Fastest way to get listed in Google

[manatee]

I've noticed that I can get in Google pretty fast by doing some or all of the following:

1 - Buy some ad space from Google Adwords
2 - Put the Google Adsense code on the site you want submitted
3 - Submit your URL to Google (obvious)
4 - Post links to your site on popular blogs.

Anyone else have any good tips to add to this list? Now, the real trick is
getting listed on the first page of the search results!

James
The Million Penny Homepage

[softplus]

1 - Buy some ad space from Google Adwords
2 - Put the Google Adsense code on the site you want submitted
3 - Submit your URL to Google (obvious)
4 - Post links to your site on popular blogs.
Skip 1,2,3 -- just go with 4.

Adsense never got ANY of my test-sites listed.
Adwords never got ANY of my test-sites listed.
Submitting to Google works, but takes a long time.
Good links get you listed within a couple of days, max. On one of my test sites, it took less than 24 hrs -- with ONE link from a pr0 page no less. (ok, 24 hours after Google crawled the site with the link, about 10 days from when I placed the link.). Sitemaps can help get your site fully indexed, but you will still need links. The better the links, the faster it works.

Try it, it's easy to test. There is no need to guess this one.

But yes, adwords will get you visitors faster, and perhaps they'll link to your site as well. But adsense will not do anything for your Google listings, if anything, it may even work against you (with lots of adsense and little content, Google might think you're spamming the index).

[Jill Whalen]

Skip 1,2,3 -- just go with 4.

Ditto.

In fact, it's the only way I know of.

[5starAffiliatePrograms]

I don't specialize in SEO any more and don't keep up with it as much as I used to. I certainly don't know nearly as much as Jill and some of the other pros here. So not sure if this still works or is advisable but it works well for me.

3) Never submit to Google. I think she likes it better when she finds links herself.

4) Blog links are great and there are other targeted places you can get relevant links quickly.

5) Use the Google Toolbar and click on your new links to help her find them fast instead of submitting directly.

my2cents, Linda

[Chris Boggs]

Ditto.

In fact, it's the only way I know of.

lol too funny... I honestly didn't know how to respond to the original post...I think you nailed it. :p

[nytrokiss]

I tend to dissagree i think google will only crawl your site after you have submitted to an online directory that has a good page rank (7) blogs are also

[softplus]

I tend to dissagree i think google will only crawl your site after you have submitted to an online directory that has a good page rank (7) blogs are also

It's easy to test, will cost you about $10: Pick a domain name with no keywords (eg tjkl.com, not sure if it's taken :-)), put trash on it, add a link from your lowest PR page that gets crawled by Google to that new domain. Check your logs. I'll put $10 on google crawling it (at least the top level) within 48 hours of finding the link on your page. If it indexes it or not is a different question, probably based on the quality of the trash you put on those pages :D :D

[sootledir]

The only thing you've ever needed to be indexed in Google is a link from another website that is already indexed in Google.

PageRank usually affects spidering frequency, so the higher the PageRank page, the faster you should get spidered.

[Chris Boggs]

I tend to dissagree i think google will only crawl your site after you have submitted to an online directory that has a good page rank (7) blogs are also

sorry nytro, but you are completely off-base on this subject.

[Jill Whalen]

lol too funny... I honestly didn't know how to respond to the original post...I think you nailed it. :p

Reading it again, I should clarify. #4 said posting on popular blogs. That's not actually necessary. What you need to get indexed by Google is a link from any other page, not necessarily a blog, not necessarily a directory. Just a link (more if possible) from any page that is already indexed by Google.

[ohcho]

I don't see any points bothering other than links from other sites. Without links, even you get spidered, your pages won't be appearing at first three pages!

[Chris Boggs]

funny no one has mentioned the Sitemap Inclusion system yet. See discussion here (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=6058).

[softplus]

funny no one has mentioned the Sitemap Inclusion system yet. See discussion here (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=6058).
:D (that's why I have this thread subscribed :-))

Sitemaps are a good idea, and they help a lot to get sites fully indexed, but to get the site listed for the first time, they are only a growth-helper, not the "seed" for the index. I haven't been following the discussions here on Sitemaps, but I have been pretty active on the official Google Group to the project (and of course have seen my share through my GSiteCrawler, which makes Google Sitemap files).

In the test-sites I've made together with one of the other Sitemaps-Generator-Guys there is one element I didn't expect: *Sitemaps for new sites don't work without at least one link as a seed*. We'll be publishing our tests and results "sometime soon" (ha ha, don't ask a for a place or date), but this is one thing that seems to hold for all test sites we did. Note, this is only for the initial seeding of the index. As soon as a site is indexed on Google, other factors come into play (things we didn't test very much, as they are hard to test seperately). And: once the site is listed, Sitemaps do seem to make a big impact regarding getting all the URLs listed and getting new URLs listed faster, but these effects are things you can only follow and wonder "why like this?". Once a larger site is active on the Web there are so many things that come into play, it's hard to test single hypothesises.

[PhilC]

That's interesting. I used a Sitemap for a new site recently, thinking that, if the URLs get spidered, the internal linkages will support the site in the index without any externals. It took a previous (not new) site a month for the Sitemapped URLs to be crawled, so I'm not giving up on the new site yet.

Google has a one-page site of mine in the index (admittedly Supplemental) and the page has no IBLs to it except one link from itself. Even Yahoo! only shows that one link from itself. So I'll wait and see what happens with the new site. (I've no idea how Google and Yahoo! got hold of that one-page site because it was never linked to from anywhere).

[softplus]

(I've no idea how Google and Yahoo! got hold of that one-page site because it was never linked to from anywhere).

Magic :-)

Yahoo found some of our test sites as well, even though they were not linked anywhere (perhaps through public domain records? though that's probably too much work for too little results)... Hard to complain, though :D

[St0n3y]

(I've no idea how Google and Yahoo! got hold of that one-page site because it was never linked to from anywhere).

Do you, or anybody accessing that site have the google toolbar installed?

[softplus]

Do you, or anybody accessing that site have the google toolbar installed?
Does the Googlebar pass data to Yahoo? Does Yahoo check the Google serps? It would be interesting to find out how Yahoo gets this kind of information, I couldn't figure it out (ok, we concentrated on Google, just watched Yahoo + MSN on the side).. If anyone can tell me how the Yahoo magic works, I'd be verrry interested :D

[Chris Boggs]

Sitemaps are a good idea, and they help a lot to get sites fully indexed, but to get the site listed for the first time, they are only a growth-helper, not the "seed" for the index. ...
In the test-sites I've made together with one of the other Sitemaps-Generator-Guys there is one element I didn't expect: *Sitemaps for new sites don't work without at least one link as a seed*. We'll be publishing our tests and results "sometime soon" (ha ha, don't ask a for a place or date), but this is one thing that seems to hold for all test sites we did. Note, this is only for the initial seeding of the index. As soon as a site is indexed on Google, other factors come into play (things we didn't test very much, as they are hard to test seperately). And: once the site is listed, Sitemaps do seem to make a big impact regarding getting all the URLs listed and getting new URLs listed faster, but these effects are things you can only follow and wonder "why like this?". Once a larger site is active on the Web there are so many things that come into play, it's hard to test single hypothesises.

thanks for this insightful information. I know that Google says the XML Feed is separate from the "regular crawl," but this would make it separate but dependent on the site being already indexed, which brings us back to the original questions. I guess the answer to that, as other people have touched on, is to get a link from an oft-crawled site already in the index.

[St0n3y]

Does the Googlebar pass data to Yahoo? Does Yahoo check the Google serps? It would be interesting to find out how Yahoo gets this kind of information

OK, down boy!

Maybe I should have clarified: Do you, or anybody accessing that site have the google, yahoo, msn, ask jeeves, aol, etc toolbars installed?

[softplus]

Maybe I should have clarified: Do you, or anybody accessing that site have the google, yahoo, msn, ask jeeves, aol, etc toolbars installed?
Weeeeellll, we did do 2 test sites with IE+Googlebar automated users... but we didn't see the results that we expected :D and we didn't have any yahoo bars running but the URLs ended up on Yahoo -- that is the riddle I would like to figure out... if only SE's passed the referrer-data....

[St0n3y]

well, I think its entirely possible for someone with a Google toolbar installed to surf a page that is essentiall "hidden" form the engines. Google picks this up through the toolbar, and puts it in its index. If somehow that "hidden' page was to be pulled up via some obscure search result by someone with a Yahoo toolbar installed, then Yahoo could pick it up.

It's a lopngshot, I know, but just exploring possibilities.

[softplus]

Yeah, it's possible. However .... Google didn't pick it up.

next explaination?

Here's the set up:
- new domain name, no keywords in the domain name, no previous history
- Site with overdose of a really-obscure keyword, 900 pages, english content, no duplicates, keywords in the URLs
- Adsense being displayed
- No submission anywhere, nothing, no sitemaps, no links, zilch.
- 1 automated "visitor" with IE6 + Googlebar (controlled PC/browser, no adware/spyware/etc), visiting 12 URLs / day
- run time approx. 1 month now

Results:
Google: 0
MSN: 0
Yahoo: 4 URLs in the site:-query (has crawled the top 2 layers)

Sure, it's not much, but even 4% is amazing considering Yahoo should have no idea that it even exists :D :D

[St0n3y]

yeah, I got nothin'.

:cool: