SEO penalty or Google sandbox? Advice needed.

[Buddy.]

Hi

I've been working on a new site which went live in March 2009. Prior to that it had a one page holding page which went up in September 2008.

The site is indexed in Google but still isn't ranking for the its primary keywords. It's obvious to me that its either sand boxed or has tripped a Google filter.

I'm not really sure what I should do. My gut instinct is to continue building links, maybe go back and reduce the keyword density, generally dumb down the on page seo, remove backlinks (I set up a few on my Soicial Network profiles) and sit it out. If nothing improves, then maybe try to request a review/re-submission via Google web master tools.

However, having read some of the presentations from Pubcon, where Matt Cutts indicated that it was sometimes easier to walk away from a domain than try and sort it out I'm a little confused about the best course to follow.

Back when I first got into this industry, you could expect a new site with good on page optimisation to fall into the sandbox before reappearing strongly in the SERPS 6 months later.

The site has good unique, reguarly upated content.

If anyone has any thoughts or advice from their own experiences then it would be much appreciated.

[vmlinuz]

Try these: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/1...penalty/10566/

[Webzcas]

Can you post a link to your site so we can have a look at it.

Also does the site in question rank #1 for it's domain name?

[casinojack]

Does the site show up in google? If so, not sandboxed.

[LiveCasinoPartners]

Are you certain your site is penalized. Every once in a while my sites disappear for a day or two and then go back to where they were before. Can you post the domain name. If so we can take a look at it and give you some advice.

However, having read some of the presentations from Pubcon, where Matt Cutts indicated that it was sometimes easier to walk away from a domain than try and sort it out I'm a little confused about the best course to follow.

If your site is blackballed by google, then I agree with the above statement. I had to walk away from site beciase I was way too aggressive in buying links. I bought all links and was a member of every link farm and link scheme know to man at the time. Every time I got spam on getting links I would buy them, lol.. It took only 6 months to get banned. I abandoned the site, and 2-3 years later the site ban was lifted by google. Since then I learned my lesson. lol

[Doolally]

It would be useful if we could see the site in question and also know what keywords you're trying to rank for. It may just be that the keywords are too competitive to get straight up into prime positions.

[matted]

Is the site setup for google or visitors? What keywords are you targeting (are they competitive)? Are other SEs ranking you.

I recommend setting a site up with SEO in mind but ultimately designed for the user. G updates their ranking algo so frequently it is impossible to keep up.

[LiveCasinoPartners]

Can you post a link to your site so we can have a look at it.

Also does the site in question rank #1 for it's domain name?

I agree, in order to give you some advice we would need to know the domain name. By this time if you search for your domain name in the google toolbar it should come up in the SERPS, if not then it is definetly banned.

[Casino Geezer]

Hi Buddy,

bf it helps, By all means PM me your URL and I can have a look for you, but if your site is in Google then you are not sandboxed.

[casino2k.com]

I have a similar situation with my top website ( http://www.casino2k.com/ ).
The domain is 2 years old and the website is 1 year old, regularly updated with 100% unique content. The website has about 300 artciles + forum + blog.
3 days ago I saw a -50% traffic and I investigated all the serps.
In all of them I lost some positions, 1 to 10 depending on the age of the article and on the number of competitors for that keyword.
To be honest, I expected an increase of traffic and better serps because of quality links I bought (I already see them on google webmaster tools).
I believe google caffeine is now live in google.it , because serps for some keywords are very similar to the caffeinated version and very different from 1 week ago.
In 3 days I lost about 50% traffic and I'm going crazy trying to fix my serps

[matius]

i have my site panalted
http://casinocaptaincooks.com/


i have list of sites like that
www.city-casino.net
www.riocasinos.net
www.all-great-casinos.com
www.online-casino-affiliate-programs.net
www.chickenotr.com
www.casinos-reviews.net

[universal4]

Matius,

You may want to fix your signature. All sites in your sig point to the same url.

Rick
Universal4

[Buddy.]

Thanks for everyone's input into the problem I'm having. I thought it would be useful to provide an update 6 weeks on from when I first made this post.

It still looks as if my site has a Google penalty. To answer some specific questions I've been asked:


1. It ranks number 1 for its domain name
2. Its not ranking anywhere for its keywords
3. There are no messages indicating problems with the Google Webmaster tools and the sitemap has been resubmitted a few times.

It looks to me that its a penalty.

I've dumb downed some of the on page seo about 6 weeks ago to see if it would get the site out of the penalty but this had had no impact.

Any help and advice would be much appreciated.

Thanks

[Buddy.]

Thought I'd come back to my post as I've come across an interesting post dated March 2009 by Rand over at Seomoz about the Google sandbox.

I keep hearing here and at Webmasterworld that the sandbox no longer exists.

Anyway here is what Rand makes of it:

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/googles-s...d-by-gradercom

[casinojack]

I never saw anyone here say sandbox does not exist?

[thebookiesoffers]

Does the site show up in google? If so, not sandboxed.

Im affraid that comment is incorrect, what the sandbox does is hold sites back for the main and most competative phrases. you will still find your site in google if its in the sandbox

[Buddy.]

I never saw anyone here say sandbox does not exist?

Apologies Casinojack. No one here has implied that the sandbox doesn't exist. What I meant to say was that after doing a fair bit of research on the net and from what I've read the sandbox issue is one that still divides the SEO community, some of whom imply that the sandbox simply doesn' exist.


The key question really remains outstanding for me:

1. Do you accept that there is a sandbox and hope that one day you suddenly come out of it and rank for your major keywords.

(Rather interestingly main proponents of the sandbox argue that Google 'releases' a number of sandboxed sites at the same time, many of whom go on to rank highly in the SERPS for their page titles. They go on to argue that this alone is a good indication of a sandbox existing).

or

2. Do you accept that the sanbox no longer exists, was something that may have been around in 2005 but which has been superseeded by filters?

Until you fix the problem that has caused you to trigger the filter can you assume that you will remain supressed in the SERPS forever. (The problem here being how to determine what is cauing your site to trip a filter).

What do I think?

I'd like to think I was in the sandbox and that I'll shortly come out having done my time. However, my gut instinct tells me I've tripped a filter.

One thing I have noticed is that I'm repeating the name of the site in all of my page titles. For example, nearly all page titles on the site are set up in the following format:


"Keyword I'm Targeting | Online Pokies Club"

Examples from the site:
http://onlinepokiesclub.com/online-pokies-reviews/
http://onlinepokiesclub.com/ready-se...go-for-hr2266/

A bit of a rookie mistake, and possibly something that could be causing a filter to trigger a penalty?

I've come across a couple of interesting posts on the sandbox:

See 1st response in this thread:

http://www.google.co.uk/support/foru...4fd3fa41&hl=en

A small survey on the sandbox with some links to Matt Cutt's original comments on the sand box:
http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/020877.html

Some interesting points I've come across also include when you transfer or purchase domains. I've seen comments where SEO's are saying that Google may treat a domain that changes its registration information as a 'new' domain and may then downsize the value of its existing links, which in turn can also lead to the site suffering some form of sandbox effect. Not sure its true but another intangible fact to bear in mind!

[Buddy.]

Apologies, I should have known that a long post can sometimes be a conversation killer!!

In relation to the Sandbox do you have any thoughts on the following:

1. Do you accept that there is a sandbox and hope that one day you suddenly come out of it and rank for your major keywords.

or

2. Do you accept that the sanbox no longer exists, was something that may have been around in 2005 but which has been superseded by filters. Until you manually fix the problem you will suppressed in the SERPS indefinitely?

[Webzcas]

Oh the sandbox most definately did exist. As to whether it is still in it's same form now, I would disagree. Sure google still applies penalties to new sites, but not as harshly as they did back in 2004/05.

The reason I say this, is because it is a lot easier to get new sites to rank quite quickly for medium and long tail terms. The sandbox of old, it was virtually impossible.

[Buddy.]

The reason I say this, is because it is a lot easier to get new sites to rank quite quickly for medium and long tail terms. The sandbox of old, it was virtually impossible.

From some testing I've been doing I'd agree completely with this. I recently launched a test micro-site which ranked within a week for a medium tail keyword purely on the basis of basic on page seo. However, what happened next was interesting. Within a month that site dropped 50 or so places in the SERPS. I'd say that this used to be what happened with the old sandbox (sites would initially rank well and then drop from the SERPs). However, I'm confident the drop in rankings in this case was a penalty caused by some aggressive testing I was doing. If I hadn't been doing it then I think the site would have maintained its SERPs position.

Sure google still applies penalties to new sites, but not as harshly as they did back in 2004/05.

Agree, but the problem I have is do you just assume that its a penalty which you will naturally come out of having served time (like the old sandbox), or do I need to fix whatever it is that triggered the filter in the first place?

I suppose it's a question of patience versus taking positive action?