:( I find it very unethical of Yahoo to include websites in their organic result just because they paid for it.

Lots of websites don't deserve to ranked at all and because they pay, get above other websites that have worked really hard to get a good rank. :mad:

I won't participate in this outrageous program just to be above my competition temporarily until I stop paying for it. Organic result should remain what it is, organic. Top position should only be deserved if you provide your visitors a well designed website, full of useful and unique information.


:mad: So Angry at Yahoo...Can't say enough.

:confused: Anyone fell this way?

If you hate it so bad..... why don't you just buy YAHOO? They are allowed to do what they want to do. Did you go into business not to make money?

This is a interesting comment to say the least. Personally I like the ability to buy organic ranking..... it helps with the age of domain and other factors some new businesses can't change.

I didn't fell this way to begin with, but your liberal use of the emotes has convinced me...

Down with Paid Inclusion!

They are allowed to do what they want to do.
Yes, and users have the right to pick which engine they want to use. Current market share seems to indicate their choice...:eek:

Personally I like the ability to buy organic ranking..... it helps with the age of domain and other factors some new businesses can't change.
How do less relevant paid listings in organic results benefit users?

Yes, and users have the right to pick which engine they want to use. Current market share seems to indicate their choice...:eek:


How do less relevant paid listings in organic results benefit users?

Please dont tell me you think Metatags, link popularity, keyword rich domains, and the rest of the rigamarooo have serious meaning in terms of relevency. Honestly is someone is willing to pay for placement it is assumed that they want or are qualified for that keyword term. I see it just as I see an adwords campaign or a yahooSM campaign. ;)

I see it just as I see an adwords campaign or a yahooSM campaign. ;) Difference is AdWords campaigns are labeled as being paid ads.:)

Difference is AdWords campaigns are labeled as being paid ads.:)

Exactly right to the point Beu.. There are Yahoo PPC if you wish to pay for it.... Paid inclusion in Organic result just doesn't make the result organic anymore...

I would agree about Meta Tags are maybe too much of a factor, but link popularity is and should definitely remain a big factor... I agree some may abuse it but in most case, link popularity builds up by itself if you truly offer something people like.. People abusing and getting tons of link out of nowhere usually become penalize from doing it....

Best Organic rank should only be deserve if you offer the best for the subject you're publishing online.... :o

There is all kind of ethical ways for Yahoo to make money and overall except for this paid inclusion, yahoo is ok.

Paid inclusion is misleading people as it doesn't specify that this is actually an advertising they are seeing.

BPFrank...

There's nothing natural about natural search.

OK so Paid Inclusion/SSP guarantee's a relevant advertiser to appear in the top spot for a fixed CPC. But MOST natural search listings also paid there way to get ranked - by hiring a professional to design their page properly. This puts smaller businesses who don't have the knowldge or resources to participate in web-page design at a loss.

What can I say, the world is an unfair place?!

But MOST natural search listings also paid there way to get ranked - by hiring a professional to design their page properly.
Paying a designer to design a site isn't the same as paying a search engine for ads not indicating that is what they are...

Honestly most designers know nothing about designing search friendly sites.

Good news is, in many cases less sophisticated sites are easier for engines to crawl.

:)

There's nothing natural about natural search.

OK so Paid Inclusion/SSP guarantee's a relevant advertiser to appear in the top spot for a fixed CPC. But MOST natural search listings also paid there way to get ranked - by hiring a professional to design their page properly.



Michelle,
Thanks for sharing your thought on this, I don't agree with you that there is nothing natural about natural search. The living proof being website such as wikipedia, that rank well not because they paid someone to make them rank well, but because they provide, rich, useful information that is unmatched is most case.

My feeling on this completely differ from you on this and I'll try to explain my view:

I did my homework. I didn't pay anyone to help, I have read about search engines, their guidelines and the basic you need to know when making a website. That's it

All this info can be found for free at many different site and you don't need to be a genius to understand it.

Now it's like if I was at school, Let say I studied hard and got the best grade...until the rich kid came along and paid $50 to get a better grade, even know, he doesn't even deserve a good grade. :mad:

I understand in some case, some people abuses and have money to get them on top of search engines... this I guess makes search engines less natural... :cool:
This SEO companies represent a big industry and even if some may have very bad pratices, some are very helpful and respective of search engines.
I'm kind of wondering if Yahoo is just putting them out of a job for doing something like this...:confused:

It's not a good feeling to forced to use paid inclusion, I agree. But the reality for me is, if you want to stay competitive, or if you have a client that needs to be in those SERPS, you have to do it. I've especially noticed this in the products sector of Yahoo while trying to rank retail products like clocks, watches, clothing and such. If you can't beat em' join them.

chillll......that's what i have got to say..LoLzz :D please don't mind:)

I haven't felt that.