There's a rumour going around that ecommerce websites have been penalized by a recent Google update.
Is it true that many pages from most sites which run on shopping cart software packages have been either de-indexed or been moved to 'supplemental result'?
My site (essentialaids.com) uses some cart software called EROL but their technicians say the issue is a much wider one and that it's not just their sites which have been affected.
> My site (essentialaids.com) uses some cart software called EROL but > their technicians say the issue is a much wider one and that it's not > just their sites which have been affected.
> What do you think?
Both non-www and www addresses return the same content. The former should be 301-redirected to the latter.
I've heard rumblings that zen-cart and os-commerce sites have been hit by the recent update - but I think that's probably just because they are (without a lot of work) extremely unfriendly to bots... also, keep in mind that alot of these sites have the following characteristics:-
1. Product descriptions are taken directly from manufacturer (eg non- original - duplicate content) 2. High number of pages, low amount of textual content.
If google has tightened up the algorithm to reward people with 'original content' and 'organic links' alot of these sites that have relied on affiliate networks for their PR, and striven for high PR rather than good, readable and original content are going to be suffering. There still seems to be a really prevalent view amongst some store owners and ecommerce SEO's that PR is what gets you search engine positioning, when it really doesn't seem to be the case.
In my niche area, the leading store is a PR2, and I'm in about 19th place (had dropped to 70th in January from 9th) with a PR5.
I saw a big drop in my zen-cart based store (backless lingerie) mid to late Jan - I've started to build traffic again by a) modifying the headers code to take away the stupid default of appending meta- keywords and title to meta description (a hangover from the old days when keyword stuffing was considered a great thing to do) and rewriting alot of my content to reduce the blatant keyword stuffing my previous SEO people had done.
I've also put a great deal of effort into individualising meta- description tags for each page, and done a complete mod rewrite of the URL's to reduce the length of the standard 'sefu' url's that were provided.
I don't think that google has suddenly introduced a penalty for sites with canonicalization errors though - in fact, I think if anything it's probably the opposite - they've made algo's to help the prob, so that's prob not the reason for your drop.
> I've heard rumblings that zen-cart and os-commerce sites have been hit > by the recent update - but I think that's probably just because they > are (without a lot of work) extremely unfriendly to bots... also, keep > in mind that alot of these sites have the following characteristics:-
> 1. Product descriptions are taken directly from manufacturer (eg non- > original - duplicate content) > 2. High number of pages, low amount of textual content.
> If google has tightened up the algorithm to reward people with > 'original content' and 'organic links' alot of these sites that have > relied on affiliate networks for their PR, and striven for high PR > rather than good, readable and original content are going to be > suffering. There still seems to be a really prevalent view amongst > some store owners and ecommerce SEO's that PR is what gets you search > engine positioning, when it really doesn't seem to be the case.
> In my niche area, the leading store is a PR2, and I'm in about 19th > place (had dropped to 70th in January from 9th) with a PR5.
> I saw a big drop in my zen-cart based store (backless lingerie) mid to > late Jan - I've started to build traffic again by a) modifying the > headers code to take away the stupid default of appending meta- > keywords and title to meta description (a hangover from the old days > when keyword stuffing was considered a great thing to do) and > rewriting alot of my content to reduce the blatant keyword stuffing my > previous SEO people had done.
> I've also put a great deal of effort into individualising meta- > description tags for each page, and done a complete mod rewrite of the > URL's to reduce the length of the standard 'sefu' url's that were > provided.
> Doc
> On Mar 12, 6:46 pm, softplus wrote:
> > No.
> > But if your shop is technically insufficient and lacking on unique, > > valuable content then it will have problems sooner or later.
> > Where did you hear that, or which sites do you think are being hit > > with an "ecommerce-penalty"?
> My site (essentialaids.com) uses some cart software called EROL but > their technicians say the issue is a much wider one and that it's not > just their sites which have been affected.
That's a BS excuse and a lie.
Your site uses the most crappy shpooing system I've ever seen. I've told you that before. Fix it, remove the redirects, deliver your textual contents server sided to the URL you're linking to and not client sided under a different URL. Your site perfectly matches a ton of spam-alert-profiles, although your intent is IMO not spammy, you've just bought the wrong CMS.
> My site (essentialaids.com) uses some cart software called EROL but > their technicians say the issue is a much wider one and that it's not > just their sites which have been affected.
> What do you think?
> On Mar 12, 8:46 am, softplus wrote:
> > No.
> > But if your shop is technically insufficient and lacking on unique, > > valuable content then it will have problems sooner or later.
> > Where did you hear that, or which sites do you think are being hit > > with an "ecommerce-penalty"?
Think of a different approach. Instead of tyring to shove thin product pages into search indexes write informative pages on product lines/ groups/... and link to the product pages within the text. When these well linked info pages provide enough product details they'll rank for product related search queries. Sebastian
> I've heard rumblings that zen-cart and os-commerce sites have been hit > by the recent update - but I think that's probably just because they > are (without a lot of work) extremely unfriendly to bots... also, keep > in mind that alot of these sites have the following characteristics:-
> 1. Product descriptions are taken directly from manufacturer (eg non- > original - duplicate content) > 2. High number of pages, low amount of textual content.
> If google has tightened up the algorithm to reward people with > 'original content' and 'organic links' alot of these sites that have > relied on affiliate networks for their PR, and striven for high PR > rather than good, readable and original content are going to be > suffering. There still seems to be a really prevalent view amongst > some store owners and ecommerce SEO's that PR is what gets you search > engine positioning, when it really doesn't seem to be the case.
> In my niche area, the leading store is a PR2, and I'm in about 19th > place (had dropped to 70th in January from 9th) with a PR5.
> I saw a big drop in my zen-cart based store (backless lingerie) mid to > late Jan - I've started to build traffic again by a) modifying the > headers code to take away the stupid default of appending meta- > keywords and title to meta description (a hangover from the old days > when keyword stuffing was considered a great thing to do) and > rewriting alot of my content to reduce the blatant keyword stuffing my > previous SEO people had done.
> I've also put a great deal of effort into individualising meta- > description tags for each page, and done a complete mod rewrite of the > URL's to reduce the length of the standard 'sefu' url's that were > provided.
> Doc
> On Mar 12, 6:46 pm, softplus wrote:
> > No.
> > But if your shop is technically insufficient and lacking on unique, > > valuable content then it will have problems sooner or later.
> > Where did you hear that, or which sites do you think are being hit > > with an "ecommerce-penalty"?
Sebastian has a good point Alex W - I saw him reply to your earlier posts and suggest the same thing. He knows what he's talking about and you could do well to show his comments to your tech people.
> Think of a different approach. Instead of tyring to shove thin product > pages into search indexes write informative pages on product lines/ > groups/... and link to the product pages within the text. When these > well linked info pages provide enough product details they'll rank for > product related search queries. > Sebastian
> On Mar 12, 10:39 am, dockarl wrote:
> > I've heard rumblings that zen-cart and os-commerce sites have been hit > > by the recent update - but I think that's probably just because they > > are (without a lot of work) extremely unfriendly to bots... also, keep > > in mind that alot of these sites have the following characteristics:-
> > 1. Product descriptions are taken directly from manufacturer (eg non- > > original - duplicate content) > > 2. High number of pages, low amount of textual content.
> > If google has tightened up the algorithm to reward people with > > 'original content' and 'organic links' alot of these sites that have > > relied on affiliate networks for their PR, and striven for high PR > > rather than good, readable and original content are going to be > > suffering. There still seems to be a really prevalent view amongst > > some store owners and ecommerce SEO's that PR is what gets you search > > engine positioning, when it really doesn't seem to be the case.
> > In my niche area, the leading store is a PR2, and I'm in about 19th > > place (had dropped to 70th in January from 9th) with a PR5.
> > I saw a big drop in my zen-cart based store (backless lingerie) mid to > > late Jan - I've started to build traffic again by a) modifying the > > headers code to take away the stupid default of appending meta- > > keywords and title to meta description (a hangover from the old days > > when keyword stuffing was considered a great thing to do) and > > rewriting alot of my content to reduce the blatant keyword stuffing my > > previous SEO people had done.
> > I've also put a great deal of effort into individualising meta- > > description tags for each page, and done a complete mod rewrite of the > > URL's to reduce the length of the standard 'sefu' url's that were > > provided.
> > Doc
> > On Mar 12, 6:46 pm, softplus wrote:
> > > No.
> > > But if your shop is technically insufficient and lacking on unique, > > > valuable content then it will have problems sooner or later.
> > > Where did you hear that, or which sites do you think are being hit > > > with an "ecommerce-penalty"?
> Think of a different approach. Instead of tyring to shove thin product > pages into search indexes write informative pages on product lines/ > groups/... and link to the product pages within the text. When these > well linked info pages provide enough product details they'll rank for > product related search queries. > Sebastian
> On Mar 12, 10:39 am, dockarl wrote:
> > I've heard rumblings that zen-cart and os-commerce sites have been hit > > by the recent update - but I think that's probably just because they > > are (without a lot of work) extremely unfriendly to bots... also, keep > > in mind that alot of these sites have the following characteristics:-
> > 1. Product descriptions are taken directly from manufacturer (eg non- > > original - duplicate content) > > 2. High number of pages, low amount of textual content.
> > If google has tightened up the algorithm to reward people with > > 'original content' and 'organic links' alot of these sites that have > > relied on affiliate networks for their PR, and striven for high PR > > rather than good, readable and original content are going to be > > suffering. There still seems to be a really prevalent view amongst > > some store owners and ecommerce SEO's that PR is what gets you search > > engine positioning, when it really doesn't seem to be the case.
> > In my niche area, the leading store is a PR2, and I'm in about 19th > > place (had dropped to 70th in January from 9th) with a PR5.
> > I saw a big drop in my zen-cart based store (backless lingerie) mid to > > late Jan - I've started to build traffic again by a) modifying the > > headers code to take away the stupid default of appending meta- > > keywords and title to meta description (a hangover from the old days > > when keyword stuffing was considered a great thing to do) and > > rewriting alot of my content to reduce the blatant keyword stuffing my > > previous SEO people had done.
> > I've also put a great deal of effort into individualising meta- > > description tags for each page, and done a complete mod rewrite of the > > URL's to reduce the length of the standard 'sefu' url's that were > > provided.
> > Doc
> > On Mar 12, 6:46 pm, softplus wrote:
> > > No.
> > > But if your shop is technically insufficient and lacking on unique, > > > valuable content then it will have problems sooner or later.
> > > Where did you hear that, or which sites do you think are being hit > > > with an "ecommerce-penalty"?
> Think of a different approach. Instead of tyring to shove thin product > pages into search indexes write informative pages on product lines/ > groups/... and link to the product pages within the text. When these > well linked info pages provide enough product details they'll rank for > product related search queries. > Sebastian
> On Mar 12, 10:39 am, dockarl wrote:
> > I've heard rumblings that zen-cart and os-commerce sites have been hit > > by the recent update - but I think that's probably just because they > > are (without a lot of work) extremely unfriendly to bots... also, keep > > in mind that alot of these sites have the following characteristics:-
> > 1. Product descriptions are taken directly from manufacturer (eg non- > > original - duplicate content) > > 2. High number of pages, low amount of textual content.
> > If google has tightened up the algorithm to reward people with > > 'original content' and 'organic links' alot of these sites that have > > relied on affiliate networks for their PR, and striven for high PR > > rather than good, readable and original content are going to be > > suffering. There still seems to be a really prevalent view amongst > > some store owners and ecommerce SEO's that PR is what gets you search > > engine positioning, when it really doesn't seem to be the case.
> > In my niche area, the leading store is a PR2, and I'm in about 19th > > place (had dropped to 70th in January from 9th) with a PR5.
> > I saw a big drop in my zen-cart based store (backless lingerie) mid to > > late Jan - I've started to build traffic again by a) modifying the > > headers code to take away the stupid default of appending meta- > > keywords and title to meta description (a hangover from the old days > > when keyword stuffing was considered a great thing to do) and > > rewriting alot of my content to reduce the blatant keyword stuffing my > > previous SEO people had done.
> > I've also put a great deal of effort into individualising meta- > > description tags for each page, and done a complete mod rewrite of the > > URL's to reduce the length of the standard 'sefu' url's that were > > provided.
> > Doc
> > On Mar 12, 6:46 pm, softplus wrote:
> > > No.
> > > But if your shop is technically insufficient and lacking on unique, > > > valuable content then it will have problems sooner or later.
> > > Where did you hear that, or which sites do you think are being hit > > > with an "ecommerce-penalty"?
Alex, I don't recommend particular software here, coz I can't provide a full-blown review for free and a quick look into any system wouldn't help. Revealing BS-at-first-sight is another story.
> I've never heard it put that way Sebastian - that's very solid advice.
> M
> On Mar 12, 7:59 pm, Sebastian wrote:
> > Think of a different approach. Instead of tyring to shove thin product > > pages into search indexes write informative pages on product lines/ > > groups/... and link to the product pages within the text. When these > > well linked info pages provide enough product details they'll rank for > > product related search queries. > > Sebastian
> > On Mar 12, 10:39 am, dockarl wrote:
> > > I've heard rumblings that zen-cart and os-commerce sites have been hit > > > by the recent update - but I think that's probably just because they > > > are (without a lot of work) extremely unfriendly to bots... also, keep > > > in mind that alot of these sites have the following characteristics:-
> > > 1. Product descriptions are taken directly from manufacturer (eg non- > > > original - duplicate content) > > > 2. High number of pages, low amount of textual content.
> > > If google has tightened up the algorithm to reward people with > > > 'original content' and 'organic links' alot of these sites that have > > > relied on affiliate networks for their PR, and striven for high PR > > > rather than good, readable and original content are going to be > > > suffering. There still seems to be a really prevalent view amongst > > > some store owners and ecommerce SEO's that PR is what gets you search > > > engine positioning, when it really doesn't seem to be the case.
> > > In my niche area, the leading store is a PR2, and I'm in about 19th > > > place (had dropped to 70th in January from 9th) with a PR5.
> > > I saw a big drop in my zen-cart based store (backless lingerie) mid to > > > late Jan - I've started to build traffic again by a) modifying the > > > headers code to take away the stupid default of appending meta- > > > keywords and title to meta description (a hangover from the old days > > > when keyword stuffing was considered a great thing to do) and > > > rewriting alot of my content to reduce the blatant keyword stuffing my > > > previous SEO people had done.
> > > I've also put a great deal of effort into individualising meta- > > > description tags for each page, and done a complete mod rewrite of the > > > URL's to reduce the length of the standard 'sefu' url's that were > > > provided.
> > > Doc
> > > On Mar 12, 6:46 pm, softplus wrote:
> > > > No.
> > > > But if your shop is technically insufficient and lacking on unique, > > > > valuable content then it will have problems sooner or later.
> > > > Where did you hear that, or which sites do you think are being hit > > > > with an "ecommerce-penalty"?
> Alex, I don't recommend particular software here, coz I can't provide > a full-blown review for free and a quick look into any system wouldn't > help. Revealing BS-at-first-sight is another story.
> Sebastian
> On Mar 12, 11:09 am, dockarl wrote:
> > I've never heard it put that way Sebastian - that's very solid advice.
> > M
> > On Mar 12, 7:59 pm, Sebastian wrote:
> > > Think of a different approach. Instead of tyring to shove thin product > > > pages into search indexes write informative pages on product lines/ > > > groups/... and link to the product pages within the text. When these > > > well linked info pages provide enough product details they'll rank for > > > product related search queries. > > > Sebastian
> > > On Mar 12, 10:39 am, dockarl wrote:
> > > > I've heard rumblings that zen-cart and os-commerce sites have been hit > > > > by the recent update - but I think that's probably just because they > > > > are (without a lot of work) extremely unfriendly to bots... also, keep > > > > in mind that alot of these sites have the following characteristics:-
> > > > 1. Product descriptions are taken directly from manufacturer (eg non- > > > > original - duplicate content) > > > > 2. High number of pages, low amount of textual content.
> > > > If google has tightened up the algorithm to reward people with > > > > 'original content' and 'organic links' alot of these sites that have > > > > relied on affiliate networks for their PR, and striven for high PR > > > > rather than good, readable and original content are going to be > > > > suffering. There still seems to be a really prevalent view amongst > > > > some store owners and ecommerce SEO's that PR is what gets you search > > > > engine positioning, when it really doesn't seem to be the case.
> > > > In my niche area, the leading store is a PR2, and I'm in about 19th > > > > place (had dropped to 70th in January from 9th) with a PR5.
> > > > I saw a big drop in my zen-cart based store (backless lingerie) mid to > > > > late Jan - I've started to build traffic again by a) modifying the > > > > headers code to take away the stupid default of appending meta- > > > > keywords and title to meta description (a hangover from the old days > > > > when keyword stuffing was considered a great thing to do) and > > > > rewriting alot of my content to reduce the blatant keyword stuffing my > > > > previous SEO people had done.
> > > > I've also put a great deal of effort into individualising meta- > > > > description tags for each page, and done a complete mod rewrite of the > > > > URL's to reduce the length of the standard 'sefu' url's that were > > > > provided.
> > > > Doc
> > > > On Mar 12, 6:46 pm, softplus wrote:
> > > > > No.
> > > > > But if your shop is technically insufficient and lacking on unique, > > > > > valuable content then it will have problems sooner or later.
> > > > > Where did you hear that, or which sites do you think are being hit > > > > > with an "ecommerce-penalty"?
Hi Alex I took a quick look at your site and I think Sebastian is a little bit wrong there. He is underestimating the problems that the software is causing. I am totally serious about that -- regardless of what their technicians say.
It will - if you leave it like that - get your domain a full ban on Google sooner or later. You might not have been here when it was happening, but scroll back to Christmas-time 2006 in these groups and you'll see a shop-owner go bezerk because of a frames-based shop that got thrown out of Google (Sebastian, we missed you there!). (I'm sure someone will post a link to the topics, if you're interested.) Your shop solution is worse than a frames-based one, your redirects are just as sneaky.
I am almost certain that you would be much better off with any of the better known shop solutions, even if they are not optimized at all. When looking at new solutions, remember that many shops have been optimized, especially if they are showcase applications for the shop. Your budget will determine how much you will be able to do with regards to customizations for search engines (and users, of course).
> Hi Alex > I took a quick look at your site and I think Sebastian is a little bit > wrong there. > He is underestimating the problems that the software is causing. > I am totally serious about that -- regardless of what their > technicians say.
> It will - if you leave it like that - get your domain a full ban on > Google sooner or later. You might not have been here when it was > happening, but scroll back to Christmas-time 2006 in these groups and > you'll see a shop-owner go bezerk because of a frames-based shop that > got thrown out of Google (Sebastian, we missed you there!). (I'm sure > someone will post a link to the topics, if you're interested.) Your > shop solution is worse than a frames-based one, your redirects are > just as sneaky.
> I am almost certain that you would be much better off with any of the > better known shop solutions, even if they are not optimized at all. > When looking at new solutions, remember that many shops have been > optimized, especially if they are showcase applications for the shop. > Your budget will determine how much you will be able to do with > regards to customizations for search engines (and users, of course).
Not later, but sooner. Google deindexes essentialaids.com with a rate of 2 pages daily. 17 of 150 pages or so are left in the index, so in a week the creeping death penatly will be executed. Sebastian
> Hi Alex > I took a quick look at your site and I think Sebastian is a little bit > wrong there. > He is underestimating the problems that the software is causing. > I am totally serious about that -- regardless of what their > technicians say.
> It will - if you leave it like that - get your domain a full ban on > Google sooner or later. You might not have been here when it was > happening, but scroll back to Christmas-time 2006 in these groups and > you'll see a shop-owner go bezerk because of a frames-based shop that > got thrown out of Google (Sebastian, we missed you there!). (I'm sure > someone will post a link to the topics, if you're interested.) Your > shop solution is worse than a frames-based one, your redirects are > just as sneaky.
> I am almost certain that you would be much better off with any of the > better known shop solutions, even if they are not optimized at all. > When looking at new solutions, remember that many shops have been > optimized, especially if they are showcase applications for the shop. > Your budget will determine how much you will be able to do with > regards to customizations for search engines (and users, of course).
> Hi Alex > I took a quick look at your site and I think Sebastian is a little bit > wrong there. > He is underestimating the problems that the software is causing. > I am totally serious about that -- regardless of what their > technicians say.
> It will - if you leave it like that - get your domain a full ban on > Google sooner or later. You might not have been here when it was > happening, but scroll back to Christmas-time 2006 in these groups and > you'll see a shop-owner go bezerk because of a frames-based shop that > got thrown out of Google (Sebastian, we missed you there!). (I'm sure > someone will post a link to the topics, if you're interested.) Your > shop solution is worse than a frames-based one, your redirects are > just as sneaky.
> I am almost certain that you would be much better off with any of the > better known shop solutions, even if they are not optimized at all. > When looking at new solutions, remember that many shops have been > optimized, especially if they are showcase applications for the shop. > Your budget will determine how much you will be able to do with > regards to customizations for search engines (and users, of course).
I don't know Actinic but I just crawled a site using it and it looks fairly "ok". I don't know if that was an exception or if they're all like that, but it's certainly better than your existing solution. But don't just use "crawlability" as the only criteria to choose a shop; that should just be one of the many requirements. Personally, if I were in your situation, I would take the time to choose a really good, long-term solution. Accept that your existing site will cause problems and give finding a new solution a fairly high priority, but don't just jump to the next best shop.
> I don't know Actinic but I just crawled a site using it and it looks > fairly "ok". I don't know if that was an exception or if they're all > like that, but it's certainly better than your existing solution. But > don't just use "crawlability" as the only criteria to choose a shop; > that should just be one of the many requirements. Personally, if I > were in your situation, I would take the time to choose a really good, > long-term solution. Accept that your existing site will cause problems > and give finding a new solution a fairly high priority, but don't just > jump to the next best shop.
> I'm not sure really where to start. It seems there are hundreds of > packages out there all with different strengths and weaknesses.
> In terms of your own experience, could you help by narrowing it down > for me - are there some front runners worth considering?
> Alex
> On Mar 12, 12:44 pm, softplus wrote:
> > Hi Alex
> > I don't know Actinic but I just crawled a site using it and it looks > > fairly "ok". I don't know if that was an exception or if they're all > > like that, but it's certainly better than your existing solution. But > > don't just use "crawlability" as the only criteria to choose a shop; > > that should just be one of the many requirements. Personally, if I > > were in your situation, I would take the time to choose a really good, > > long-term solution. Accept that your existing site will cause problems > > and give finding a new solution a fairly high priority, but don't just > > jump to the next best shop.
Just thought you may want to remove the 3 links at the very bottom of this page, or at least make them nofollow'ed: http://www.essentialaids.com/map.html Sebastian
> My site (essentialaids.com) uses some cart software called EROL but > their technicians say the issue is a much wider one and that it's not > just their sites which have been affected.
> What do you think?
> On Mar 12, 8:46 am, softplus wrote:
> > No.
> > But if your shop is technically insufficient and lacking on unique, > > valuable content then it will have problems sooner or later.
> > Where did you hear that, or which sites do you think are being hit > > with an "ecommerce-penalty"?
> By the way, John, when you say you crawled the site... what do you > mean?
> Is that something I could do with the right software? Sounds like a > good tool.
> On Mar 12, 2:26 pm, Alex W wrote:
> > Hi John, thanks for that.
> > I'm not sure really where to start. It seems there are hundreds of > > packages out there all with different strengths and weaknesses.
> > In terms of your own experience, could you help by narrowing it down > > for me - are there some front runners worth considering?
> > Alex
> > On Mar 12, 12:44 pm, softplus wrote:
> > > Hi Alex
> > > I don't know Actinic but I just crawled a site using it and it looks > > > fairly "ok". I don't know if that was an exception or if they're all > > > like that, but it's certainly better than your existing solution. But > > > don't just use "crawlability" as the only criteria to choose a shop; > > > that should just be one of the many requirements. Personally, if I > > > were in your situation, I would take the time to choose a really good, > > > long-term solution. Accept that your existing site will cause problems > > > and give finding a new solution a fairly high priority, but don't just > > > jump to the next best shop.
I went to Actinic's site and picked one of the user's sites at random and used "Xenu's link sleuth" (freeware) to crawl the shop. It can give you a rough feeling for the structure of the site fairly quickly.
Regarding a shop for you, I really can't say much, there are so many "depends" :-)
I'm certain that there are forums where more ecommerce site owners are online and active - but even there they would have to know more about your requirements (simple things like budget :-))
Thanks to all for all this input - I'm grateful you've taken the trouble.
I'll have a look on those and see what I can find out.
Meantime - it seems some of the sites which have lost pages on Google and which run on the same software as mine are reporting that their pages are starting to reappear in the index.
That would be strange, wouldn't it, given what's been discussed above? Anyway I'll keep you informed if the same thing happens with my site over the next few days.
> I went to Actinic's site and picked one of the user's sites at random > and used "Xenu's link sleuth" (freeware) to crawl the shop. It can > give you a rough feeling for the structure of the site fairly > quickly.
> Regarding a shop for you, I really can't say much, there are so many > "depends" :-)
> I'm certain that there are forums where more ecommerce site owners are > online and active - but even there they would have to know more about > your requirements (simple things like budget :-))
> Meantime - it seems some of the sites which have lost pages on Google > and which run on the same software as mine are reporting that their > pages are starting to reappear in the index.
I fear that's just everflux - Google datacenters not perfectly in sync.
The software architecture Erol/DreamteamUK has invented is not search engine friendly and will lead to more troubles if not 100% revamped, or dumped. Sure there's no bad intent, and perhaps a reinclusion request will gain Google's sympathy, but how to tell a fully automated spam filter drilled to remove sneaky JS redirects from Google's search index that your site and a few others have got the permission to use this prohibited cloaking technology? Next week all spammers would plaster their sneaky JS code with Erol copyright notices and other footsteps this software leaves on the net to flood the search index with shitloads of crap.
> Thanks to all for all this input - I'm grateful you've taken the > trouble.
> I'll have a look on those and see what I can find out.
> Meantime - it seems some of the sites which have lost pages on Google > and which run on the same software as mine are reporting that their > pages are starting to reappear in the index.
> That would be strange, wouldn't it, given what's been discussed above? > Anyway I'll keep you informed if the same thing happens with my site > over the next few days.
> Alex
> On Mar 12, 2:53 pm, softplus wrote:
> > Hi Alex
> > I went to Actinic's site and picked one of the user's sites at random > > and used "Xenu's link sleuth" (freeware) to crawl the shop. It can > > give you a rough feeling for the structure of the site fairly > > quickly.
> > Regarding a shop for you, I really can't say much, there are so many > > "depends" :-)
> > I'm certain that there are forums where more ecommerce site owners are > > online and active - but even there they would have to know more about > > your requirements (simple things like budget :-))
|
