http://casino-directory.lots0cash.com

[lots0cash]

Well I guess my casino portal is in much worse shape than I thought - Not one response on the forum and only one brave person submitted a casino to my search engine/directory.

I also got turned down for membership to the GPWA because of content and/or technical issues. What those issues are I have no idea. But I would like to know in more detail why I was rejected for membership, so I can at least defend myself or fix the problem. Sorry I don’t take rejection very well.

Brad Bristol
Lots0cash

[spinoza]

I am not a member so not really qualified to answer. But I noticed that
http://www.lots0cash.com/ is "powered by search king". If you go to searchengineforums.com you can find a thread explaining that all sites hosted by search king have been penalized by Google because 'SeachKing' tried to 'sell pagerank'. I believe it is also not advised to link to SearchKing sites because it is considered a 'bad neighboorhood' (Google's words not mine)

[lots0cash]

Hmm, could you give a URL where anyone from Google said SearchKing was being penalized or was a bad neighborhood - no you can't, cuz it aint true!

Can you give me a URL where someone (that don't know his/her butt from a hole in the ground) was spouting off with no facts or evidence - yes you can - SEF is full of folks that don't bother to check facts or evidence and just spout off.

In other words spinoza - your spreading a horrible rumor that has no basis in fact.

Why would Google penalize everyone that is hosted by SearchKing and not just SK, the people being hosted by SK had nothing to do with the PRaddnetwork?

Also, Searchking is not selling PR - never has and never will - SK was baseing the cost of text ads on the PR of the site the ads were placed on. (Not a bad idea)

lots0cash.com has a PR of 1 becouse we crossed linked a subdomain incorrectly - next update we will be back to a PR6. If we were banned we would not be showing up in the SERP and we are.

[spinoza]

You are correct that Google did not make it explicit that they penalized SearchKing for selling pagerank. My mistake.

But the general consensus on searchengineformums and webmasterworld seems to be in my perception that Google tried to 'solve' the problems of google bombing and selling pagerank. Of course nobody knows for sure and we are left to guess.

I will quote the owner of SearchKing from the following thread on searchengineforums:

As my final post in SEF I will just say that what google has done is wrong and you can all villify me all you want but that still does not give anyone, even the all-mighty google, the right to harm innocent people. There is no possible justification. If it is a mistake, then take responsibility for it and fix it. If it is intentional, then you all had better get smart enough to see that it could be you next.

See http://www.searchengineforums.com/Fo.../004344-5.html

So he is saying Google did wrong to him and the sites he hosts, either mistakenly or intentionally.

If I was in your position I would change hosts instead of waiting another month just to find out if Google did or did not make a mistake.

[lots0cash]

If I was in your position I would change hosts instead of waiting another month just to find out if Google did or did not make a mistake.

Thanks for the advice spinoza - but I will not change hosts - Google is not “all that” to me or my sites.

If I am penalized because of something someone else did that Google did not like then Google is in the wrong.

How long would it be before a new host did something Google did not like and I might be banned again? (not saying I am banned now - cuz I’m not)

To prove my point about not being banned or penalized check out this URL
http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...q=lottery+info
Now I know I am not at #1 but I am on page 1 in search that returns over 800,000 results. If you would like more URL’s that show my site in the SERP I will be happy to provide them.

I refuse to let Google (or anyone else) dictate to me how I run my business! If you and other webmasters choose to let Google control your web sites and business thats up to you.

[LineResearch]

Also, Searchking is not selling PR - never has and never will - SK was baseing the cost of text ads on the PR of the site the ads were placed on.

Actually, if Google is penalizing for this practice, I would have to agree with Google. Basing the cost of text ads on the PR of the site the ads were placed on is the same thing as selling page rank. The site selling the ads is just couching the selling of PR in words so that it doesn't sound like that is what they are doing. The sites buying the ads are buying them because they hope that having a text link from a high PR page will, in turn, increase their PR. And the practice of selling PR diminishes the quality of search results that are being delivered based on PR.

[lots0cash]

Hello LineResearch,

While I am not here to defend What SK has done or not done (For the record, I am not a part of the PR ad network) I do have a few comments about it.

First - I know that there are other reasons to run a text ad on a high PR site besides rasing your own PR - like qualified traffic for one and there are other reasons if you think about it.

2nd - Googles PR is a form of rating (much like the Nelson’s rating for TV)- in other words in Google’s opinion a high PR site is ‘better’ than a low PR site and receives more traffic than a low PR site - So following this logic shouldn’t a high PR site charge more for a text link than a low PR site?

Please don’t get me wrong I also see the other side of the chip. Something like this ‘could’ degrade the search results - kinda like people that set up domain after domain and cross link them all to inflate there own PR.

[LineResearch]

Both your points really express the same idea - higher traffic sites should be able to charge more than lower traffic sites. I don't think anyone, including Google, has a problem with the idea of a higher PR site charging more than a lower PR site based on the ability to deliver more quality traffic. Advertising rates in this industry are generally based on the amount of quality traffic that a site can deliver to the advertiser.

But this premise does not get you where you want to go. Basing the ad rates on the amount of traffic (i.e., potential customers) a site can deliver is fine. That is pretty much the standard on the Internet. There is no reason to bring PR into the equation unless the site is trying to sell something other than traffic, i.e. selling PR.

And, as a practical matter, it is pretty easy to see that this is what sites are doing that base their rates on the PR of the page where the text link is placed. There are plenty of sources one can go to in order to determine the market rate for the traffic that is being sold. What you find is that the sites basing their "link prices" on PR are charging a premium over the market rates. The reason for that premium is that the sites buying the text links are buying them because they hope that having a text link from a high PR page will, in turn, increase their site's PR. And, this practice does diminish the quality of search results that are being delivered based on PR.

[lots0cash]

LineResearch I won’t argue the point that sites buying a high PR link are doing so mostly for chance that there own PR will be increased - I just said that there are other reasons as well to have a link on a high PR site.

Advertising rates in this industry are generally based on the amount of quality traffic that a site can deliver to the advertiser.

Very true, but who can make a living off the current advertising rates? - Not me and I doubt that very many small or medium sized web sites out there are paying the bills with advertising income even if they have a high PR.

To be honest, this debate is moot as selling PR has become a fact on the net, like it or not and SearchKing is not the only one that is doing it. And as I said before I am not here to defend SearchKing or defend the PR ad
network, I am here trying to promote my new Casino Directory and Search Engine.

IMO the only way selling PR is gonna stop is if Google stops letting people know what the PR of a site is and IMO that aint gonna happen - PR is Google’s golden goose.

Now what do you think of my new site?
casino-directory.lots0cash.com
Be honest - I can take it

[lots0cash]

P.S.
I just noticed that I am no longer on page one for the search that I posted before, I am now on page 3 in www but in www2 & www3 I am still on page one.

Google is acting very very strange this update - perhaps PR will not be such a factor in the future, but then I am just guessing - like everyone else.

[yleewolf]

Not bad. Not the most inspiring site design but i'm sure it works for you. Information is a bit thin for each casino listed. You don't say how you have arrived at a rating which doesn't give me the confidence to click through.

Not all negative though. You have a good number of casinos listed and the site does what it professes to do.

You asked!

The Wolf
CardSharkIsland

[lots0cash]

Thanks for the response yleewolf.
Site design is not my strong suit, so I chose to go for simple, fast loading.
The ratings are determined by users based on a point system 10 is the best and 1 is the worst. - I do
not rate the Casinos - IMO the last thing that was needed was another site that used canned ratings to
promote its own Casinos.

Thanks again for the responce.

[lots0cash]

oops