Update: Google “Bad” SEO Update – Now named Penguin Update

April 25th, 2012 | Analysis 175 comments

Google, by way of Matt Cutts, announced some weeks ago that a special SEO over optimization update will come. Now it’s live with its first iteration. Yesterday evening Google also published the article “Another step to reward high-quality sites” with some more insights into the update. Interesting stuff that every SEO should read.  The official goal was “to take care” over-optimized websites, containing too many unnatural links, automated content (spinning), keyword stuffing etc. Google tries to kill webspam altogether. The impact on all keywords queries is about 3.1%, which compared to Panda (with around 12%) is much less. But Google said more short-head/visible keywords should be affected.

What’s definitely new and surprising for me was the day of the update. It’s unusual for Google to make a major update on a Tuesday or Wednesday.  Normally Google makes this kind of update on a Monday or Thursday. That’s why I presume that in the next few days we’ll see more updates and this update is just the beginning.

Update: I updated the data tonight so it is fresh and you’ll see more losers and much better correlations to the Google update. You can also click directly in the table to see more data in the Searchmetrics Essentials.

What happened?

I took nearly a huge set of keywords from short-head to medium and low search volume and looked at the current rankings from position 1 to 100 and compared the rankings to April 20th. In the data were also some glitches from the Panda 3.5 update which was going live from April 19th to 20th, Matt Cutts mentioned. But overall you see a trend of those domains which really lost visibility within the Google Penguin update.

In the data I saw some striking losers, which suggests to me there must have been another update today. There is a pattern in the winners and losers table and I’ll give you some insights below the table. Note I analyzed the visibility, not the overall traffic. The SEO visibility only includes calculation on organic rankings. Direct traffic, Social, PPC etc. is absolutely not included.

List of SEO visibility losers (google.com)

UPDATE: I updated the table (2012-04-26) with more keywords and fresher data.

Domain SEO Visibility Difference in %
songlyrics.com 128186 -128679 -50,10
great-quotes.com 4515 -72248 -94,12
comcast.com 143032 -66286 -31,67
dslreports.com 65264 -63770 -49,42
appbrain.com 100782 -53439 -34,65
hotels-rates.com 16868 -43554 -72,08
1-love-quotes.com 30366 -42772 -58,48
tvrage.com 124821 -40846 -24,66
shoplocal.com 39654 -39966 -50,20
vzw.com 31323 -38387 -55,07
free-games.net 40883 -37542 -47,87
hotelplanner.com 8933 -33676 -79,03
consumeraffairs.com 50384 -32243 -39,02
lottostrategies.co 1192 -31367 -96,34
edogo.com 2015 -29850 -93,68
2011blackfridayads.com 9514 -29339 -75,51
creditcards.com 47759 -29281 -38,01
download-free-games.com 33558 -28644 -46,05
htc.com 49104 -28268 -36,54
black-friday.net 49484 -28153 -36,26
freephonetracer.com 29783 -28085 -48,53
ghacks.net 38952 -27989 -41,81
customerservicenumbers.com 48318 -27985 -36,68
langenberg.com 22037 -27534 -55,54
karaoke-lyrics.net 1595 -27269 -94,47
dressupgirl.net 42109 -26965 -39,04
robtex.com 92320 -26162 -22,08
lotteryusa.com 76685 -23355 -23,35
bestsampleresume.com 17787 -22175 -55,49
resellerratings.com 48542 -21948 -31,14
dmv.com 15619 -21672 -58,12
songs-lyrics.net 4284 -21096 -83,12
unemployment-extension.org 214 -21025 -98,99
dictionary.com 27654 -20584 -42,67
thedomainfo.com 74737 -20497 -21,52
creditcardforum.com 13481 -20119 -59,88
thesmokinggun.com 41682 -19956 -32,38
ipaddresslocation.org 6050 -19357 -76,19
free-online-games-to-play.net 1489 -19288 -92,83
digg.com 68914 -19126 -21,72
mainkeys.com 44423 -19082 -30,05
lovepoemsandquotes.com 25694 -18719 -42,15
tjoob.com 5585 -18522 -76,83
promgirl.net 15993 -18204 -53,23
americanrhetoric.com 6652 -18079 -73,10
costumekingdom.com 8813 -17670 -66,72
doc-txt.com 13794 -17229 -55,54
education.com 54829 -17127 -23,80
freegames.net 827 -17023 -95,37
halloweencostumes.com 22190 -16951 -43,31
statscrop.com 14936 -16759 -52,88
latest-hairstyles.com 40126 -16733 -29,43
abovethelaw.com 19251 -16450 -46,08
celebjihad.com 23960 -16152 -40,27
aoltv.com 62290 -15872 -20,31
cardratings.com 11762 -15859 -57,42
watch-movies-tv.info 23640 -15717 -39,93
collegeview.com 15151 -15526 -50,61
interest.com 5606 -15389 -73,30
freecookinggames.net 3207 -15246 -82,62
scrabble-word-finder.com 2564 -14442 -84,92
americanheart.org 3732 -14035 -78,99
lotsofjokes.com 12157 -13954 -53,44
ticketcity.com 48204 -13954 -22,45

A lot of these losers are database-driven websites – they mainly aggregate information and use large database systems to create as many pages as possible. Sites such as songlyrics.com, great-quotes.com, cubestat.com or lotsofjokes.com fall into this pattern. It makes sense that these sites will lose visibility.

Press portals and feed aggregators such as pressabout.us, newsalloy.com and bloglines.com were also affected, which makes sense from a Google point of view since these are the website types that are very often created by very aggressive (possibly overly aggressive) SEOs and often contain similar content.

A couple of heavily template-based websites were also affected – ticketnetwork.com/ticketcity.com, hotelscombined.com and customerservicenumbers.com fit Google’s anti-SEO bill perfectly when it comes automatically (possibly also spun) content.

Furthermore, a lot of sites that copy or rehash other peoples’ content (or are used by their users to do that) were demoted – examples include mayor sites such as digg.com, folkd.com and pastebin.com.

First Preview of SEO visibility winners

Domain Win of SEO Visibility in %
spotify.com > 30%
yellowbook.com > 30%
observer.com > 30%
nme.com > 30%
menshealth.com > 30%
poynter.org > 30%
mysanantonio.com > 30%
slideshare.net > 30%
azstarnet.com > 20%
lasvegassun.com > 20%
stackoverflow.com > 20%
epinions.com > 20%
ebates.com > 20%
locatetv.com > 20%
ovguide.com > 20%
gq.com > 20%
newyorker.com > 20%
giantbomb.com > 20%
networkworld.com > 20%
morningstar.com > 20%
livescience.com > 20%
snopes.com > 20%
marvel.com > 20%
lyrics007.com > 20%
esnips.com > 20%
techspot.com > 20%
usnews.com > 20%
drupal.org > 20%
theverge.com > 20%
miamiherald.com > 20%
webs.com > 20%
thehollywoodgossip.com > 20%

 

On the winners side it’s not as easy as on the losers side to find a pattern. But a lot of brand sites won visibility, which makes sense to Google strategy. Sites like menshealth.com, gq.com or lots of other magazines fill perfectly the gap that the losers leave.

The day started exciting and it will end exciting and tomorrow will start again exciting because I have so much data to analyze. :) I keep you updated.

Dies ist nur ein Gravatar

Who’s writing this stuff? My name is Marcus Tober and I’m the founder of Searchmetrics. Because we really love to analyze every kind of online data, we can give you more insights than any other company in SEO, SEM and Social Media. It’s not a job, it’s passion. You can find me also on Google+ .
Show all articles from .

Comments (88)

Comments (175)

  1. 2012/04/25

    FTFA:

    “In the next few days, we’re launching an important algorithm change targeted at webspam.”

    Officially, not rolled out yet, thus not rolled out on a Wednesday.

  2. 2012/04/25

    Marcus, this is very interesting indeed! I am amazed at the level of study you have conducted but I can see it will be beneficial to those who aren’t spamming the internet. At the end of the day those of us searching for high quality content material that is informative and beneficial to growing our businesses need access to that without the headaches of seo aggressive companies!

  3. 2012/04/25

    @Jack
    Right. That’s why I assume that more changes or more important changes will follow.

  4. 2012/04/25

    That’s a logical flaw: if they are /launching/ in the next few days, then

    1) it’s not live
    2) there’s no major update yet

    and thus the point of the data is useless as you are measuring something else not related to the webspam / bad seo update.

  5. PH
    2012/04/25

    @Zoe Alexander you’re a dreamer. I don’t know for the US but here in France plenty of websites have been hit and they “aren’t spamming the internet” … And as funny as it can be, a bunch of sites using BH techniques have raised. So once a again the Tomahawk’s “Panda” update didn’t real hit it’s target. Lots of collateral damage and the real “terrorist” are still alive … (by the way I got nothing against BH or WH, I’m both of them and my sites are fine)

  6. 2012/04/25

    In Denmark we’re seen several EMDs get hit but far from all. So I can only guess if it has anything to do with the fact that they were EMDs or if there is some other reason.

  7. 2012/04/25

    Great article Marcus. This algorithm update is almost more exciting than panda. It creates an absolute level playing field for budding internet entrepreneurs and will get more people focusing their time on creating quality content as opposed to creating rubbish spun articles

  8. 2012/04/25

    We analyze the Serps since 5 years now. It’s unsual to have on Wednesday, but today was an update. Thats for sure and we saw on some sites where we also have analytics access the impact. Because of updates which are normally on Monday or Thursdays it can happen that tomorrow comes an iteration of that update. So your digital point of view could be wrong. ;) We’ll see. And in the end we update lots of our keywords now daily, I keep everyone updated.

  9. 2012/04/25

    Sad to see some of the latest winners from this update.

    Try searching for “make money online” and look at the #1 site – no content. Wtf?

    Obviously, there are other factors at-play here, but you’d think this late in the game that something like this would be devalued easily.

    Will be interesting to see how this shakes out over the next week or so as more site owners see their traffic drop.

  10. 2012/04/25

    how do you explain the bad or inappropriate websites that have made it to the top of the rankings. including a blank page ranking for “make money online” (google has since manually removed it).

  11. 2012/04/26

    I hope this is not the final update… because it seems a large number of quality sites have been penalized, and replaced with low quality sites.

  12. 2012/04/26

    Biggest loser here is Google, as they step up their campaign to eliminate companies who do not make them money.

    The search results have gone down the tube and Google advertizing has hit all time highs, that is if you can afford their advertising algorithms and dictatorship over search and mostly spam advertizing in “Broad Links” and the Bloggers is a waste, international thieves and Google steel your money with little results.

    As the Dictator Google owns 65% of Search +/- it time to stop Google before they own even more, yes use bing, yahoo, I use duckduckgo.com they do not track you, they do not bubble you.

  13. 2012/04/26

    @David
    Making money should be a priority to Google, but I don’t think they will trade giving you the best results instead of showing you the sites with the best ads, because people simply stop returning.
    They want results and fast. Google is well aware of this fact, and the main exhibit is the new snippets, somewhat smart, that will have to compute, in the future, with Apple Siri alikes.

    My bet is that is becoming way harder to fight web spam, therefore they rather take down most of the sites with bad content and maybe a few quality content, in order to preserve the community.
    Imagine a zombie apocalipse, wouldn’t you rather isolate the city that started and save the rest of the world, and then latter try to rescue the non zombies or would you let it be and may darwin rule over us all?

  14. 2012/04/26

    Thanks for sharing good update

  15. 2012/04/26

    I hope that this update isn’t over yet. A lot of good quality sites been dropped and MFA sites has raised. Also that “sensation” with [make money online] already is deindexet.

  16. 2012/04/26

    Any idea why on earth Techdirt.com? I read that, it’s a good, genuine blog.

  17. Wes
    2012/04/26

    Toptenreviews.com didn’t make this list?

    It appears keyword rich ROOT and SUBDOMAINS got a huge boost, and I’ve noticed their sub-domains are dominating just about everything now.

    I’m not suggesting they should or shouldn’t, just making an observation, and curious how they did compared to everyone else?

  18. 2012/04/26

    Techdirt got punished by this update. By definition it must be spamming, right?

  19. ian
    2012/04/26

    I run about 15 sites and all have been hit except 1 which due to the size of it (10k pages) was the only one with duplicate content so in theory was the most likely to be a loser but it increased traffic. The rest had no duplicate content or other black hat stuff but fell and some got decimated on google.

    Interesting points;

    1. all sites except the winner had several hundred direct traffic referels with 1 page view in the early hours last night
    2. a site reviewed by a google + user made ridiculous gains, try searching for short hairstyles and look at ihairstyles2012.com. Mediocre site but at number1 or high up for a bigish keyword just cos it was reviewed (the only site she reviewed) by ms collins
    3. SERPS seem to have settled down a bit my end but no change to analytics data as yet.

    Cheers

  20. 2012/04/26

    Many thanks for this great article.

    I would be interested in getting more details about this sentence “A couple of heavily template-based websites were also affected – “. As you explained it, I understood approximativally the samle as for DB-driven websites, also website using templates for displaying “table form” informations. Is it the right meaning?

  21. 2012/04/26

    Hi,

    Thanks for the insightful report.. Wonder what level playing field does Google claim of when there are number of poor websites floating on the web on top rankings & at the other end you have pretty good sites facing Google wrath with this latest update…
    Google monopolistic approach is not helping neither site owners nor users.

  22. 2012/04/26

    aha Google using a shotgun when a scalpel is required :D No good moaning about it though, until everyone finds a search alternative, it’s their game.

    Good study! Impressed at the numbers you research.

  23. 2012/04/26

    Many seo guys wants to know that this updation goes against seo. And Google wants to kill
    seo.

  24. 2012/04/26

    I run about 20 different sites and two seem to have been hit hard. Both are keyword rich domain name with heavy affiliate links. I think @Wes is wrong when he says “keyword rich ROOT and SUBDOMAINS got a huge boost.” Others at the webmasterworld.com thread have also noted keyworded domains and affiliate sites getting whacked.

  25. 2012/04/26

    Hi Marcus, great article as always. Can you explain how you conjure the organic rankings percentage increase or decrease? I am not 100% sure what the percentage represents.

  26. LC
    2012/04/26

    Marcus, have you or any one else seen a negative impact on websites with 301 redirects following this update? One of my web properties that had a 301 redirect to it lost about 30% of its traffic on Wednesday. The homepage is still ranking very high, but the internal pages (which were housing content from the old domain) have disappeared? Prior to Tuesday this website was ranking very well for all of long tail keywords.

    Also, I have to agree somewhat with Jimmy, most of my other keyword rich domains dropped, but a few moved up. Surprisingly the keyword rich domains that went up were the ones with little or no SEO. Go Figure!

    Any input regarding the 301s would be very much appreciated

  27. 2012/04/26

    I suggest you all look at this: http://searchengineland.com/winners-losers-from-googles-webspam-update-119493

    There was a Panda update on the 19th April which has significantly skewed this study.

  28. 2012/04/26

    Is it due to a 3.5 version of the filter Panda launched on or about 19 April (and confirmed by Matt Cutts site Search Engine Land)? Or the new algorithm spam “black hat” Google announced yesterday (though it was his understanding that according to the announcement of Matt Cutts, the new algorithm was not yet launched …)? The fact is that Google’s results have been greatly modified in recent days.

  29. Wes
    2012/04/26

    @ Remote Keyless Jimmy

    Well I’ve listed plenty examples over here and on Search Engine Land of keyword rich sub and root domains getting a boost. Many of which violate nearly every major guideline Google has tried to instill in us.

    Whether the boost was directly related to the name or not, is still up for debate. But the examples of it happening are numerous.

    -And just a friendly tip, using keywords as your name in the comments could easily be interpreted by Google a SPAM.

  30. 2012/04/27

    Are google for real – Are they really so desperate for more adwords customers? If so they should just google “Make money online” and look at the first result to see what they’ve done. C’mon guys. This penalty against quality sites who may not have even done their own seo is desperate and already backfiring.

  31. 2012/04/27

    Oh, I forgot to add a ps.
    P.S. If you really want to Make Money Online (www.notgoogle.com) I’d suggest you consider buying shares in Bing and Yahoo right now.

  32. 2012/04/27

    @ Marcus et all,

    I don’t know about the other sites in your list, but I do know similarsites.com very well, especially the online marketing, and the site has not lost organic traffic from google over the past few days.

    Either your numbers are wrong, or your not measuring the right parameters, but search traffic has not been hit recently.

    Knowing what I do about one specific site in your list makes me weary of accepting the rest of your data as well as your conclusions.

    A few additional points:

    Similarsites is not a spammy aggregator/spinner, the site takes information, processes it quite intelligently, and then creates fresh content which adds value for the millions of people that use it each month.

    The real organic earthquake hit a few months ago, and it seems to be more about localized results for organic searches, i.e. – person in NY searching for “widgets” (NOT widgets in NY), and SERPS serving a blend heavily salted with widget sites in NY (or aimed at NY). This is not just for terms like “pizza”, but also true for more general informative terms.

    All this is effecting the bigger national directory-type sites. I’d be interested to hear about how the sites in your list rank across regions, i.e. – search results per keyword per major US metro area in google.

    You can’t really check SERPS for a broad USA google anymore, it’s not the death of SEO, but there is no longer a “real” first page listing for many terms, it all depends on where the searcher’s IP is logged from.

  33. 2012/04/27

    First of all congratulations to Mr. Cutts and all the members of the webspam team, they surely have rolled out an algo update that will not only kill webspam but also force closure of so many mom and pops stores that depend on SE traffic to bring home the bacon.

    Google clearly wants everyone to use PPC and pay them to get traffic. This is a shady business practice. You may be trying to kill SEO but did you guys realize you are giving rise to a much bigger market of NEGATIVE SEO?

    If not, then check out this little experiment http://trafficplanet.com/topic/2369-case-study-negative-seo-results/#entry33318

    If that does ring a bell of alarm in your ears then nothing would and gaming dumb search engines (read Google in this case) and blasting your competitors out of the SERPS became a much easier task.

    You sure hate webspam but you are the ones who are actually promoting it.
    —===End of Rant===—–

  34. 2012/04/27

    @Alison
    Its pretty true as people can play dirty on competitors now, without leaving a trace.
    The update, I hope is incomplete as I saw genuine sites disappearing nowhere!, which kinda sucks.

  35. 2012/04/27

    @David Spanierman
    The percentage means the increase or decrease in SEO visibility based on our keyword set. I updated the list and now you also see the difference in SEO visibility and the percentage.

    @LC
    I also saw this drop especially for keyword domains. But these domains often don’t appear in loser lists because they rank for too less keywords and thats why the drop in SEO visibility is not high enough to show these domains. But you can check all your domains in our Essentials: http://suite.searchmetrics.com/en/essentials

    @Chris Gedge
    It doesn’t matter if there was a Panda update in between or not. We update our data every week since years. So the trend is most important and if you lose X percent of your SEO visibility you have to take a look at your site. This is what matters. The only thing is that the interpretation of the analysis is more complex because of some noise of another update. But that’s why I updated the data this morning. ;)

    @Boaz
    similarsites.com is also ranking well in many other Google indexes, e.g. co.uk and .pl. The drop in visibility is mainly in the US index. That’s why the overall traffic could be stable. Look here: http://suite.searchmetrics.com/en/essentials?url=similarsites.com&cc=US. If you register for the Essentials you can also see the keywords where they lost rankings.

  36. 2012/04/27

    @marcus, I don’t need to register with your program, I have access to the similarsites.com analytics, and I repeat that organic traffic, including organic US traffic, did not drop this week.

    Besides that, the site has dedicated subdomains per language/region. So, co.uk traffic, for example, mostly hits the UK version of the site (uk.similarsites.com).

  37. 2012/04/27

    @Boaz
    To be honest. Similarsites.com is a site which typically has to be hit by this update. The function to show similar sites is something that has value for the users, but it’s no real content with real information. The loss in SEO visibility means that you don’t lose this percentage in traffic, it means you lose this visibility. And if you’re below the fold for lots of keywords where you has no value for the user, then you rank, you get visibility, but if you lose lots of these rankings you lose a lot visibility.

    This site used to rank for lots for domain and brand names. No wonder that this site isn’t ranking for keywords like: wuzam, craigslist evansville, datehookup, backpage portland, tubekitty anymore. I assume that this site will lose more SEO visibility in the future. Nothing against the product, it seems great, but no useful content if user are looking for brands etc.

  38. 2012/04/27

    @marcus, you’re making a circular argument, saying we were hit by the update because we had to be! The rest is kind of smoky.

    If we really lost visibility, then de facto, we lose organic traffic, the two points are directly correlated to each other (i.e., more results and higher rankings equal more clicks). We don’t track most individual keywords, but since we have not lost traffic, if anything, we had a small increase, then I don’t see the point you are trying to make.

    The site ranks for a huge variety of terms, with a considerable churn rate among them, which is what is probably throwing off your visibility program.

    So, having never used your data before, I can still say that it seems to have some flaws when dealing with large and complex sites. Besides that, I don’t know how valuable your visibility data is unless it is tied to a specific region (for example, google.com for a NY IP) – to quote Dylan, “the times, they are a changin'”.

    Can your product take location into account? If not, it may not have much use for current SEO practice across a huge range of keywords and site types.

  39. 2012/04/27

    @Boaz
    You are a target of these updates because you have no valuable content for a search engine. I also guess that your “considerable” churn rate of changing keywords is much higher than for a normal website. Your product looks fine, but you’re a spam for a search engine. You have nothing unique in terms of content. You scrape the title and description and build a relation between other sites where you also show the title and the description. If I were you I won’t build a business around organic traffic… because this is just automated content and spam for SEs. Sorry, but that’s the truth. This what you’re doing I did 8 years ago. Look we have millions of domains and lots of data for these domains in our database. The reason I don’t create well optimized landing pages is that I know it will only rank temporarily, because it’s spam.

    And your argument with the dependancy on the location makes no sense if I take a look at your keywords. There is mostly nothing related to possible local searches. You build sites liks these http://www.similarsites.com/site/youtube.com and try to rank on brands/domain names and some long tail content around the content that belongs to this domains.

  40. 2012/04/27

    @Marcus, no, we were not affected by this update, why is that so hard for me to explain? Traffic has not dropped, not US, or any other oragnic. The new spam update is also supposed to address spam in other languages than English, and we did not suffer there either.

    The site itself is not spam. Just because something is DB driven does not make it spam. We create unique correlations between data which users find relevant and useful. Our user base includes millions of toolbar users and repeat visitors that find our free product useful on a daily basis.

    What we really offer users is a combination of user data for a huge range of sites and relational data between millions of websites. We add new data and features continuously. Our competitors are folks like Alexa and Xmarks. We are not some whois-driven spam, our widgets and APIs help power many other sites, including Compete.com.

    My location argument is more general and not specific to similarsites. The main point is that for many keywords, there is no longer a “real” ranking on advanced engines like google, its now a ranking set that is qualified per term/location.

  41. 2012/04/27

    Thanks a lot for this news very good for my business.

  42. 2012/04/27

    @Boaz
    This conversion leads to nothing. Look SEO visibility is not traffic. It’s more. It’s a calculation which includes ranking of a keyword, search volume, type like navigational, informational and transactional search. It does NOT take a usual CTR, also keywords below the fold and keywords on page 2 will be considered on a diminishing scale. But you just talk the whole time about traffic. You don’t want to think about what visibility is.

    You say you offer a service similar to compete.com, but this is totally different than talking about the SEO of your site! Compete.com does not spam the internet like you do. You created these hubs http://www.similarsites.com/browse on purpose to index all these pages. These pages only offer scraped content, nothing else.

    Look at your SERP spread. It’s absolutely not natural and you’ll see a drop in page 1 and 2 rankings this week: http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/2287/similarsitescom.png
    You also see that for all the keywords that we track for the US index you only have 2% keywords on page 1. This is far far away from a natural site.

    Your algorithm behind your product seems to be cool, but what you do is spamming. This has nothing to do with your user base and the product at all, I just want to say that your spamming is against what you wants. Be honest to yourself. Spamming the index with content that Google already knows is no rocket science and not useful for Google users. I hope we can discuss this out in person sometime. Cheers Marcus

  43. 2012/04/27

    @Marcus, wow, what started off as a factual error on your part (our getting hit by an update) has turned into a bit of a tirade.

    Quick responses:
    -Re visibility: this started as an algo post, saying a new update is killing spam sites, and that our site was hit hard (was at the top of your list). I replied that our site was not affected by it. If an algo kills hits a site, rankings drop and so does traffic, an algo hit directly implies a traffic drop.

    -Re compete: we don’t offer a service similar to compete, their site uses our API for some of the data they show their users.

    The /browse page is not a hub, but part of the internal site index (sitemap), yes, we want our pages indexed, but that is the what a sitemap does – it helps users and spiders find relevant pages on a site based on whatever hierarchy.

    -Re serp spread: nothing could be more natural for a type of site like ours. Their is no one-size-fits-all “natural” profile, it will vary across markets, site types and regions.

    Re spam: the site does not scrape & serve. We have both a ‘cool algo’ (thanks) and a large data set of user behavior, so the results we show are very useful to a large pool of users.

    We are not “spamming the index with content google knows”, since we take various data sources, then manipulate it to add value to our users (browsers/surfers, widgets and APIs to a wide range of other sites).

    What happens is the opposite – we get hit by scrapers and spammers daily, spammers are scraping our content and trying to feed it to search engines left and right. Since our unique content gets stolen/scraped so often, it’s a bit annoying to be labeled a spammer by someone who I stumbled onto while reading a defamatory post about a site I’m involved with.

    Why don’t we just argue about politics and religion? LOL. Anyways, I’m trying to think what I can do with your blog post’s data, and how I can use it to improve similarsites. If you have a free full-working version I’ll give it a whirl.

  44. 2012/04/27

    I think the sites that dropped are doing ad related cloaking.
    Not showing the ad when Google bot visits, but showing when everyone else visits.
    One of them shows a Google ad below another ad, so when the ad is not shown, a google ad appears.

    They all seem to be doing the same thing.

  45. 2012/04/28

    Most affected are content aggregators with large databases…

  46. 2012/04/28

    Thanks for inform me because i have lose site ranking … thanks again.

  47. 2012/04/28

    Thanks for sharing a latest update of Google..I really glad to see…

  48. 2012/04/28

    I have lose 10 positions on google. thanks for the information

  49. 2012/04/28

    Hi,

    we were hit very hard by the penguin update, we have lost 72% visibility in germany. After two days of frustration I’ve started a blog for pengiun victims.

    Best wishes,
    Georg.

  50. 2012/04/29

    I think it`s true, wating…

  51. 2012/04/29

    Hard time for bloggers, many of my fellow bloggers were hit by Panda, and now Penguin making things worse. Some of them quite blogging and some have started updating their blogs, but its gonna be a real hard work.

  52. 2012/04/30

    I don’t know exactly what Google doing with Penguin update. But Google made it clear that it’s about targeting those violating its quality guidelines.

  53. 2012/04/30

    Yes, it`s a real hard work, but to bee better…

  54. 2012/05/01

    Panda, Penguin does not effect these duplicate sites from same person, strange!
    http://website.informer.com (alexa 400)
    http://who.pho.to
    http://informe.com

  55. AC
    2012/05/02

    Many of these arguments about Panda/Penguin rank are completely ridiculous.

    Two weeks ago, if you were ranked on page one, the Googleites over in the Google Panda thread would tell you how great your site is and use you as a shining example on the hill for all to see.

    Today if you got dropped, with the same exact content, you are doing something evil.

    If Panda dropped you it was because you were spam. If Penguin reinstated you with the same content, are you still spam or a shining example?

    The focus is always on what the webmaster is doing wrong. Last I checked, Google runs a search engine that lists sites on the web, they don’t run the Internet. Stop kowtowing to Google and move on to mobile, facebook and other search engines. Google is socialing themselves out of existince and another major player like Facebook is going to step in and blow this deteriorating search engine out of the water.

    Billions of man hours wasted every year chasing Google.

    We need an equitable search engine that shows all matches from the internet in rotation. With a concentration on filtering keyword spammers and objectionable content and leaving everyone else be.

    This filtered view of the world thru Google’s academic eyes is getting pretty myopic. Showing us 10 entries out of millions isn’t representative.

  56. 2012/05/02

    when will facebook release there search engine? i wish they will make one to stop this google monopoly!

  57. 2012/05/02

    Over optimization penalty. I think this is crazy. So the new black hat will be buy cheap back links for your competitors that are ranking higher than you with the perfect Anchor text.

    I think google should just stick to the websites that have bad links.. Those links do not have any credibility towards their ranking. Low SEO Juice. I do not know. Seems more of a back stabbing kind of community now.

    I know this has been a strategy but this used to be a manual process. Now it is not manual. It is in the algo. So now google will be dropping people rankings without even personally looking at it.

  58. 2012/05/03

    Hope following Search engine guidelines could be avoided search engine penalization. My keywords are dropped on SERP and 45 % traffic dropped from April 28th.

  59. 2012/05/04

    How panda, penguin have no effect on these duplicate sites from same person, strange!
    website.informer. com (alexa 400 site)
    who.pho. to
    informe. com

  60. ian
    2012/05/04

    Periodically the who.pho.to page relating to my website (prom-hairstyles.org which was decimated by penguin) appears where my site used to be in the SERPs

    Perhaps these sort of sites are responsible for the mess this update has made of googles results.

  61. 2012/05/06

    Thanks for sharing good update

  62. 2012/05/06

    OMG .. I’m checking to see if there’s any effectes on my websites :(

    Thnx dude,

  63. 2012/05/06

    It would be nice if Google (or other Major Search Engines) could provide a section that features websites or pages that were not ranked on page #1 or 2 yet, either randomly or maybe feature selected pages from search results from page #5 onwards in a little box on the front page.

    I know we could buy ad spaces to let our website appear Before search #1 result, but if All of us get an equal chance to be featured, it would encourage us to write more (for human readers), rather than spending time optimizing keywords to fight for page #1 ranking..

  64. 2012/05/06

    Thanks for keeping us up to date. Few of our sites got hit and we’re implementing measures to save them. Problem is, we don’t know where to start. Our links are naturally grown, no blasting or unethical link promotions whatsoever. I think quality content is important more than ever.

  65. Val
    2012/05/07

    Hope I am not affected by those changes… I checked my website’s keywords and some of them are not shown yet… Yesterday were … Hope it will take time to re-adjust… Let’s see in a few days…

  66. 2012/05/07

    This is great news and I appreciate Google’s efforts to eliminate webspam. I wonder what the metric is of ‘SEO Experts’ that use spam SEO methods to ‘rank’ the sites they work on? I’d say it’s up there in the 90+ percent.

  67. 2012/05/08

    I am always happy when I find really good quality research and data gathered for others to share :) It’s what I then curate to share with others having then researched the research myself…

    It is a slightly shocking algo but then actually … not. It’s what they said they’d do, its just suprising some of the algorithmic judgements that have gone sooo wrong – eg empty sites devoid of all content featured on page one!

    Thanks for this anyways, great content keeps Google happy and me doing less ‘legwork!’

  68. 2012/05/21

    The worst algorithm update so far, I hope they fix it really soon :)

  69. 2012/05/23

    This is actually a tremendous web site. Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed browsing your blog posts. After all I’ll be subscribing to your rss feed and I hope you write again very soon! can i unlock iphone.

  70. 2012/05/25

    I have found your blog while touring in the blog world. I would like to appreciate your effort for sharing this article with the readers. I have gone through most of your articles and will make sure to visit back again. Nice blog with some amazing write ups. Keep it up. I have tweeted this article to my followers and I hope they will like it too. :)

  71. 2012/05/25

    Google is now supporting paid links or reciprocal links or private blogs. Now SEO is completely depending if you are investing money on buying links and managing own blogs. There are bundle of examples available while searching in Google.

    Sorry to say but as per new studies, most of the people are going to use Bing instead of Google.

    Even my competitor of keylogger for iphone keywords is number 1 position due to paid links but google is not taking any action after reminders as well as phone calls to Matt Cutts directly

  72. 2012/05/30

    Interesting…because either they want relative content or they don’t. Or is it that you will have to have all of your own “relative content?”

    I find it quite odd that many people haven’t mentioned website “curation” or “blog curation” yet, because some believe that’s the way of the future delivering relative content.

    Then again in a way that contradicts with the direction of panda/penguin. (Do you think the comment about buying ads is perhaps true?)

    I want to know specifically then, is blog curation good or bad? Are sites like Huffington Post and CNN good or bad?

    Further, responsible SEO webmasters shouldn’t be punished for trying and vying to deliver to the serps quality optimization. SERPS should respond properly and reward their hard work in return.

    Quality SEO and quality content should be regarded and rewarded as such.

  73. 2012/07/18

    Interesting post, seems Google is upsetting a lot of customers so when will the other search engines step up.

  74. 2012/07/20

    This is really great post by your Marcus. After the panda and penguin update we know that google is working hard to reduce spam links and spam content. Thanks for sharing this informative post with us.

  75. 2012/07/24

    Thanks for the article was helpful

  76. 2012/07/25

    This penguin update has really killed sites that were not using white hat techniques.

  77. 2012/07/31

    I prefer to read this kind of stuff.Thanks for the post.

  78. 2012/08/04

    Agreed, It’s a bad update for poor webmasters/seo or spammers :)

    It has been effected billions of sites and thanks god my client’s sites are not one of them. hmm

    Well, still learning about it. who knows who is the next ?

  79. 2012/08/08

    Hello I am so delighted I found your website, I really found you by mistake, while I was browsing on Google for something else, Regardless I am here now and would just like to say many thanks for a tremendous post and a all round thrilling blog (I also love the theme/design), I don’t have time to read through it all at the minute but I have book-marked it and also included your RSS feeds, so when I have time I will be back to read more, Please do keep up the fantastic work.

  80. 2012/09/07

    There are actually loads of particulars like that to take into consideration. That may be a great point to convey up. I supply the thoughts above as basic inspiration however clearly there are questions like the one you bring up the place the most important factor will likely be working in trustworthy good faith. I don?t know if best practices have emerged round issues like that, but I’m sure that your job is clearly identified as a fair game. Both boys and girls really feel the impression of just a moment’s pleasure, for the remainder of their lives.

  81. 2012/12/07

    Google is now supporting paid links or reciprocal links or private blogs. Now SEO is completely depending if you are investing money on buying links and managing own blogs. There are bundle of examples available while searching in Google.

  82. 2012/12/26

    A really cool spreadsheet would be how Google treats local directories from period to period. I think the key here is to get fresh, differentiated content on the pages in order to stay ahead of the power curve. Provide value and be rewarded.

  83. 2013/01/18

    really useful for effective SEO

  84. 2013/03/04

    Hi Marcus,
    I wanted to thank your for this is very interesting article!
    I am amazed at the level of study you have conducted but I can see it will be beneficial to those who aren’t spamming the internet.
    At the end of the day those of us searching for high quality content material that is informative and beneficial to growing our businesses need access to that without the headaches of seo aggressive companies!
    Now with the new updates of Panda, the losers gain a little more of their traffic :(.
    Best regards, Nathan

  85. 2013/03/16

    To be the best in the SEO industry, we must be acquainted with in the latest updates in the Google.

  86. 2013/11/28

    this is really excellent information and definitely this will help for those who are looking for updated SEO details…i love it…

  87. 2014/08/29

    So cool to revisit these old posts, this was the first time the penguin update was discovered little did we know how much this would influence SEO as we know it also love the title Google ‘Bad’ seo update renamed now as Penguin lol it was a bad update at the time but I think Matt Cutts is doing a fantastic job

    now he has to tackle paid links i think

    PS: never knew it was called bad update and im the head of seo at the company i work for oops gonna do more research

  88. 2014/10/22

    I think Google and their updates are getting way too technical. In 2010 when I was helping to manage some websites – SEO was easy, but now it’s getting even crazier. Trying my hardest to get with the update thingy. All the same thanks for info- well received.

Trackbacks (87)

Comments (175)

  1. 2012/04/25

    […] Whenever Google announces major updates, SearchMetrics usually puts together some data about what it determines to be the top winners and losers from the update, in terms of search visibility. They’ve put out their first lists for this update. […]

  2. 2012/04/25

    […] to an initial analysis by SearchMetrics, Spotify is a big winner, along with Observer.com and NewYorker.com, while Merchant Circle is a […]

  3. 2012/04/25

    […] search results. That’s already produced changes. Who won and who lost? Searchmetrics has done a quick analysis. Winners include names like Poynter, Spotify and The Verge. Losers have some surprises like Cult Of […]

  4. 2012/04/25

    […] Searchmetrics has released a preliminary analysis of search visibility winners and losers from the update, and they’ve concluded that aggregators and template-based websites are among the biggest losers. As always, however, it’s best not too put too much stock in these lists. […]

  5. 2012/04/25

    […] search results. That’s already produced changes. Who won and who lost? Searchmetrics has done a quick analysis. Winners include names like Poynter, Spotify and The Verge. Losers have some surprises like Cult Of […]

  6. 2012/04/25

    […] Searchmetrics has released a preliminary analysis of search visibility winners and losers from the update, and they’ve concluded that aggregators and template-based websites are among the biggest losers. As always, however, it’s best not too put too much stock in these lists. […]

  7. 2012/04/25

    […] search results. That’s already produced changes. Who won and who lost? Searchmetrics has done a quick analysis. Winners include names like Poynter, Spotify and The Verge. Losers have some surprises like Cult Of […]

  8. 2012/04/25

    […] search results. That’s already produced changes. Who won and who lost? Searchmetrics has done a quick analysis. Winners include names like Poynter, Spotify and The Verge. Losers have some surprises like Cult Of […]

  9. 2012/04/25

    […] here to see the original: Google “Bad” SEO Update – A first earthquake on the short-head … This entry was posted in Seo, Seo Iso and tagged also-published, announced-some, article, cutts, […]

  10. 2012/04/25

    […] Searchmetrics has released a preliminary analysis of search visibility winners and losers from the update, and they’ve concluded that aggregators and template-based websites are among the biggest losers. As always, however, it’s best not too put too much stock in these lists. […]

  11. 2012/04/25

    […] search results. That’s already produced changes. Who won and who lost? Searchmetrics has done a quick analysis. Winners include names like Poynter, Spotify and The Verge. Losers have some surprises like Cult Of […]

  12. 2012/04/26

    […] original article: Google “Bad” SEO Update – A first earthquake on the short-head … Posted in […]

  13. 2012/04/26

    […] […]

  14. 2012/04/26

    […] “Over Optimized” Algorithm Update – Preview of SEO visibility lo… 1 Upvotes Discuss Flag Submitted 1 min ago William Craig SEO blog.searchmetrics.com Comments […]

  15. 2012/04/26

    […] Google “Bad” SEO Update – A first earthquake on the short-head […]

  16. 2012/04/26

    […] soll:[…] We rolled out a Panda data refresh several days ago. Because of the one week window, the Searchmetrics data include not only drops because of the webspam algorithm update but also Panda-related drops. In […]

  17. 2012/04/26

    […] site Searchmetrics fez uma análise rápida dos sites que já foram punidos ou beneficiados pela mudança. O estudo considerou 50 mil […]

  18. 2012/04/26

    […] tail, which seems understandable as those are the money keywords that many webmasters are after.Search Metrics has posted a preliminary list of winners and losers, based on 50,000 monitored keywords. When you […]

  19. 2012/04/26

    […] prevent webspam from polluting its search results. Who won and who lost? Searchmetrics has done a quick analysis. Winners include names like Poynter, Spotify and The Verge. Losers have some surprises like Cult Of […]

  20. 2012/04/26

    […] temat przeprowadzanych zmian. Z analizy posta na oficjalnym blogu Google oraz ciekawego badania na Search Metrics (tutaj bardzo ciekawa analiza matematyczna)  wynika […]

  21. 2012/04/26

    […] stage, Panda seems to have shown the foul card to high profile sites like Digg.com. Although, Searchmetrics comments that this list of winners and losers is just a preview of the sites hit and this data is prone to […]

  22. 2012/04/26

    […] Search Metrics has posted a rough list of winners and losers, formed on 50,000 monitored keywords. When you look at the winners, you will notice that many brands gained visibility. This includes journal and repository sites, as well as high form sites like Drupal or Spotify. […]

  23. 2012/04/26

    […] Search Metrics has posted a preliminary list of winners and losers, based on 50,000 monitored keywords. When you look at the winners, you will notice that many brands gained visibility. This includes newspaper and magazine sites, as well as high profile sites like Drupal or Spotify. […]

  24. 2012/04/26

    […] Searchmetrics has expelled a rough research of hunt prominence winners and losers from the update, and they’ve resolved that aggregators and template-based websites are among the biggest losers. As always, however, it’s best not too put too much stock in these lists. […]

  25. 2012/04/26

    […] announced yesterday about a change in search algorithm to combat webspam. Searchmetrics put out a list of winners and losers of the Webspam […]

  26. 2012/04/26

    […] http://searchengineland.com/winners-…-update-119493http://blog.searchmetrics.com/us/201…he-short-head/http://www.webpronews.com/google-web…viagra-2012-04 […]

  27. 2012/04/26

    […] Searchmetrics has released a preliminary analysis of search visibility winners and losers from the update, and they’ve concluded that aggregators and template-based websites are among the biggest losers. As always, however, it’s best not too put too much stock in these lists. […]

  28. 2012/04/26

    […] to a report by SearchMetrics, some of the biggest winners in the wake of the webspam update, all of which saw a visibility […]

  29. 2012/04/26

    […] vous me suivez !). Un algo centré sur les méthodes de spam et de black hat en général. Et selon Searchmetrics, qui a fait une étude et un classement, l’hémorragie peut-être très importante pour […]

  30. 2012/04/26

    […] hit. Searchmetrics, as it customarily does following vital Google updates, compiled some rough lists of the tip winners and losers. Before we […]

  31. 2012/04/27

    […] about negative SEO, which you can read here. Most of the SEO’s are referring this update as bad SEO update and we can expect an updated version of Penguin update (May be Penguin 1.1) soon. According to […]

  32. 2012/04/27

    […] comme dans chaque modification d’ algorithme si des résultats de recherches sont modifiés il y a des perdants et des gagnants (l’ histoire des […]

  33. 2012/04/27

    […] stories about sites getting hit. Searchmetrics, as it usually does following major Google updates, compiled some preliminary lists of the top winners and losers. Before we get to those lists, however, there are some caveats. For […]

  34. 2012/04/27

    […] and popular sites like Digg.com have been hit already with a combination of the Panda and the Penguin, but soon the lists of sites hit hard by […]

  35. 2012/04/27

    […] and popular sites like Digg.com have been hit already with a combination of the Panda and the Penguin, but soon the lists of sites hit hard by […]

  36. 2012/04/27

    […] Update: Google “Bad” SEO Update – Now named Penguin Update … Posted in […]

  37. 2012/04/27

    […] quantificare l’impatto di questo aggiornamento: Searchmetrics ha pubblicato nel suo blog una lista di “vincitori e vinti”, elencando i domini che nelle ultime ore hanno subito gli scossoni maggiori in termini di […]

  38. 2012/04/27

    […] w wynikach i znalezienia wspólnego mianownika. Co z tego wyszło można przeczytać w oryginale tutaj, a streszczenie znajdziecie na blogu SEO […]

  39. 2012/04/27

    […] Search Metrics has posted a preliminary list of winners and losers, based on 50,000 monitored keywords. When you look at the winners, you will notice that many brands gained visibility. This includes newspaper and magazine sites, as well as high profile sites like Drupal or Spotify. […]

  40. 2012/04/27

    […] أكده Matt Cutts لموقع Searchengine Land، حيث ظهرت قائمة على موقع Searchmetrics للمواقع التي استفادت والتي لحق بها ضرر جراء تحديث Google […]

  41. 2012/04/27

    […] infine, prendendo come riferimento un articolo postato sulla rete analizzare alcuni dei siti che hanno in effetti subito sostanziali penalizzazioni […]

  42. 2012/04/28

    […] has released list of websites that got hit really hard by Penguin update. Some of the popular webosites like Digg, Comcast, HTC, […]

  43. 2012/04/28

    […] as with all the human creations, this one too had caused an uproar among many websites, which were hit by the update and is no longer listed on Google Search results. In case you are in a way confused […]

  44. 2012/04/28

    […] stories about sites getting hit. Searchmetrics, as it usually does following major Google updates, compiled some preliminary lists of the top winners and losers. Before we get to those lists, however, there are some caveats. For […]

  45. 2012/04/28

    […] and about negative SEO, which you can read here. Most of the SEO’s are referring this update as bad SEO update and we can expect an updated version of Penguin update (May be Penguin 1.1) soon. According to […]

  46. 2012/04/28

    […] guys over at searchmetrics put together a list of the biggest losers (and winners!) from the penguin update. Most notable […]

  47. 2012/04/30

    […] search results. That’s already produced changes. Who won and who lost? Searchmetrics has done a quick analysis. Winners include names like Poynter, Spotify and The Verge. Losers have some surprises like Cult Of […]

  48. 2012/04/30

    […] Cette nouvelles mise à jour (Google penguin) bouscule le monde du référencement.  SearchMetrics  a fait une études sur 50 000 requêtes des sites ayant perdu ou gagné de la visibilité suite à ce changement !  (http://blog.searchmetrics.com/us/2012/04/25/google-bad-seo-update-a-first-earthquake-on-the-short-he…) […]

  49. 2012/04/30

    […] about 3.1%, which is way less than the Panda update (which hit around 12%). This list of the first winners and losers of the update from Search Metrics reveals who was the hardest hit (or who benefited the most), and by how […]

  50. 2012/04/30

    […] still some early winners and losers predictions. You can see the list below, which was formatted by SearchMetrics.LosersWinnersSo what do you do if your site has been punished? Same as always: improve your […]

  51. 2012/05/01

    […] original Searchmetrics post has since been updated to show what it believes are now the Penguin Update winners and losers. The […]

  52. 2012/05/02

    […] and about negative SEO, which you can read here. Most of the SEO’s are referring this update as bad SEO update and we can expect an updated version of Penguin update (May be Penguin 1.1) soon. According to […]

  53. 2012/05/02

    […] his correspondence with Matt Cutts – with a clarifying post at Search Engine Land.  (See source, Search Metrics, for the list of SEO visibility winners & […]

  54. 2012/05/03

    […] Search Metrics, tanto per (non) cambiare, stila la solita lista dei vincenti / perdenti, riportando statistiche annesse al proprio indice di ricerca. […]

  55. 2012/05/04

    […] […]

  56. 2012/05/05

    […] Biggest Losers from penguin […]

  57. 2012/05/11

    […] Google+ Auditing your Link Building Portfolio before Google’s Over-Optimization Penalty Hits Update: Google “Bad” SEO Update – Now named Penguin Update Google Penguin Update Recovery Tips & Advice Google Launches “Penguin Update” Targeting […]

  58. 2012/05/11

    […] Slideshare s’est retrouvé propulsé en tête avec un gain de vis­i­bil­ité SEO de plus de 30%, pour être racheté par Linkedin lui-même grand chou­chou de Google, avec Twit­ter et […]

  59. 2012/05/14

    […] -39,02 (fonte: blogsearchmetrics) […]

  60. 2012/05/17

    […] 3 percent of search queries. The sites most influenced by the update have been those that are database driven or mainly aggregate information, according to web data firm […]

  61. 2012/05/17

    […] have been those that are database driven or mainly entire sum information, according to web data firm […]

  62. 2012/05/20

    […] 3 percent of search queries. The sites most influenced by the update have been those that are database driven or mainly aggregate information, according to web data firm […]

  63. 2012/05/21

    […] 3 percent of search queries. The sites most influenced by the update have been those that are database driven or mainly aggregate information, according to web data firm […]

  64. 2012/05/21

    […] 3 percent of search queries. The sites most influenced by the update have been those that are database driven or mainly aggregate information, according to web data firm […]

  65. 2012/05/22

    […] 3 percent of search queries. The sites most influenced by the update have been those that are database driven or mainly aggregate information, according to web data firm […]

  66. 2012/05/23

    […] 3 percent of search queries. The sites most influenced by the update have been those that are database driven or mainly aggregate information, according to web data firm […]

  67. 2012/06/13

    […] are plenty of small businesses excelling while some big businesses are not. Searchmetrics provides list of the biggest winners and losers from the Penguin update on their […]

  68. 2012/06/29

    […] Some useful artciles on the subject, Penguin Update Loosers […]

  69. 2012/08/01

    […] To see just how important this can be, take a look at the following list of some of the biggest post-Penguin losers (in terms of natural search visibility), as compiled by web data firm Searchmetrics: […]

  70. 2012/08/01

    […] To see just how important this can be, take a look at the following list of some of the biggest post-Penguin losers (in terms of natural search visibility), as compiled by web data firm Searchmetrics: […]

  71. 2012/08/01

    […] To see just how important this can be, take a look at the following list of some of the biggest post-Penguin losers (in terms of natural search visibility), as compiled by web data firm Searchmetrics: […]

  72. 2012/08/02

    […] To see just how important this can be, take a look at the following list of some of the biggest post-Penguin losers (in terms of natural search visibility), as compiled by web data firm Searchmetrics: […]

  73. 2012/08/02

    […] Para ver lo importante que es esto, echa un vistazo a la siguiente lista de algunos sites que han perdido una gran cantidad de tráfico SEO debido al impacto de Google Penguin. El informe ha sido elaborado por Searchmetrics: […]

  74. 2012/08/02

    […] biggest post-Penguin losers (in terms of natural search visibility), as compiled by web data firm Searchmetrics: Losers in Google’s Penguin update experienced significant drops in search […]

  75. 2012/08/04

    […] To see just how important this can be, take a look at the following list of some of the biggest post-Penguin losers (in terms of natural search visibility), as compiled by web data firm Searchmetrics: […]

  76. 2012/08/05

    […] To see just how important this can be, take a look at the following list of some of the biggest post-Penguin losers (in terms of natural search visibility), as compiled by web data firm Searchmetrics: […]

  77. 2012/08/09

    […] 看看下面这个表格,它列出了一些“后企鹅”时代最大的输家(就搜索引擎收录情况而言),就知道上述这一点是多么重要(由网络数据公司Searchmetrics编辑): […]

  78. 2012/09/20

    […] hedge your bets against the search engines.  If your business finds itself on the wrong side of a Googlealgorithmchange, you could see a large drop in visitors to your website.  Leveraging your social […]

  79. 2012/11/21

    […] seit April 2012 jedoch hat Google diese SEO-Experten aufgeschreckt durch einen Algorithmus-Update (Penguin- oder Bad SEO-Update) der u.a. die Qualität von Backlinks deutlich höher […]

  80. 2012/12/08

    […] la conclusion de Searchmetrics, un site spécialisé sur les moteurs de recherche. Pour les éditeurs cela signifie un besoin plus […]

  81. 2012/12/24

    […] business website owners who were affected by the change. SEO Blog Searchmetrics has compiled a list of the big winners and losers. Most of the losers aren’t that surprising, with mostly database driven sites being knocked […]

  82. 2013/01/29

    […] la conclusion de Searchmetrics, un site spécialisé sur les moteurs de recherche. Pour les éditeurs, un besoin plus important de […]

  83. 2013/04/10

    […] biggest post-Penguin losers (in terms of natural search visibility), as compiled by web data firm Searchmetrics: Losers in Google’s Penguin update experienced significant drops in search […]

  84. 2013/04/29

    […] Searchmetrics has released a preliminary analysis of search visibility winners and losers from the update, and they’ve concluded that aggregators and template-based websites are among the biggest losers. As always, however, it’s best not too put too much stock in these lists. […]

  85. 2013/05/23

    […] forthcoming weeks and months stories will be reported of the Penguin 2.0 winners and losers. As for Penguin 1.0 (and 1.1 and 1.2) these stories will help to identify the specific signals and tactics which the webspam algorithm is […]

  86. 2014/01/08

    […] comme dans chaque modification d’ algorithme si des résultats de recherches sont modifiés il y a des perdants et des gagnants (l’ histoire des […]

Write a comment