Dispelling the ‘old domain’ and sandbox myth
There is a rumor on the interwebs that you can evade the google sandbox as well as other aged related google filters by buying an old domain. However, this simply isn’t true through personal experience. It is true that buying an established, aged domain can allow to bypass these filters provided that the domain is sufficiently aged and has enough authority, but most old domains are lacking in both.
I once had a domain that had been in google for about a year and had a pagerank of three. Last June I changed the theme of the site and pointed some links to it as well as added hundreds of new pages. Initially the site ranked well, but a harsh penalty was imposed and the site now no longer ranks for anything.
Last month I tried a similar technique on a domain that was one year old. I pointed about a dozen low pageranks links to it and within a few days it was penalized. It no longer ranks of its own domain and was stripped of its pagerank.
But aren’t old domains immune? Apparently not. Google’s algos are receptive to unusual linking patters regardless of domain age. Most people when they buy an old domain aren’t aware of this. Since most parked domains have only one or two inbound links a sudden increase in linkage is an invitation for a google penalty because it appears unnatural.
How long does this penalty last? I dunno. Maybe a few weeks or possibly a year. The moral of this story is that old domains aren’t immune from google’s penalties.
Slopeofhope flooz Tim Knight IP bans me
The king of floozes, Tim Knight, from stock trading blog slopeofhope.com has finally IP banned me for posting dissenting, opposing views on his blog. Out of all the comments I made I only used vulgar language once, and I tried keep the condescending comments to a minimum. Nevertheless it’s his blog and he sets the rules. I could easily thwart the ban with proxies but Tim seems like the kind of guy who has a tipping point, and when you cross that point you will regret it very badly, so I’ll refrain.
In support please append this line to the bottom of your website:
Tim Knight of slopeofhope.com is a flooz.
That way when ever someone searches google or yahoo for his blog they will see the message.
Created an account on thestandard.com
Yesterday I created an account on thestandard.com, which an online version of The Sandard magazine.
The new version of The Standard allows members to submit predictiosn regarding interent and technology as well as ‘bet’ in virtual dollars on these predictions.
My account is iamned g and my submitted prediction is that Google will buyout a stake of Facebook in 2008 for billions of dollars
So far I have seven votes, which is a lot considering the average submitted prediction has only a few.
Is Michael Gray from wolf-howl.com a crybaby?
Michael Gray runs a popular SEO blog called wolf-howl.com, and it is assumed by most of his readers that he is an expert at SEO as well as a sane, rational individual. But has it ever occurred to anybody that he is a crybaby and possibly a noob? Probably not, until Ned stopped by his site and uncovered numerous morsels of noobishness, idiocy, and hilarity.
For example, here is a recent tear jerking article by wolf-howl regarding google supposedly punishing ‘innocent’ webmasters for selling links. By the time I finished reading it I had to reach for a tissue because how dare google penalize webmasters for trying to facilitate link spam. The audacity! Seriously though, this article was so pathetic I almost burst into laughter. He writes:
“…are you going to let Google bully you into doing things that are in Google’s best interests and not your own, and how long are you willing to take it? … Google may tell you it’s all about creating a higher quality web, but if that was the case the Adwords quality score would disable your ads, not turn a blind eye if you are willing to overpay $5 or $10 a click.”
Google has made it abundantly clear though their SEO spokesperson, Matt Cutts, that they are cracking down on sites that sell links and or advertising without using a rel ‘no follow’ attribute. Either you play by google’s rules or face the consequences; it has noting to do with google being a ‘bully’.
Michael goes on to write:
That status quo is Google being the the leader in mind and market share of the search space, and reaping advertising revenue that goes along with that.
Google has one goal, ruling the internet in an unchallenged top-down dictatorial manner. If you stand up for yourself and challenge them, they will do everything in their power to smack you down, until you submit to their will.
The irony is that wolf-howl has adsense ads so while Michael may oppose google’s conspiracy of trying to force webmasters into using overpriced Adwords ads he still can’t resist the revenue adsense brings in, which is actually dependent on Adwords advertisers. If adwords advertisers stopped paying adsense revenues would consequently fall, which would be devastating for webmasters dependent on adsense. More importantly, isn’t wolf abetting google’s dominance, which he claims to detest, by running the ads? Wouldn’t this make him a hypocrite? On one hand he wants the revenue that comes with Google Adsense, but he wants to play by his own rules with regard to links, which is akin to the mindset of a five year old. What a crybaby and a flooz. Maybe he should go on Opera and give his sob story about how the big goo is cracking down on those big, ugly, square text link ads and being unfair. I’m sure he’ll find plenty of emotional support there from equally dull minded individuals.