Issue with jagger hypothesisisisisis

... you know i cant spell

ive bean reading that jagger favours large sites with 100's of pages of
keyword dense content that point to the home page...

the only problem is that with my serp "silver jewellery" the top site
doesnt have any of these qualities (google says its a 20ish page site)

anyone any comments or care to clarify the jagger theories?

<markrush (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

.. you know i cant spell

ive bean reading that jagger favours large sites with 100's of pages of
keyword dense content that point to the home page...

the only problem is that with my serp "silver jewellery" the top site
doesnt have any of these qualities (google says its a 20ish page site)

anyone any comments or care to clarify the jagger theories?

'wish I had a dollar for every hypothesis arrived at following Bourbon.
'though I wouldn't mind hearing what anyone has to say on your question.
Remember though, there's widespread belief that Jagger's very far from
over....'thus possibly making the idea that it favours anyone at this point
moot?

Still like to know why the #1 and #2 spot in my serps have remained
static? maybe its an oportunity for learning, anyone care to comment
why inspirals.co.uk is still top for "silver jewellery" ?

mark

<markrush (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

Still like to know why the #1 and #2 spot in my serps have remained
static? maybe its an oportunity for learning, anyone care to comment
why inspirals.co.uk is still top for "silver jewellery" ?

Still, I thought they dropped here a while back.

On 25 Oct 2005 11:48:32 -0700, markrush (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Still like to know why the #1 and #2 spot in my serps have remained
static? maybe its an oportunity for learning, anyone care to comment
why inspirals.co.uk is still top for "silver jewellery" ?

mark

Same reasons as the last ten times you asked us.

BB
--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo (AT) kruse (DOT) demon.co.uk
Elvis does my SEO

i guess i just dont geddit

<markrush (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

i guess i just dont geddit

You didn't answer my posting. Didn't this site drop a few weeks to a month
ago?

Stacey

no its ALWAYS been there

mark

Big Bill wrote:

On 25 Oct 2005 11:48:32 -0700, markrush (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:


Still like to know why the #1 and #2 spot in my serps have remained
static? maybe its an oportunity for learning, anyone care to comment
why inspirals.co.uk is still top for "silver jewellery" ?

mark


Same reasons as the last ten times you asked us.

BB

Which was, Bill? I don't remember there ever being a definitive answer
that deserves the terse reply.

Jez.

On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:14:41 +0100, Jez <j.ez (AT) virgin (DOT) net> wrote:

Big Bill wrote:

On 25 Oct 2005 11:48:32 -0700, markrush (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:


Still like to know why the #1 and #2 spot in my serps have remained
static? maybe its an oportunity for learning, anyone care to comment
why inspirals.co.uk is still top for "silver jewellery" ?

mark


Same reasons as the last ten times you asked us.

BB

Which was, Bill? I don't remember there ever being a definitive answer
that deserves the terse reply.

Jez.

I don't either but we get this from Mark every time there's an update.
I wasn't meaning to be terse, by the way.

BB
--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo (AT) kruse (DOT) demon.co.uk
Elvis does my SEO