Yahoo update: notice anything different?

[Marcia]

Some significant movements and I haven't checked much, but at first glance it looks like there's been a change in weighting for link pop.

[Dave Hawley]

Their index has certainly changed....for the better in my highly biased opinion :)

[rustybrick]

In the meet the search engines session, Tim Mayer from Yahoo did say that they rolled out a new index Tuesday.

[sugarrae]

"been a change in weighting for link pop"

Definitely seeing this, among other things.

[Adam C]

"been a change in weighting for link pop"

Definitely seeing this, among other things.

What sort of change? More weighting, less, anchor text, volume?

[seobook]

more weighting on anchor text & off the page factors from the few results I have glanced at

[Dave Hawley]

How can we know that it's more weighting being given to anchor text and off-page factors?

[Marcia]

Among a few other things, I'm seeing some sites that were doing fine that now need need more independent inbound links to counteract a drop.

[Dave Hawley]

But that only suggests that Yahoo does use these factors, not that they are now being given more weight.

[Marcia]

How can we know that it's more weighting being given to anchor text and off-page factors?
That's exactly what our job is - to figure out what's being given weight, or more or less weight. That's what SEO is and how it works.

But that only suggests that Yahoo does use these factors, not that they are now being given more weight.
So what do you suggest?

[Dave Hawley]

Marcia, I'm simply wondering how you can make the assumption that Yahoo is giving more weighting to anchor text & off-page factors based on adding more of these factors and seeing improved rankings?

Like I say, Yahoo very likely uses these now anyway, so adding more is bound to show a positive effect, true?

[Marcia]

Marcia, I'm simply wondering how you can make the assumption that Yahoo is giving more weighting to anchor text & off-page factors based on adding more of these factors and seeing improved rankings?
Dave, when based on experience, intuitional cognition and observation over time the evidence points to something that may be causative, all that can be done is to take positive measures to improve the situation.

For example, if a number of sites are observed to lose a bit in position without any changes being made to them and we know that they're link-poor, we can test by acquiring more quality inbound links to see if that will make an improvement. If we look and see that the meta tags and/or page title could be improved, then we make modifications to those. That is what makes it an art rather than an exact science.

Like I say, Yahoo very likely uses these now anyway, so adding more is bound to show a positive effect, true?
Exactly! That is precisely what will be done in most cases of ongoing promotion, which in any event is a good thing to do anyway. Which is exactly why we try to discern patterns with sites moving up or down, to see which factors may be having influence.

For example, there is one newish client site that is in the teens and twenties for a few *very* competitive, desirable two-word phrases within their niche. Savvy webmaster, great folks, a delight to work with. Good on-page text, qualilty content perfect for their target audience. But they are very lacking in good, on topic quality inbound links and have been for a long time, and the meta tags stink.

Based on observations with numerous sites, the action to be taken is to modify and improve page titles and meta tags, and acquire quality IBLs. Good things to do under any circumstances, and completely within search engine guidelines.

That's another thing, BTW - meta tags are not "dead" they just need to be properly done.

[sem4u]

Yahoo does seems to be giving more weight to inbound links.

[Dave Hawley]

Thanks for the reply Marcia. I still cannot see how one would jump to the conclusion that Yahoo adds more weight (than it did) to anchor text and other off-page factors, simply by adding more and seeing a postitive effect. But I don't think we are going to agree so let's agree to dissagree.

BTW, I believe that Google and all SE's use the Meta tags in some way when ranking pages. But as you say, that another issue.

[sugarrae]

"What sort of change? More weighting, less, anchor text, volume?"

I'm all for sharing information and discussing algo changes in a "vague" form. But, it is all going to be from a general standpoint. That's what seperates good seos, from mediocre, from the bad - being able to look at changes, make a decision about whats changed and run with it successfully. I am happy to discuss fishing techniques. I will not give a list of the bait I use that gets the best response.

"How can we know that it's more weighting being given to anchor text and off-page factors?"

I've made my living via SEO for many years now by deciphering new aspects of the algorithms, so I have my own way of looking at things and deciding what it is that I'm seeing.

I'm more than happy to dicuss what I see, and exchange information with other SEOs I know working on the same aspects of something, but I will not give a handy dandy formula to ranking and tell you in depth what tests, research, etc make me come to my conclusions on a brand spanking new algorithm. I've spent hours doing said research and it's for my own sites, to use as an exchange at times and for clients.

So, that basically means, it is up to the SEO reading my posts and the posts of others to take what they read and decipher it themselves and see if they find it to be fact or fiction. It is not on me to prove or disprove whether or not my SEO advice, theories, statements, information is valuable or right for *your* use.

Just my two cents.

[Mel]

IMO if you are interested in your pages rankings you should understand what causes those rankings and why you rank better than others.

When your rankings drop its time to see what those who have prospered have done and what you can do to improve your own rankings. If (when) your changes work you can see a cause and effect and have no need to prove to others why it works.

Some, like Marcia, are generous enough to share their experience and conclusions with others and for that they should be applauded. Up to you if you want to take advantage of it or not.