. For the most part the top sites are indeed authorities on their subject. For those that aren’t authorities on their
theme, yet still rank well, the website owners seem to have a large marketing budget or carry out:

1. Purchase of text links on similarly related sites.
2. Blog spam
3. Have multiple domains (on varying c-block ip numbers.)

Of the varying theories out there what I personally don’t buy is:
a. There is an over optimization filter. Many sites at the top of florida/austin keywords have high kw densities, h1 tags etc.
b. The Google Adwords trigger theory. That Google have specifically targeted keywords based on Adword price for example. I believe Google has enough
search data to know what is a "strong" theme (many searches) and what is a "weak" theme (terms with few searches).

So how do you get to be one of the authority sites?
========================================

Well of course, the usual way is to create great content that webmasters will feel is worthy of linking to. Not any old link will suffice, but links
from sites that are themselves regarded as authority sites. For "weak" themes I still see good results from high link popularity that are not
necessarily thematic. Hence for weak themes you will likely see link farm spam rising to the top.

Here some suggestion for becoming an authority site:

1. Get a link from DMOZ, this supports the theming theory believed to be in place as the category page you have your link, is highly likely to have
lots more occurrences of your keyword /theme and be very thematic (unless it’s a regional category). I am seeing a lot of google directory category
links visible on the very top of Austin results.
2. There may well now be a stronger case for forking out the $299 for a Yahoo link. Although I haven’t tested this out yet so the Yahoo link may not
be weighted.
3. More effort should be taken in finding thematic portals and quality directories where site submissions are accepted for review (in google try
‘keyword directory’ / ‘keyword +submit site’ etc.)
3. As links from a website of the same theme and links from authority sites appear to be important, you might consider trading links with a
competitor. Here you might think Webby’s lost his marbles with that suggestion :-) but trading a link with a competitor that is ranking well in the
current SERPs may bring about a large boost for your own site. Not easy to pursuade, but with a well formulated email feasible.
4. Large sites have by default lots of content. More content is likely to mean more chance of you getting one or more of your sub-pages linked to. It
is also logical that large sites are seen by google as more effort being taken by a webmaster and the site deemed more of an authority than a smaller
site. This suggests increasing the size of your website to compare with the number of indexed pages of the top sites in the current serps
('site:www.domain.com' in google). Think glossary/lexicon, faq, forum, detailed product description…)as potential areas for more pages.
5. Create something unique such as an on/offline tool or perhaps a research article. Basically something of worth that none of your competitors have
on their sites.
6. If applicable to your theme, create a forum. This has two advantages, if it is an se friendly forum you will get many more pages indexed (I have
thirty odd thousand pages indexed, mostly coming from my German language SEM forum). The other advantage is that posts in a forum regularly get linked
to from other forums, or if it's a particularly good post, perhaps directly from an authority site.
7. If you are knowledgeable in your field, write articles and place them on your website (don't syndicate immediately). If the article is of worth,
authority sites may well link to it. A little public relations (the other PR) can help here to get an article published on a major authority site, be
sure to get that backward link though.
8. Google have a new patent for distinguishing duplicate pages and near duplicate pages. The important bit is 'near' duplicate pages. If you have
several domains and the content is not completely duplicated, but very similar, consider a new layout and re-wording paragraphs to make the sites more
different.
9. Google can identify crosslinking on multiple domains with the same ip c-block. A lot of the crosslinking merchants have lost their ranking because
they hosted their multiple domains on the same c-block and none of the domains were themselves authorities. Another reason why professional spammers
are still in the serps is that their multiple domains are on completely different ip blocks and they have a budget to buy their links (no names but
you know I'm sure yourselves of examples of this).
Having multiple domains in itself is not however spam. Don't kick the proverbial out of cross linking and review your hosting arrangements. Are they
on the same ip c-block?

For mom & pop small online businesses, getting a high ranking just got much harder. Most cannot afford to purchase text links from similarly related
websites, they cannot compete with the professional spammers who have dozens of separate domains with separate ip blocks as the hosting of such is
unaffordable. They can only rank well for minor (weak) terms as some posts here have already highlighted.

On-page optimization is still a factor but much less than it used to be imo. What imo smaller websites that don't have link purchase kind of budgets
can do, is to increase the size if their website as mentioned in point 4 above. Perhaps also split 'scrolly' pages in to 2-3 smaller pages.

On a side note, I've researched the No. of backward links and No. of indexed pages for many florida top 10 serps. There seems to be some correlation
between the top results and:
a. Many backward links + many indexed pages
b. fewer backward links but many indexed pages.
c. Many backward links but few indexed pages.

I believe it is the combination of these two factors which determines an authority page, especially lonks from sites of the same theme. It is like
there is some kind of a threshold where sites are filtered out and in. I don’t know what the threshold is but I imagine it is based on the strength of
the theme and competition.

So imo, new sites with low budgets, or those hit by Austin/Florida need to increase the the number of pages in their sites, get something unique on
their site which makes the site of value in order to get linked to. Really what Google have been saying all along.

However, more and more 3-4 word search terms are no longer showing up highly relevant 'smaller' websites due to the new algo placing far too much
emphasis on authority.
The results often show authority sites coming tops with 3-4 keyword phrases with the keyword phrase, or even just half the phrase, occuring just once
or twice. this hardly makes the page relevant. This is not good. It means that if you ranked well before and have now lost your ranking, It doesn’t
matter how relevant your pages are or how good your on-page optimization is, if you aren’t an authority or at least becoming one, you have no chance
of getting found unless it really is a very niche keyword phrase. You might want to do some synonym/thesaurus checks to find relevant terms that do
not include a 'strong' keyword. That way you probably have more chance of getting found.

I can't tell you for sure if localrank or hilltop is in use. It is most likely a combination of the two plus some more filtering we don’t know about
which might explain some anomalies. There again, i might also be completely wrong.

Anyway, I just thought that I’d at least provide perhaps some practical ideas to try out. For those devastated by Austin/Florida, some of my
suggestions might be worth trying. It certainly cant hurt your site.

Cheers
Alan
PS. Full localrank patent can be found here...
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...0&RS=6,526,440
PPS. Subject posted and in discussion at the following locations...
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum3/21648.htm
http://forums.seochat.com/t8151/s.html


--
ABAKUS Internet Marketing: SEO tutorial, SEO forum, articles, blog...
http://www.abakus-internet-marketing.de/en/

Alan Webb <newsgroups (AT) abakus-internet-marketing (DOT) de> wrote in
news:gq2v101p8le1jn50irje40vcfdo88sp38k (AT) 4ax (DOT) com:

For mom & pop small online businesses, getting a high ranking just got
much harder. Most cannot afford to purchase text links from similarly
related websites, they cannot compete with the professional spammers
who have dozens of separate domains with separate ip blocks as the
hosting of such is unaffordable. They can only rank well for minor
(weak) terms as some posts here have already highlighted.

On-page optimization is still a factor but much less than it used to
be imo. What imo smaller websites that don't have link purchase kind
of budgets can do, is to increase the size if their website as
mentioned in point 4 above. Perhaps also split 'scrolly' pages in to
2-3 smaller pages.

On a side note, I've researched the No. of backward links and No. of
indexed pages for many florida top 10 serps. There seems to be some
correlation between the top results and:
a. Many backward links + many indexed pages
b. fewer backward links but many indexed pages.
c. Many backward links but few indexed pages.

What I am seeing doesn't really accord well with b). Splitting pages/
adding pages worked very well post-Florida: the Austin update however
seems to have changed that.

I would say that having more pages in site has just last week become a
less useful approach, and that links have become much more important.

I'd say that's going to up the amount of blog spam, and decrease the
amount of real content created. Hmmmm.

Victoria
--
Clare Associates Ltd
http://www.clareassoc.co.uk/
01822 835802
--

Alan Webb wrote:

Hi all,
Like many search engine marketing companies, some clients have been negatively effected by the Florida/Austin update (read disappeared from the
serps). I have carried out my own research and have read many reports and analysis on the Florida / Austin algorithm here and elsewhere. I'm
increasingly seeing more references to Localrank and Hilltop as the most likely factors regarding the new algorithm and these articles and reports
back up my own research.

I'd like to make perhaps some practical suggestions, or at least things to try out, for those affected by Florida/Austin.
Disclaimer: These suggestions are essentially for trial purposes and I do not claim to hold the definitive answer.

Becoming an authority <snip

Very interesting Alan. Thanks for posting.

Do you think there will be a reinstatement of deemed "authoritative"
sites or do you think the ones that are currently left after Florida and
Austin ARE the deemed authoritative sites?

If it's the former I suppose I have some chance of regaining some
position as I have authoritative links from some relevant sites
including DMOZ and others. If it's the latter - I'm knackered!

Jez.



--
Rustic Stone House Signs
www.rusticstone.net

Extract the "URINE" to e-mail

Alan Webb wrote:

Hi all,
Like many search engine marketing companies, some clients have been
negatively effected by the Florida/Austin update (read disappeared from the
serps). I have carried out my own research and have read many reports
and analysis on the Florida / Austin algorithm here and elsewhere. I'm
increasingly seeing more references to Localrank and Hilltop as the
most likely factors regarding the new algorithm and these articles and

reports

back up my own research.

I'd like to make perhaps some practical suggestions, or at least
things to try out, for those affected by Florida/Austin.
Disclaimer: These suggestions are essentially for trial purposes and
I do not claim to hold the definitive answer.

Becoming an authority <snip

Very interesting Alan. Thanks for posting.

Do you think there will be a reinstatement of deemed "authoritative"
sites or do you think the ones that are currently left after Florida and
Austin ARE the deemed authoritative sites?

If it's the former I suppose I have some chance of regaining some
position as I have authoritative links from some relevant sites
including DMOZ and others. If it's the latter - I'm knackered!

Jez.



--
Rustic Stone House Signs
www.rusticstone.net

Extract the "URINE" to e-mail

Alan Webb wrote:

Hi all,
Like many search engine marketing companies, some clients have been
negatively effected by the Florida/Austin update (read disappeared from the
serps). I have carried out my own research and have read many reports
and analysis on the Florida / Austin algorithm here and elsewhere. I'm
increasingly seeing more references to Localrank and Hilltop as the
most likely factors regarding the new algorithm and these articles and

reports

back up my own research.

I'd like to make perhaps some practical suggestions, or at least
things to try out, for those affected by Florida/Austin.
Disclaimer: These suggestions are essentially for trial purposes and
I do not claim to hold the definitive answer.

Becoming an authority <snip

Very interesting Alan. Thanks for posting.

Do you think there will be a reinstatement of deemed "authoritative"
sites or do you think the ones that are currently left after Florida and
Austin ARE the deemed authoritative sites?

If it's the former I suppose I have some chance of regaining some
position as I have authoritative links from some relevant sites
including DMOZ and others. If it's the latter - I'm knackered!

Jez.



--
Rustic Stone House Signs
www.rusticstone.net

Extract the "URINE" to e-mail

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 14:44:49 +0000, Jez <j.ez (AT) URINEvirgin (DOT) net> wrote:

Alan Webb wrote:
Hi all,
Like many search engine marketing companies, some clients have been
negatively effected by the Florida/Austin update (read disappeared from the
serps). I have carried out my own research and have read many reports
and analysis on the Florida / Austin algorithm here and elsewhere. I'm
increasingly seeing more references to Localrank and Hilltop as the
most likely factors regarding the new algorithm and these articles and
reports
back up my own research.

I'd like to make perhaps some practical suggestions, or at least
things to try out, for those affected by Florida/Austin.
Disclaimer: These suggestions are essentially for trial purposes and
I do not claim to hold the definitive answer.

Becoming an authority <snip

Very interesting Alan. Thanks for posting.

Do you think there will be a reinstatement of deemed "authoritative"
sites or do you think the ones that are currently left after Florida and
Austin ARE the deemed authoritative sites?

If it's the former I suppose I have some chance of regaining some
position as I have authoritative links from some relevant sites
including DMOZ and others. If it's the latter - I'm knackered!

Jez.

Hi Jez,

What Google classes as authoritive sites are essentially those at the top of the serps assuming its a strong keyword.
You might wan tto compare the number of indexed pages on the top of the serps with the number of your own and using my link pop tool
(http://www.abakus-internet-marketing...e-tools.htm#lp ) check what atw and altavista have for backward links on your competiors sites and
more importantly if those at the top have more thematic incoming links than you do.
If you are knackered, its time for more content and even more incoming thematic link building I'm afraid :-/

Cheers
Alan

--
ABAKUS Internet Marketing: SEO tutorial, SEO forum, articles, blog...
http://www.abakus-internet-marketing.de/en/

What I am seeing doesn't really accord well with b). Splitting pages/
adding pages worked very well post-Florida: the Austin update however
seems to have changed that.

I would say that having more pages in site has just last week become a
less useful approach, and that links have become much more important.

I'd say that's going to up the amount of blog spam, and decrease the
amount of real content created. Hmmmm.

Victoria
--
Clare Associates Ltd
http://www.clareassoc.co.uk/
01822 835802

Hi Victoria,
long time, no see, glad to see you are stil around :-)

Of the many keywords I've checked at the top of the serps post austin, there are websites with few incoming links, even less than those that are on
the second page and which are no more thematic either. The difference is the size of the website. Those with few inbound links tend to be massive
sites with literally thousands of pages indexed, particularly for strong terms. Size of site / number of internal internal link appear to still be
part of the Austin algo from my own research. If you like I can dig out my research and give you instances of this. There are however some anomalies
but few from what I've seen. We dont know everything about Austin but my water tells me I'm getting there :-)

Not only the blog spam is going to increase but cue the doorway page spammers with their crappy content pages and js redirection :-(

Good to 'see' you again :-)

Cheers
Alan

--
ABAKUS Internet Marketing: SEO tutorial, SEO forum, articles, blog...
http://www.abakus-internet-marketing.de/en/

Jez, your email address / reply address bounces.

Alan

--
ABAKUS Internet Marketing: SEO tutorial, SEO forum, articles, blog...
http://www.abakus-internet-marketing.de/en/

Alan Webb <newsgroups (AT) abakus-internet-marketing (DOT) de> wrote in
news:gtfv10pk2nqogd4e5nqn9sccfspvs7lsu3 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com:

Good to 'see' you again :-)

(Waves)

You may be right - if you are talking about sites with 1000s of pages. But
splitting up a few longer pages isn't going to transform a 40-page static
site to a 1000+ one.

Pre-Austin, splitting up longer pages worked rather well even on smaller
sites because of the increased opportunities for relevant link anchor text.
But now the sheer number of links (internal or external) is making a bit
more of a difference, and link anchor text a bit less - at any rate, that
seems to be what I'm seeing.

Victoria
--
Clare Associates Ltd
http://www.clareassoc.co.uk/
01822 835802
--

Great post Webby, thanx for sharing.

I have to agree with many of your observations, indeed the "themes" element
appears to be almost an essential criterion now. In fact in my
investigations it would appear that individual page content for "strong"
terms is almost irrelevant. "Anchortext" from a high number of internal
pages would appear to be fairly critical though, along with links from
authority sites.

I have notice there might also be a dilution factor in the new algo. A site
with a small number of localrank backlinks scores higher than the same site
with the same localrank + non related links. Almost as though there is a
percentage thing going on where localrank can be diluted by non localrank
links- this would certainly put pay to the link farms.


--
Matt

http://www.xseo.com




"Victoria Clare" <victoria (AT) markpoles (DOT) org.uk> wrote

Alan Webb <newsgroups (AT) abakus-internet-marketing (DOT) de> wrote in
news:gq2v101p8le1jn50irje40vcfdo88sp38k (AT) 4ax (DOT) com:

For mom & pop small online businesses, getting a high ranking just got
much harder. Most cannot afford to purchase text links from similarly
related websites, they cannot compete with the professional spammers
who have dozens of separate domains with separate ip blocks as the
hosting of such is unaffordable. They can only rank well for minor
(weak) terms as some posts here have already highlighted.

On-page optimization is still a factor but much less than it used to
be imo. What imo smaller websites that don't have link purchase kind
of budgets can do, is to increase the size if their website as
mentioned in point 4 above. Perhaps also split 'scrolly' pages in to
2-3 smaller pages.

On a side note, I've researched the No. of backward links and No. of
indexed pages for many florida top 10 serps. There seems to be some
correlation between the top results and:
a. Many backward links + many indexed pages
b. fewer backward links but many indexed pages.
c. Many backward links but few indexed pages.


What I am seeing doesn't really accord well with b). Splitting pages/
adding pages worked very well post-Florida: the Austin update however
seems to have changed that.

I would say that having more pages in site has just last week become a
less useful approach, and that links have become much more important.

I'd say that's going to up the amount of blog spam, and decrease the
amount of real content created. Hmmmm.

Victoria
--
Clare Associates Ltd
http://www.clareassoc.co.uk/
01822 835802
--