Duplicate content and google

On Jun 29, 2:12*pm, John Bokma <j... (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote:

Big Bill <b... (AT) kruse (DOT) co.uk> wrote:
If you recall some years back there was a period when the top SERPS
were riddled with obvious spam, much of which was eventually purged.
It was theorised in some quarters then that the algo had been rigged
on a temporary basis purely to make this spam more visible. Quite
possibly something similar's happening now.

Might be true, maybe they are even testing how effective the "Report
spam" page is. OTOH, it's not that difficult to host an unfiltered version
of Google on a small set of IP addresses for reviewers, and not bothering
the rest of the world. But I have no idea how the human reviewing process
works, so you might have a good point.

--
John Bokma * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *http://johnbokma.com/

AISE/AWW/SEO/web development forum: * * *http://seo-expert-wiki.com/

I have a related question about duplicate content. Some of my
customers have thousands of products and have chosen to purchase the
descriptions from a service so they do not have to manually enter then
in. The inventory changes very frequently, so this will be a major
time saver. Anyway, given that a number of my customers wish to
purchase the same service for the same type of products (they are
resellers and are selling the same products), all of their item detail
pages will have the same content. As a designer, they will be
displayed differently, but the description will remain the same. Will
they all ultimately be penalized for purchasing the prefab
descriptions? If none of you know, please point me in the direction of
someone who might before I send my legitimate customers down a bad
path.

Thanks,

Michelle

"michelleC" <chancemichelle (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Anyway, given that a number of my customers wish to
purchase the same service for the same type of products
... Will they all ultimately be penalized for purchasing the
prefab descriptions?

Quite possibly.
Google compares page with page, so it depends a bit on how that information
is displayed.

There is no doubt that with thousands of affiliates competing with each
other, not all will do well. And with tempate sites, virtually none of them
will do well.

I have one affiliate site where I do better than the core site - but I have
completely rewritten the content, and he uses 1998 spam methods. Sadly, most
affiliates do NOT do well.

Look at the way mazon works; at one time, affiliates were encourage to make
their own pages, slotting in the occasional product link or linked photo;
many of the sites did really well in their niches, and often an Amazon
affiliate came above Amazon for particular searches. These days, Aamazon
encourages more and more 'corporate' affilaite sites, and - surprise
surprise - Amazon's own page appears in the top two slots for many product
searches.

Content is King - and that still means unique, releavnt and interesting
content.

Some of the sickest sites on the web are machine generated affiliate
template sites.
--

Andrew
seo2seo.com
sick-site-syndrome.com

UK Residents:
STOP THE "10p Tax Ripoff"
Sign the petition to stop the government stealing from the
very poorest tell your friends about this petition:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/10penceband/

On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 11:03:35 -0700 (PDT), michelleC
<chancemichelle (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

On Jun 29, 2:12*pm, John Bokma <j... (AT) castleamber (DOT) com> wrote:
Big Bill <b... (AT) kruse (DOT) co.uk> wrote:
If you recall some years back there was a period when the top SERPS
were riddled with obvious spam, much of which was eventually purged.
It was theorised in some quarters then that the algo had been rigged
on a temporary basis purely to make this spam more visible. Quite
possibly something similar's happening now.

Might be true, maybe they are even testing how effective the "Report
spam" page is. OTOH, it's not that difficult to host an unfiltered version
of Google on a small set of IP addresses for reviewers, and not bothering
the rest of the world. But I have no idea how the human reviewing process
works, so you might have a good point.

--
John Bokma * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *http://johnbokma.com/

AISE/AWW/SEO/web development forum: * * *http://seo-expert-wiki.com/

I have a related question about duplicate content. Some of my
customers have thousands of products and have chosen to purchase the
descriptions from a service so they do not have to manually enter then
in. The inventory changes very frequently, so this will be a major
time saver. Anyway, given that a number of my customers wish to
purchase the same service for the same type of products (they are
resellers and are selling the same products), all of their item detail
pages will have the same content. As a designer, they will be
displayed differently, but the description will remain the same. Will
they all ultimately be penalized for purchasing the prefab
descriptions?

It's not a question of being penalised. It's more that they will be
seen as having less to offer than someone with the same everything
else plus individually created text content on each page. I know this
is a logistical nightmare and if you're dealing with several thousand
products it makes the business model impractical. I suspect Google
know that too. This is an environment that favours the niche, the
specialist.

Make sure the page titles are different, that'll help, I understand.

BB