Yahoo!- SERPs nightmare

Dear all

I'm managing about 20 sites, since the changes at inktomi/yahoo/overture
I've seen some of these sites all but disappear from the Yahoo SERPS. Others
have remained but all continue to do well in Google.

In an effort to combat the falls I took out submissions in the sitematch
system, the sites were all accepted a few days later and started to attract
traffic...but through the paid sitematch system. There was no re-entry to
the general SERPs.

In speaking with Overture Sitematch they confirm that the page that is
submitted should get a spider visit to 2 clicks down. Every site has a
comprehensive sitemap 1 click down from the homepage. By using
site:http://www.mysite.com in Yahoo! the number of pages listed can be
counted on one hand (Google is listing almost 4500).

On closer inspection those sites that have survived the recent fluctuations
in the Yahoo SERPs would appear to be in the Yahoo Directory (although there
are a couple of exceptions).

Anyone like to comment on theories for the above.

Matt

"Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net> wrote in
news:4WNvc.1088$IR1.751@newsfe3-gui:

Dear all

I'm managing about 20 sites, since the changes at
inktomi/yahoo/overture I've seen some of these sites all but disappear
from the Yahoo SERPS. Others have remained but all continue to do well
in Google.

Suggests to me that the page code needs a good going over - if you've been
tacking on SEO improvements to existing sites, it may be time to think
about stripping them down and rebuilding rather than titivating.

On pretty much all the sites I manage, I've found Yahoo is very responsive
to good, clean code, appropriate headings, clear page structure and title
tags - much more so than Google, where you have to have the linking side of
things just right, but can get away with much less effort in terms of page
structure and coding.

Victoria

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

my tip with yahoo is to cluster phrases close together in the code.. it
works brill

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

"Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net> wrote in
news:4WNvc.1088$IR1.751@newsfe3-gui:

Dear all

I'm managing about 20 sites, since the changes at
inktomi/yahoo/overture I've seen some of these sites all but disappear
from the Yahoo SERPS. Others have remained but all continue to do well
in Google.

Suggests to me that the page code needs a good going over - if you've been
tacking on SEO improvements to existing sites, it may be time to think
about stripping them down and rebuilding rather than titivating.

On pretty much all the sites I manage, I've found Yahoo is very responsive
to good, clean code, appropriate headings, clear page structure and title
tags - much more so than Google, where you have to have the linking side
of
things just right, but can get away with much less effort in terms of page
structure and coding.

Victoria

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

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 09:32:36 +0100, Victoria Clare
<victoria (AT) markpoles (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

"Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net> wrote in
news:4WNvc.1088$IR1.751@newsfe3-gui:

Dear all

I'm managing about 20 sites, since the changes at
inktomi/yahoo/overture I've seen some of these sites all but disappear
from the Yahoo SERPS. Others have remained but all continue to do well
in Google.

Suggests to me that the page code needs a good going over - if you've been
tacking on SEO improvements to existing sites, it may be time to think
about stripping them down and rebuilding rather than titivating.

On pretty much all the sites I manage, I've found Yahoo is very responsive
to good, clean code, appropriate headings, clear page structure and title
tags -

I'm still getting away with not including doctypes. I do clean code
though.

BB

much more so than Google, where you have to have the linking side of
things just right, but can get away with much less effort in terms of page
structure and coding.

Victoria

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

Big Bill <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in
news:ebl0c0potlj60i36ac6uoa8aihjkgtq0sv (AT) 4ax (DOT) com:

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 09:32:36 +0100, Victoria Clare
victoria (AT) markpoles (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

On pretty much all the sites I manage, I've found Yahoo is very
responsive to good, clean code, appropriate headings, clear page
structure and title tags -

I'm still getting away with not including doctypes. I do clean code
though.

I'm not sure omitting them helps, myself, and I find that the advantages of
being able to easily use a validator outweighs any tiny SEo advantage of
removing those few characters from the head section.

If you don't use a validator, I can see why you might choose to omit the
doctype.

I'm quite sure there are no SE's out there that will be bothered, as long
as the code is short and sweet.

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

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 12:06:26 +0100, Victoria Clare
<victoria (AT) markpoles (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

Big Bill <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in
news:ebl0c0potlj60i36ac6uoa8aihjkgtq0sv (AT) 4ax (DOT) com:

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 09:32:36 +0100, Victoria Clare
victoria (AT) markpoles (DOT) org.uk> wrote:

On pretty much all the sites I manage, I've found Yahoo is very
responsive to good, clean code, appropriate headings, clear page
structure and title tags -

I'm still getting away with not including doctypes. I do clean code
though.


I'm not sure omitting them helps, myself, and I find that the advantages of
being able to easily use a validator outweighs any tiny SEo advantage of
removing those few characters from the head section.

If you don't use a validator, I can see why you might choose to omit the
doctype.

I use a linter, two in fact. And Tidy.

I'm quite sure there are no SE's out there that will be bothered, as long
as the code is short and sweet.

You weren't so sure a year or two ago, Modom. Every little helps is
what I think.

BB

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

thanx Victoria,

maybe it would be an advantage to show you the URL, there are no tricks just
proper pages using everything the engines want. Can you see anything I've
missed? www.reflex.co.uk

Matt

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

"Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net> wrote in
news:4WNvc.1088$IR1.751@newsfe3-gui:

Dear all

I'm managing about 20 sites, since the changes at
inktomi/yahoo/overture I've seen some of these sites all but disappear
from the Yahoo SERPS. Others have remained but all continue to do well
in Google.

Suggests to me that the page code needs a good going over - if you've been
tacking on SEO improvements to existing sites, it may be time to think
about stripping them down and rebuilding rather than titivating.

On pretty much all the sites I manage, I've found Yahoo is very responsive
to good, clean code, appropriate headings, clear page structure and title
tags - much more so than Google, where you have to have the linking side
of
things just right, but can get away with much less effort in terms of page
structure and coding.

Victoria

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

On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 08:55:49 +0100, "Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net>
wrote:

thanx Victoria,

maybe it would be an advantage to show you the URL, there are no tricks just
proper pages using everything the engines want. Can you see anything I've
missed? www.reflex.co.uk

Yes, optimisation. Where does it say in your page title what the
company does? Why is the lengthy javascript not externalised? Does
that tell the engines anything about what the company does? So why
make them read it then?

And on, and on. You need to learn some stuff or hire one of us to work
on the site. Or ask Carol or Stacey or Will to go through it; they
have time and most of us don't.

BB

Matt

"Victoria Clare" <victoria (AT) markpoles (DOT) org.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns94FE611C07C74victoriamarkpolesorg (AT) 195 (DOT) 8.68.209...
"Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net> wrote in
news:4WNvc.1088$IR1.751@newsfe3-gui:

Dear all

I'm managing about 20 sites, since the changes at
inktomi/yahoo/overture I've seen some of these sites all but disappear
from the Yahoo SERPS. Others have remained but all continue to do well
in Google.

Suggests to me that the page code needs a good going over - if you've been
tacking on SEO improvements to existing sites, it may be time to think
about stripping them down and rebuilding rather than titivating.

On pretty much all the sites I manage, I've found Yahoo is very responsive
to good, clean code, appropriate headings, clear page structure and title
tags - much more so than Google, where you have to have the linking side
of
things just right, but can get away with much less effort in terms of page
structure and coding.

Victoria

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

Bill,

ok hold up one minute, the point here is that optimisation is not all done
on one page, optimisation is about many factors, anchor text being one of
the most critical, titles are important but this is not the issue.

Google has 4500 pages indexed (allinurl Yahoo has 8 (site, what is it
that Yahoo doesn't like? The Javascript could be one factor but I could show
you another site that doesn't have the same problem (but has the same
Javascript).

Matt


"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 08:55:49 +0100, "Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net
wrote:

thanx Victoria,

maybe it would be an advantage to show you the URL, there are no tricks
just
proper pages using everything the engines want. Can you see anything I've
missed? www.reflex.co.uk

Yes, optimisation. Where does it say in your page title what the
company does? Why is the lengthy javascript not externalised? Does
that tell the engines anything about what the company does? So why
make them read it then?

And on, and on. You need to learn some stuff or hire one of us to work
on the site. Or ask Carol or Stacey or Will to go through it; they
have time and most of us don't.

BB


Matt

"Victoria Clare" <victoria (AT) markpoles (DOT) org.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns94FE611C07C74victoriamarkpolesorg (AT) 195 (DOT) 8.68.209...
"Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net> wrote in
news:4WNvc.1088$IR1.751@newsfe3-gui:

Dear all

I'm managing about 20 sites, since the changes at
inktomi/yahoo/overture I've seen some of these sites all but
disappear
from the Yahoo SERPS. Others have remained but all continue to do
well
in Google.

Suggests to me that the page code needs a good going over - if you've
been
tacking on SEO improvements to existing sites, it may be time to think
about stripping them down and rebuilding rather than titivating.

On pretty much all the sites I manage, I've found Yahoo is very
responsive
to good, clean code, appropriate headings, clear page structure and
title
tags - much more so than Google, where you have to have the linking
side
of
things just right, but can get away with much less effort in terms of
page
structure and coding.

Victoria

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

On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 12:39:51 +0100, "Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net>
wrote:

Bill,

ok hold up one minute, the point here is that optimisation is not all done
on one page, optimisation is about many factors, anchor text being one of
the most critical, titles are important but this is not the issue.

Well it's AN issue. I often find that adressing visible issues will
make the head-scratchers go away.

BB

Google has 4500 pages indexed (allinurl Yahoo has 8 (site, what is it
that Yahoo doesn't like? The Javascript could be one factor but I could show
you another site that doesn't have the same problem (but has the same
Javascript).

Matt


"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:g5a3c0t1lt9mn9dvba7aulopl8dletes8c (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 08:55:49 +0100, "Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net
wrote:

thanx Victoria,

maybe it would be an advantage to show you the URL, there are no tricks
just
proper pages using everything the engines want. Can you see anything I've
missed? www.reflex.co.uk

Yes, optimisation. Where does it say in your page title what the
company does? Why is the lengthy javascript not externalised? Does
that tell the engines anything about what the company does? So why
make them read it then?

And on, and on. You need to learn some stuff or hire one of us to work
on the site. Or ask Carol or Stacey or Will to go through it; they
have time and most of us don't.

BB


Matt

"Victoria Clare" <victoria (AT) markpoles (DOT) org.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns94FE611C07C74victoriamarkpolesorg (AT) 195 (DOT) 8.68.209...
"Matt" <mj.paines (AT) virgin (DOT) net> wrote in
news:4WNvc.1088$IR1.751@newsfe3-gui:

Dear all

I'm managing about 20 sites, since the changes at
inktomi/yahoo/overture I've seen some of these sites all but
disappear
from the Yahoo SERPS. Others have remained but all continue to do
well
in Google.

Suggests to me that the page code needs a good going over - if you've
been
tacking on SEO improvements to existing sites, it may be time to think
about stripping them down and rebuilding rather than titivating.

On pretty much all the sites I manage, I've found Yahoo is very
responsive
to good, clean code, appropriate headings, clear page structure and
title
tags - much more so than Google, where you have to have the linking
side
of
things just right, but can get away with much less effort in terms of
page
structure and coding.

Victoria

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