YA Sandbox Thread...

[rmccarley]

I think to a degree they have done that... I think the sandbox sucks, but what SEO doesnt. Also this brings another point. The sandbox only applies to small guys (IMO), and this goes towards my branding thread. Assuming Dennys (restaurant) didnt have a website, and the #1 ranked site on all of the search engines was "Dennysmachineshop.com" now assuming it had a ton of one way links because they built cars for the president blah blah blah dont think for one second that the dennys restaurant website would be sandboxed. It would be #1 in a flash... Now it would be relevant, but my point is money can by you anything you want

Ripped from http://www.seorefugee.com/forums/yahoo-optimization/1960-yahoo-really-better-g.html

And following the SEO circles there are some SEOs that claim marketing is the answer. Others that "buzz" can do the job. I'm wondering if it is possible the amount of references to a company name or product helps get a site out of the box faster. This wouldn't be the URL, but just the company. Then Google at some point attaches the company to that URL and ditches the box.

I'm probably reaching and may not be explaining well...

[skitzzo]

I think that the Denny's example would probably be a manual thing. I dont think that the "big guy's" sites rank just because they are big, they rank because the big guys sink a lot of money into them and when a big guy launches a website, there is often a lot of publicity and chatter about it. I think this is a lot like the cultural phenomenon thing. If some site takes of and becomes big news around the country or world, G has to unbox it for appearances' sake.

[rmccarley]

there is often a lot of publicity and chatter about it. I think this is a lot like the cultural phenomenon thing.

That's along the lines of what I'm thinking but does the chatter have to be a URL, or something attached to the URL like the company name or the name of their product?

This may explain why ranking for your own domain name in quotes is an indicator of the SB - it may take G a while to dtermine that there is chatter about "company x" and then attach that chatter to the domain.

[skitzzo]

That's along the lines of what I'm thinking but does the chatter have to be a URL, or something attached to the URL like the company name or the name of their product?

This may explain why ranking for your own domain name in quotes is an indicator of the SB - it may take G a while to dtermine that there is chatter about "company x" and then attach that chatter to the domain.

I would guess that in most cases it wouldn't be very hard for G to figure out what domain goes with what company. Most of the time when I hear about a new site it almost always includes the company name and the URL or even has the company name as the anchor text for the link. I dont know that I quite follow what the theory is... sorry, maybe I'm not quite on top of my game today?

[jstcrzyengh]

Well, you also have to remember that most companies names are just that, no one else is using them, and they are myreallybigcompany.com and they dont have a lot of competition, but for something like dennys there could be, because it is a common name. Same thing with "best buy" well people could be searching for best buys on just about anything, but it is the money and "branding" that gets it there. So I dont have a problem thinking that it is manually done in fact I think I kind of eluded to that.

Like was said G has to save face by bringing it out of the box for sites that didnt have the money behind it, but that people started talking about.

G has always looked for the next big thing to get a "buzz" on things. It was guestbooks, than message boards, now its blogs, but even those are being bombed and soon they will (if theyre not already) start becoming more and more devalued.

[pittbug]

When a corporation like Dennys goes online, they will naturally have a ton of "trusted" sites linking to them, such as all the big newspapers and other relevent industry sites which all stems from the PR department/agency.

I doubt any of the big corporations have some guy building recip links and doing directory submissions. To most of them SEO is an afterthought and something they *may* dabble with. Most of their traffic will be generated by the usual online and traditional ads.

Most of their organic referrers will be for their name, since they'll have such a well known brand. Noone searches for "24 hour restaurant serving pancakes", users just search for the company name. This is probably part of the theory as to why Google lets you get ranked for your company name very easily.

[toddieg]

This is probably part of the theory as to why Google lets you get ranked for your company name very easily.

and a very good theory at that.

google doesn't just put a big company at the top of the SERPs manually... it's definitely done algorithmically.

we manage a VERY high profile client, a brand name product that everyone uses (or has used), and the site is still not at the top of the SERPs for its name (which happens to be the product name as well). it currently sites at about 4 or 5 depending on the day.

if google added large corporations manually then surely we'd be #1.

[rmccarley]

Using the Denny's example a bit more. I think they would be wise to hire an SEO. Imagine Denny's being #1 for "grand slam". It hits their target market even if that isn't what they were looking for ATM. It's product placement and advertising. And it is technically relevant.

I wonder if the SEs would let them get away with that?

I can hijack my own thread, right?

[skitzzo]

and a very good theory at that.

google doesn't just put a big company at the top of the SERPs manually... it's definitely done algorithmically.

we manage a VERY high profile client, a brand name product that everyone uses (or has used), and the site is still not at the top of the SERPs for its name (which happens to be the product name as well). it currently sites at about 4 or 5 depending on the day.

if google added large corporations manually then surely we'd be #1.

Wow... that surprises me... I guess that throws out my earlier post about manual. Thanks for the info TG.

[toddieg]

I wonder if the SEs would let them get away with that?

it's a computer program, of course they would.
should i remind you again of miserable failure?