MSN vs Google 1

[1DMF]

I've followed all your tips, I've written 100% valid code and tried to be as semantic as I can, I've SEO'd and carefully written page content.

I've reached No.6 in MSN, yet google still hasn't re-indexed my site, i've done a sitemap, robots.txt , used the remove URL tool, re-submitted, nothing seems to change what google had originally indexed.

How come MSN loves my site, but google seems to hate it?

Why is MSN so up-to-date and indexing my pages correctly yet google is dragging its heels.

Also does having a good MSN ranking mean if & when google does finally re-index my site, will it produce as good a result as MSN.

Regards,

1DMF

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[Foamcow]

Google can take ages to reindex a site.

I launched a revamped site in September and it's only just been properly indexed. I estimate it has taken 75 days to do so.

MSN picked up the site after a couple of days max.

You just have to be patient.

<honk>*:O)</honk>

Earl & Thompson Marketing - Marketing Agency Services in Gloucestershire

 

[1DMF]

Thanks foamy, pain in the butt though, bosses wanna know when we gonna get some traffic and sales, but hey nothing new there , that's all bosses ever care about - bottom lines!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[Foamcow]

Your bosses should not be relying on the website generating money from organic searches.

As with most things, the site needs to be marketed and this doesn't mean just 'online'. The organic SERPS are a nice bonus that will come about if things work out well.

Perhaps thinking of it as an investment fund, or a pension fund, will help. They put something in (i.e. time, effort) and over time their investment *may* grow enough to pay them dividends. On the other hand, it may not. It's down to many factors, including how that time and effort is invested.

<honk>*:O)</honk>

Earl & Thompson Marketing - Marketing Agency Services in Gloucestershire

 

[1DMF]

The problem is though the site is basicaly lead generation, not product sales.

This is the only source (at present) they want to promote / generate enquiries.

I've now been given a marketing budget for pay-per-click.

Is google adwords the best place to do this and i PPC actualy cost effective.

thanks,

1DMF

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[Foamcow]

This is the only source (at present) they want to promote / generate enquiries.

That is a frighteningly short sighted business model. And, if I may be so bold to say, rather foolish. Do they realise that if the promote the site via offline means they:
1. Generate leads
2. Get the site known

Point 1 keeps the thing running until Point 2 gets the site established enough that people know the brand and so associate Product X with Company X. It's THEN that the site will possibly start generating leads.

If it's a new site, this is even more true. Especially since you are (from my recollection) in a very competitive marketplace.

With an absence of other marketing your only real option is to engage in PPC. It can be cost effective if you do it right, there is no doubt about that. The trick is not to generate LOADS of traffic, just generate the RIGHT traffic.... tricky! It's always worth a punt with a small budget anyway.

A client of mine is using PPC with a site I built. It's not that well targeted (in my opinion) but it's pulling 250-300 people in a day. Out of those around 10-12% contact the company for further info etc.


<honk>*:O)</honk>

Earl & Thompson Marketing - Marketing Agency Services in Gloucestershire

 

[1DMF]

thanks for the feedback.

I appreciate it isn't a good business model, but it isn't actually our core business, it's just a side line they wanted to delve into.

Though from just having a punt, they seem to be expecting rather larger returns!

I don't know how many times i've told them they will get out what they put in, I can only do so much!

I've taken care to make the site, clean, valid, semantic, targeted keyphrased, etc..etc.. from all the great advice Tek-Tips has given, and I have reached No.6 in MSN in a couple of weeks, but I can do no more as a programmer!

I have mangaged now to secure £30.00 for a months trial of PPC, and beleive this is the only way we will get quick hits as it were.

I have learnt alot from you guys on SEO and the links i've read and know how important quality over quantity is along with targeted key phrases not single key words, so hopefully I might beable to design a reasonable campaign that could yeild some results.

It's odd though, we have basically gone into a field that is actually what our clients do (we run a compliance network for brokers), our managers and marketing team bang on at them on how they should advertise and market themselves to develop their business, yet don't apply the same logic to their own business model when setting up a similar venture.

As i've seen someone post here before,

you can lead a horse to water, but you have to shove a hosepipe down its throat to make it drink!

cheers,
1DMF.

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[ChrisHirst]

Dangerous words there "Used the remove URL tool"

You do realise that pages removed using the tool will not be reindexed (under the same filename) for 6 months at least.

It sounds like one of two things

Not enough decent quality links.

or

It's still in the 12 months "aging delay"



Chris.

Indifference will be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
Woo Hoo! the cobblers kids get new shoes.
People Counting Systems

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

 

[1DMF]

Dangerous words there "Used the remove URL tool"

You do realise that pages removed using the tool will not be reindexed (under the same filename) for 6 months at least.

good I hoped that would be the case it keeps indexing test1.html index1.html etc...

I don't want my test files indexed!!!!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[ChrisHirst]

use the robots.txt protocol or the robots meta to keep compliant bots away from test files/folders.



Chris.

Indifference will be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
Woo Hoo! the cobblers kids get new shoes.
People Counting Systems

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

 

[1DMF]

yup, i do now, but googled had already indexed these pages before i'd learnt all this wonderful stuff

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[1DMF]

on a side note, I guess semamtic, valid code really doesn't mean didly squat to google seings as their own site has...

Result: Failed validation, 55 errors
Address:

http://www.google.co.uk/

Encoding: iso-8859-1
Doctype: (no Doctype found)

No DOCTYPE found! Attempting validation with HTML 4.01 Transitional.

lol - I don't why i bother anymore!


"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[ChrisHirst]

having pages that validate is of absolutely zero importance for SEO.

SE crawlers and indexers do not render pages in the same way as browsers do, so validation means nothing to them.

The HTML code has to be seriously broken to even slow down the indexers.

Chris.

Indifference will be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
Woo Hoo! the cobblers kids get new shoes.
People Counting Systems

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

 

[1DMF]

I know, but it does make me laugh that I spend so much time worrying about getting into google, when if you look at the website code , it's a piece of s**t.

All the time i waste getting valid, symantec code as well, makes me wonder why I bother, but I won't stop caring, even if google is a pile of poo!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[Foamcow]

You write valid code for your users and to ensure your site works in standard compliant browsers (as all future browsers *will* be). Don't confuse writing HTML with SEO, they are 2 different beasts - there may be some overlap here and there but code validity is not one of those areas.

<honk>*:O)</honk>

Earl & Thompson Marketing - Marketing Agency Services in Gloucestershire

 

[1DMF]

no - i think you miss the point of what i was saying.

We all spend hours doing our best to get into google, but semanticly google's site is a pile of poo full of errors.

Irony, gotta love it!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[Foamcow]

I think you missed my point.

The fact we spend time writing semantic code that validates has nothing to do with getting a good position in Google.

We spend time on standardised code for other reasons, namely so our sites work well for our users and in whatever device/browser they use to view them. BY working to standards we can be sure that when viewed in a standards compliant browser work will be presented as intended. Search engine positioning has nothing at all to do with this.

Don't confuse the 2 disciplines. They are by and large unrelated. The reasons and methods for writing good code are different to the reasons and methods for SEO. It's like comparing cushions and bricks. They have different qualities, hard vs soft, but that's because they do different jobs.

So if Google's own HTML doesn't validate, so what? Makes no odds to us... but it *might* to their users. That's Google's problem though.

<honk>*:O)</honk>

Earl & Thompson Marketing - Marketing Agency Services in Gloucestershire

 

[1DMF]

come on foamy , I know valid code has no or little effect on SEO.

i guess it's just my sense of homour, we all try so hard to get a good position in a website that techically on a quality code basis is a POS.

and considering the lack of content on google's homepage, you'd think they would have valid code.

tickles me anyhow

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.