[Simon]

Originally Posted by Greenguy

But, when what you think should work doesn't, sometimes it's best to do the complete opposite.

There's definitely something to be said for testing the counter-intuitive choice(s). Often you'll find that the things you *believe* should work are not at all what does. Plus it's very good mental exercise to always try to identify the counter-intuitive choices. Otherwise you can wind up like the masses who run their lives based on beliefs and intuition. No matter how finely-honed someone's intuition may be, it's always good to test.

Originally Posted by faxxaff

I think the original article from Google was about thin affiliate content in general and tubes were just one example. It impacts free sites, galleries, sblogs in the same way. In general terms Google raised the bar for content to advertising ratio. In the old days we had to write 10 to 50 words of text for an outbound link. These days we need much more content to compensate for posting links.

Very true. The Big G doesn't like thin sites in most cases, or too much non-content (ads) above the fold, or too many outbound links without a suitable amount of content. The reason I singled out tubes, in particular the BIG ones, is that they're in the SERPs in a big way. And we can learn some things from them if we don't mind learning from our (enemies/opponents/competitors/the_damn_pirates).

Originally Posted by ecchi

Rather than:

<a href="submitted-site-or-gallery.com">Naked BBW teenage lesbians sucking cock
and taking it anally in bondage.</a>

Try:

Naked BBW teenage lesbians sucking cock and taking it anally in bondage.
<a href="submitted-site-or-gallery.com">Click here to visit the site/gallery.</a>

That way you get "real" text as content, not just a page of links.

That's part of why Useless was building good traffic for awhile with his PervBox site. I was regularly submitting content to him with 500 word descriptions. The last sentence was usually unfinished, it ended with (more...) and had just the word more and elipsis deep-linked. That also helped me pick up a lot of those generic/junk blind links that you need to keep the Penguin happy.

Originally Posted by JustRobert

... I have (like most of you) read the G warnings (he has talked about) I have somewhat ignored them or changing hubs and sites has slowly been pushed down the to do list. Mostly because there has been flashes of the "they are getting liked again" that stops the changes.

Most of what you can do is just following "best practices" when building or remaking sites. Make pages that validate or at least have no critical errors. Build for the visitor and not specifically for search engines. Keep up on what's happening with changes to SE algorithms and tweak things as you go. This will kinda sorta lead to somewhere in the low medium success level.

You see, you're supposed to build sites with content that visitors want to see and for which they're willing to spend time on your site. But you also have to understand that this goal is in direct opposition to the concept of wanting to get them to your sponsor's tour as quickly as possible. Further, unless you're selling advertising on your site or BUILDING A LIST, then it may not be in your best interest to keep the visitor on your site too long.

The first step must be strategy. Only then can the tactics be evaluated. Decide why each of your sites exists. Do you have sites where you're trying to build longer time on site, longer time on page, and more pages per visitor? Have you considered that unless you're selling advertising on your site or BUILDING A LIST, you're spending a good part of every work day working against your own interests?

Originally Posted by Cleo

Bought this ebook a few days ago. Been reading it on my Macbook and iPhone. So far it's a lot of stuff that I already knew but it also contains some good information that I didn't know. Well worth the $2.99 cost.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...eosgoodstuf-20

I'll grab a copy of that and take a look when I get some time. It looks decent and somewhat up to date from what I saw in the TOCs and sample chapter, and read on the author's site. At the least it doesn't seem filled with harmful info like so many other SEO books and guides that were written too long ago.

Just noticed you posted that you finished reading it. Anything seem really helpful?

Originally Posted by housekeeper

Precisely! Have you done your keyword research lately? You'll see what the top ranking adult sites are, and none of it has anything to do with substance. You'll find on pages 2 or sooner, the criminals and file sharing sites, the pirates and everyone else that generally not us.

Yep, this is sort of what I was talking about earlier. You can study the Big G's webmaster guidelines and try to follow them to the letter and you still will never get the kind of SERPs you think you deserve. Or you can study the sites who are getting top rankings and try to understand their strategies and tactics. In my 58+ years I've been fortunate to have learned a lot from criminals and pirates. You don't have to choose to be one to learn from them.

Originally Posted by lezinterracial

Great thread! Not sure if it was this issue or my Google honeymoon period was up. I just lost my ranking for my chaturbate white label. I was taking the xml feed and showing the top free chaturbate girls on the main page. http://www.bestfreecamgirls.com
Either way, Need to figure out how to get more text content on the page.

It's not easy to rank a white label site. So if that's a new one, and you had some good Google traffic for a while at first, it probably was what people call their honeymoon period. Did your site drop to a natural place in the SERPs or is it way down? A natural drop is okay, a big drop could mean your site will be spending time on probation in their sandbox.

And yes, content is definitely needed on that page/site if you ever want it to get any SE traffic. But you also want to think about how the Big G will view your incoming link profile. Unless I'm looking at the wrong site, having almost 60K incoming links from only 9 domains (on only 7 different IPs) isn't going to do you any good. Plus too many links with your exact match domain (EMD), which is no longer a good idea (in fact it's been a bad idea since at least September 2012 when Google rolled out (admitted to) its EMD update).

And now the obligatory... Hockey! Olympics! Snow! Ice! Go USA! |macho_guy_ice_dancing_smilie|