News August 04, 2005
Monitoring how your site performs with
respect to the search engine industry is
a key aspect of business in today's era.
As a result, the growth of SEO-related
services has been tremendous in recent
years. Once SEO services are
administered, being the creatures of
instant gratification that we are, site
owners expect to see results
immediately.
Editor's Note:
Whether or not Google has a sandbox it
can place newly indexed websites has
been a major topic of discussion among
many forums. What are your thoughts on
the subject? Do you think such a thing
exists? If so, have you ever experienced
what you perceived as being placed in
the sandbox? Discuss your experiences at
WebProWorld.
However, when site doesn't perform as
well as expected, one of the first
things to be blamed, specifically when
it comes to Google, is a mythical effect
called the sandbox. The term "sandbox"
was coined by people who had sites that
weren't performing up to expectations.
It is believed that if a site hasn't
achieved a desired ranking, despite SEO
adjustments, the new/altered site has
been placed in the sandbox where it is
held until the alterations are
reflected.
 The
sandbox effect is a reason (excuse?)
routinely used by some when they aren't
being rewarded with the results they had
anticipated. One of the main targets of
the sandbox effect are newer sites who
haven't had a chance to age. It is
thought these sites are kept in the
sandbox until Google gives their SEO and
backlink work credit.
Speaking of backlinks, it is also
believed the sandbox effect can affect
these as well. If a set of newly
acquired links hasn't given the
recipient site a boost in PageRank or
hasn't shown up on a backlink check
(link:www.yoursitesname.com), the
sandbox is the one to blame, even though
Google has stated numerous times a
backlink check does not reveal all of
the links pointing to a site.
Incidentally, Google has never admitted
to having a sandbox, in fact, the
existence of a Google sandbox was
actually denied by noted Google insider,
Google Guy.
The topic is a contentious one. There
are those who firmly believe the sandbox
does exist, while others are opposed to
the idea. This concept is obvious on the
WebProWorld forum, where moderator
greeneagle invited other posters that
feel they'd been affected by the sandbox
to show him which site and which
keywords the site owner was targeting
(the keywords can be calculated using
this tool).
As with most sandbox related topics,
this particular discussion has grown in
length, featuring ideas and examples
from both sides of the table. Both sides
are well represented with intelligent
posts from both camps. On the
pro-sandbox side, DMC_34 offered this
quite valid example:
|
WhosClickingWho? A
Tracking Tool Designed
to Detect and Deter
Click Fraud -
Click Here |
|
When Google was updating with
Bourbon, my new site was #1 for the
domain name, and #78 for Holiday Gift
Baskets, and many more. I believe during
the update the filters were turned off
during testing on certain datacenters.
Once the update was finished all of
rankings disappeared beyond the >1000
marker. I am fairly confident the
litterbox does exist but hits new sites
and link mongering sites the most.
Another quote, this time from poster
Phantom, gives another possibility about
what the sandbox could be:
… However, someone told me the
sandbox effects only highly competitive
keywords. Since the results were for
keywords with only a couple hundred
thousand results or less, it was
dismissed as not falling into the
sandbox perimeters. Therefore, my
high-ranking sites were not allowed to
play in the sand. I've never had a site
in a sandbox, nor do I intend to place
any of my sites in one.
 Because
of the evolving nature of the search
engine industry (in other words, the
effects of many changes, especially in a
competitive area are not immediate), I
tend to doubt the sandbox's existence.
Although, there was a quote that may
give some ammo to the conspiracy buffs
out there:
Protected AdWord revenue = moneybox =
sandbox?
Would Google, or any other search engine
for that matter, actually protect sites
that are ranking well while being big
advertising spenders by purposely
delaying another, newer site's climb up
the SERPs, provided they were taking the
necessary steps (contextual content,
IBLs)? That's seems highly unlikely.
The idea of the more competitive the
field being harder to break into the top
spots seems more probable than the whole
sandbox concept of being placed
somewhere by Google or Yahoo while the
site matures. But perhaps these two
lines of thinking have become one and
the same? Perhaps both events are being
used to describe the sandbox effect.
For another perspective on the Google
sandbox theory, please read Xan Porter's
blog post, which looks at Google's
algorithm patent and how that could
determine the existence of a search
sandbox.
Continue the discussion
here.
|
Search Engine Optimization News Archive
|
Copyright ©2006 Wolfline Productions and My Web Reporter
site map
search engine website optimization for automotive, car dealerships search engine website
optimization for real estate agents and brokers search engine internet marketing page
ranking website optimization page optimization msn search results high ranking on google
top result for yahoo! web site optimize seo developer search engine webmaster high position
websites increase traffic lead generation site visibility
|
|
