Archive for the ‘SEO’ Category

Nuevo bot de bing

Sunday, July 12th, 2009

Si eres de los que revisa con frecuencia los logs de tu servidor web es probable que te hayas encontrado un nuevo “agente” entre los resultados, y es que Microsoft está haciendo pruebas con su nueva versión de MSNBot, ahora llamado adidxbot/1.1 (+http://search.msn.com/msnbot.htm)

Aunque no se sabe aún exactamente que diferencias incluye este nuevo rastreador, sí que algunos usuarios están teniendo ciertos problemas por un exceso de lecturas (algunos comentan que llega hasta las 150 peticiones pro segundo).

Para aquellos que noten problemas con este crawler, es recomendable que se pongan con el equipo de Microsoft que lo lleva a través de lswmc@microsoft.com.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live

Baidu acusado de monopolio

Friday, April 24th, 2009

Parece que haber “maltratado” con los resultados de búsqueda a una empresa le puede salir caro al buscador chino Baidu, que tiene cerca del 75% de cuota de mercado en el país (algo que supone miles de millones de usuarios).
Parece que la reducción de ingresos de una campaña de publicidad implicó una bajada de puestos en todo tipo de resultados, y eso ha llevado al buscador a los tribunales. Aún así, no es la primera vez que el buscador tiene problemas de este estilo, ya que hace unos meses tuvo una situación similar al mostrar publicidad de marcas que no correspondían a sus titulares.

Además, un detalle curioso, es que una de las pruebas que se aportan para la sentencia es que la consulta de páginas indexadas en Google es de cerca de 7.000 resultados, y en baidu es tan sólo de 4 resultados, y que este cambio se ha dado coincidiendo con la retirada de publicidad del sitio.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live

Buying expired domains. Benefits and contras

Friday, April 24th, 2009

Lately I’ve noticed a lot of questions in Q&A centering on purchasing expired domains. A lot of our members have expressed interest in buying old domains for a variety of prices (some are cheap, some are going for upwards of $50k) and want some advice on what to do with the domains once they’ve been purchased. I’m no domainer, nor am I an expert in such a business tactic, but I generally recommend one of three different options for an expired domain (and would love to hear more if you’ve got any).

Option #1: 301 Redirect the Old Domain to Your Existing Domain

The easiest and least time consuming option is to 301 redirect the old domain to your existing site. This tactic obviously works best if both sites are in the same sector and are targeting the same keywords; otherwise, if you have a pet supply site and you buy an old Texas Hold ‘Em poker site, a redirect probably might raise some eyebrows among the search engines. If, however, your site is brandnamepets.com and you buy onlinepetsupply.com and 301 redirect the domain over, you’re inheriting a lot of topical and appropriate links.

PROS:
Is the least time consuming option
Benefit from the value (about 95% or so) of the old domain’s links (postscript: Danny Sullivan has recently blogged about expired domains and their link credit, and it appears that buying a domain and redirecting to your site for the link benefit may not work since the links may not pass credit from expired domains.)

CONS:
Old branded anchor text pointing to your new site isn’t going to help as much as a keyword-rich anchor text
If the old site had a penalty (for shady link building, cloaking, spamming, etc.), the penalty could carry over to your new site (I can’t confirm this to be true, but a lot of SEOs I’ve talked to believe that this is a possibility, and some have sworn that they’ve experienced it firsthand, so I guess you just have to be cautious)
Option #2: Create a Microsite That Links to Your Existing Domain

The second option requires a bit more time and effort than a 301 redirect. You could do a mini overhaul of the site and turn it into a microsite for your main domain. This option is good for exact-match domains for your targeted keyword, and there are other reasons for going the microsite route that Rand’s highlighted in his post about root domains, subdomains, subfolders and microsites. This strategy also works better if the old domain has decent rankings for the keywords you’re targeting.

PROS:
Can cross-promote/cross-link to your existing site
More real estate in the SERPs means more branding and potential conversions for your site
You can do stuff on your microsite you may not want to do with your main site (e.g., launch silly viral content, experiment with a promotional tactic)
You don’t have to have a completely robust site; a lot of microsites are smaller and have a single focus (e.g., center on a quiz or a centric idea)

CONS:
Can be time-consuming to do an overhaul of the old site
Aggressive promotion and linking to the existing domain can seem spammy and you could get penalized for reciprocal linking or setting up a link farm
Your current site isn’t inheriting any of the old site’s link value that would have come via a 301 redirect
Microdomains can be used ineffectively (see Rand’s Whiteboard Friday about the microsite mistake)
Option #3: Overhaul the Old Domain and Operate It Independently

The third option is the one that’s the most time consuming but also has its benefits. It’s like having a successful restaurant and buying another restaurant and operating them simultaneously. They’re not the exact same restaurant, but both are popular in their own right and make you money. The same goes for Option #3. You could update the content on the old domain and sell the same products that you’re selling on your current site. If you can get both sites to rank alongside each other in the SERPs, you’re increasing your conversion chances and sales potential.

PROS:
As with Option #2, you get more real estate in the SERPs if you can get both sites to rank for your targeted search terms
You don’t have to work hard to brand the old site if it’s a generic, keyword-rich domain–you can just focus on getting rankings and conversions
The old site already has links pointing to it and is more established than starting with a brand new domain

CONS:
You have to ensure that the old site doesn’t mimic the new site and runs into any duplicate content issues
It’s time consuming to revamp and maintain the old site (you’ve essentially doubled your workload)
As with Option #2, aggressive cross linking between the sites can raise red flags
Your course of action really depends on how much work and effort you can put into the expired domain. If you’re barely able to maintain and optimize your current site, you probably want to just 301 redirect the old site (note: see my amended comment above about the link value not likely to be passed). If, however, you’re more creative and have some time on your hands, you can try your hand at crafting a microsite. If you really know your stuff and are experienced at making money off various websites, you’d probably do well with the third option.

Here’s where I open things up: do any of you have experience buying old domains? If so, what do you do with them and has your decision worked well for you? Are there any other strategies you recommend?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live

SEO Over-Optimization issues

Friday, April 24th, 2009

Os adjunto un interesante video (Powered by SEOMOZ), donde rank habla acerca de “SEO over-optimization”. Siempre es interesante estar al dia en este tipo de incidéncias…

Over Optimization

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live

Mejora del protocolo de exclusión de robots

Thursday, April 23rd, 2009

Mejora del protocolo de exclusión de robots

miércoles 22 de abril de 2009

Etiquetas:

Los editores web nos preguntan a menudo cómo aumentar la visibilidad en la web. Gran parte de esto tiene que ver con la optimización para motores de búsqueda, es decir, asegurarse de que su contenido aparece en todos los motores de búsqueda.

Sin embargo, hay algunos casos en los que los editores necesitan comunicar más información a los motores de búsqueda, como por ejemplo qué contenido no quieren que aparezca en los resultados de búsqueda. Y con este fin se utiliza el protocolo de exclusión de robots [inglés], que permite a los editores controlar la manera en la que los motores de búsqueda acceden a su sitio: ya sea controlando la visibilidad del contenido de su sitio (a través de robots.txt) o a nivel mucho más detallado, para páginas específicas (a través de meta etiquetas).

Desde que se introdujo a principios de los años 90, el protocolo de exclusión de robots se ha convertido en el estándar para que los editores web especifiquen qué partes de su web quieren mantener públicas y qué partes quieren mantener privadas. Hoy en día, millones de editores lo utilizan para comunicarse con los motores de búsqueda de manera fácil y eficiente. Su fuerza reside en su flexibilidad para evolucionar en paralelo con la web, su aplicación universal por parte de los principales robots y motores de búsqueda, así como en la forma en la que funciona para cualquier editor, sin importar si se trata de un editor grande o pequeño.

Aunque prácticamente todos los motores de búsqueda siguen el protocolo de exclusión de robots, nunca hemos llegado a poner juntas y en detalle las diferentes interpretaciones para las etiquetas. Durante los últimos años, hemos trabajado con Microsoft y Yahoo! para sacar adelante normas como Sitemaps [inglés] y para ofrecer herramientas adicionales a los webmasters. Desde el anuncio inicial, hemos ofrecido y seguiremos ofreciendo nuevas mejoras basadas en los comentarios de la comunidad.

Hoy, con el mismo propósito de hacer más sencilla la vida a los webmasters, publicamos documentación detallada sobre la mejora del protocolo de exclusión de robots. Esto hará que todos los webmasters lo apliquen de manera similar y también servirá de ayuda a los editores el hecho de conocer cómo los tres principales proveedores de búsqueda tratan las directivas para el protocolo de exclusión de robots, haciendo así que éste sea más intuitivo y fácil de usar para todos aquellos que publican en la web.

Entonces, sin más demora…

Directivas comunes del protocolo de exclusión de robots

La siguiente lista contiene las principales funciones del protocolo de exclusión llevadas a cabo por Google, Microsoft y Yahoo!. Con cada función, se indica qué hace y cómo se debe comunicar.

Cada una de estas directivas se puede especificar para que se aplique a todos los rastreadores o a algunos de ellos en concreto, apuntando a un agente de usuario específico, que es su modo de identificación. Cada uno de nuestros rastreadores también admite la autenticación por DNS inversa para verificar la identidad del rastreador.

1. 1. Directivas de Robots.txt


2. 2. Meta directivas HTML


Estas directrices se aplican a todo tipo de contenidos. Las puedes poner tanto en el código HTML de una página como en el encabezado HTTP para contenidos que no son HTML, tales como PDF, vídeo, etc, usando la etiqueta X-Robots. Aquí tienes más información: Artículo sobre la etiqueta X-Robots [inglés] o en nuestra serie de entradas [inglés] sobre el uso de robots y las meta etiquetas.

Otras directivas del protocolo de exclusión de robots

Microsoft, Google y Yahoo! utilizan las directivas que hemos mencionado, pero puede que éstas no sean válidas para otros motores de búsqueda. Además, existen las siguientes directivas que sólo ofrece Google:

UNAVAILABLE_AFTER Meta Tag
- Indica al robot cuando debe caducar una página [inglés], es decir, la fecha tras la cual no debe aparecer en los resultados de búsqueda.

NOIMAGEINDEX Meta Tag
- Indica al rastreador que no indexe las imágenes de una página determinada en los resultados de búsqueda.

NOTRANSLATE Meta Tag
- Indica al rastreador que no traduzca el contenido de una página a otros idiomas [inglés] para los resultados de búsqueda.

De cara al futuro, tenemos previsto seguir trabajando para que, cada vez que surjan nuevas directivas de protocolo de exclusión de robots, los webmasters puedan usarlas con facilidad. ¡Así que no olvides visitarnos con frecuencia!

Información adicional

Puedes encontrar más información acerca de robots.txt en http://www.robotstxt.org/ [inglés] y en el Centro de Asistencia para Webmasters de Google, que contiene una gran cantidad de información útil, que incluye:

También se han publicado varias entradas acerca de robots.txt en el Blog para webmasters inglés, como:

También hay una lista útil de robots [inglés] utilizados por los principales motores de búsqueda.

Para ver lo que nuestros colegas dicen al respecto, también puedes visitar los blogs de Yahoo! [inglés] y Microsoft [inglés].

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live

Advanced SEO en el Search Congress

Saturday, January 31st, 2009

El pasado jueves 29/01 tuve el placer de realizar una ponencia en el Search Congress 2009 de Barcelona.

La ponencia tenía el título de “Advanced SEO”, y tenía que haber sido impartida por Enrique Aguilera, pero por temas personales no pudo asistir y me pidió que le sustituyera.

Fue un reto interesante, ya que me avisaron con 12h de antelación, y teniendo en cuenta las reuniones y la carga de trabajo que tenía… solo dispuse de 3h para prepararla.

Creo que al final… salió mas o menos bien (teniendo en cuenta la situación) y podemos darla por buena, aunque como siempre… mejorable :-)

Os he colgado la presentación en Grupos eMagister. Vuestros comentarios serán bien recibidos.

Nota: Tendéis que solicitar el alta en el Grupo de Posicionamiento  en buscadores para descargaros el PDF.

Enric_Search_Congress

Entre otros, también presentaron

  • Eva Visiers (Google Analytics)
  • Ismael El-Qudsi (Havas Digital)
  • Ricardo Baeza-Yates (Yahoo)
  • Juan Antonio Roncero (Live Search)
  • Lennert de Rijk (OneToMarket)

Teniendo en cuenta que era la primera edición, creo que el resultado en cuanto a asistencia se refiere ha sido mas que aceptable (unos 400 inscritos aproximadamente).

El próximo Search Congress se hará en Valencia. Creo que todavía no hay fijada una fecha concreta.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live

Actualización Reciente de Page Rank

Wednesday, December 31st, 2008

Esta mañana, al mirar las métricas de varios proyectos… he visto como Google ha efectuado la última actualización de PR del año (supongo :-))

Varios de los proyectos en los que participo… han incrementado su PR. En esta ocasión… solo 1 ha bajado !!

google.page.rank.explained

Alguien confirma la noticia ? Como os ha ido a vosotros ?

En fin… la siguiente… la esperamos de cara a Marzo.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live

Global SEO. Duplicate content

Tuesday, December 2nd, 2008

Os adjunto parte de un artículo de Vanesa Fox (Ex Mano derecha de Mr. Cutts) en la que habla de SEO global y varios aspectos a tener en cuenta.

Vanesa estuvo moderando algunas de las sesiones del SMX UK y una de ellas trataba especificamente de este tema.

Francamente: Hay algunas afirmaciones muy interesantes, y algunas respuestas que muchos hemos estado intuyendo desde hace tiempo.

Por ejemplo: La localización del servidor SI importa :-) Grácias Vanesa por confirmar nuestra estratégia… Hace ya 3 años que emagister apostó por esta solución y al final… alguien muy afin al mundo de Google lo ha reconocido abiertamente.

Espero que sea de vuestro interés.

Nota: No os lo leais en vertical –> Merece la pena leerlo detenidamente (sobre todo aquellos que tengais sites en varios idiomas/paises)

How search engines determine the geographic intent of the searcher

Search engines try to display the most relevant results possible to a searcher. The language of the searcher, the searcher’s geographic location, way the searcher accesses the search engine, and language or regional intent in the query are all factors the search engines consider when determining relevance. Since queries are generally three to four words long, search engines use all the signals they can beyond the query to figure out what searchers are really looking for.

For instance, if a searcher is in Ireland searches for [airline booking], they’ll likely get a very different list of results than a searcher in the United States, as the results will skew towards Irish airlines. But this doesn’t just happen at the country level. If a searcher in Seattle searches for [pizza], they’ll likely get more Seattle-based pizza listings than a searcher in Boston would. And for Google in particular, a searcher who’s logged into a Google account and has set a default location in Google maps may get even more targeted results. Google has made this option more visible lately, and for queries they think may have local intent, they offer a zip code option:

In addition, a searcher will get get different results:

  • Searching google.fr from the US.
  • Searching google.fr from France.
  • Searching google.fr and choosing “French pages”
  • Searching google.fr and choosing “pages from France”

And, as you might imagine, including a geographic location in the query impacts results as well. A search for [restaurant in Dublin] returns different results than [restaurant], regardless of the other signals. And searching in a particular language will generally return results in that language. For instance, look at the results for the query [donde esta los cabos] from a US IP address on google.com:

So, to recap, some ways search engines determine regional intent include:

  • Domain accessed (google.co.uk vs. google.fr)
  • Language-restriction (only search French pages)
  • Country-restriction (only search pages in France)
  • Location of searcher (at the country level, as well as more local levels, such as the city)
  • Locational or language intent in the query
  • Searcher’s default location (such as set in Google Maps)
  • The language the query was composed in

Remember  that search engines make slight tweaks to their algorithms all the time as they test what changes improve results. As personalized search becomes more important, it would make sense that if a searcher generally clicks on results in a particular language or country, pages in that language or from that country may start to appear more often for that searcher.

Note that I’m mixing language and region together a bit for the purposes of this article, although they are, of course different. And issues can crop up because there’s not a one-to-one mapping between language and country. For instance, if someone is searching for Spanish pages, should a search engine return pages from both Mexico and Spain? (Probably if the query is language-specific but not regional; and perhaps search engines should use the country associated with the site as a signal for the language the site is in.) Conversely, if you have a site that targets Spanish speakers, do you need separate sites for both Mexico and Spain? (Maybe not if your content isn’t regional, but how then do you ensure your content is returned for searchers in both Mexico and Spain?)

How search engines determine the relevance of the page

Once a search engine decides what is relevant for the query, what signals from the pages come into play? They include the following:

  • Top-level domain (TLD): Many domains can only be used for a particular country. For instance, .fr always signifies a domain in France. TLD could potentially be used as a signal in determining language as well. a .fr domain is likely to have French content.Many domains, however, aren’t country-specific. .com, .net, and .org are well-known examples, but some countries allow their domains to be used by anyone. For instance, .tv is the TLD for Tuvalu, but that country has negotiated an agreement to make the TLD available for anyone ).The exception to the standard seems to be .us. While it’s intended for US-based domains, it hasn’t really taken off, and .com is much more commonly used.
  • Server location: For domains that are not country-specific (such as .com or .tv), search engines use the geographic location of the server where the site is hosted to determine country. For instance, a .com hosted in Canada is seen as a Canadian site and a .com hosted in Australia is seen as an Australian site.
  • Google Webmaster Tools setting: Google Webmaster Tools includes an option for specifying the geographic location of a site. This option isn’t available if the TLD is country-specific. This setting basically replaces the server hosting location signal. This option is useful not only because you can host your domain anywhere and still set a location, but also because you can set each subdomain and subfolder of your site separately, if you’d like. For instance, you can set es.mysite.com or mysite.com/es to Spain and uk.mysite.com or mysite.com/uk to the United Kingdom. The disadvantage to this solution is that it only works for Google.
  • Location of incoming links: If 90% of the incoming links to a site are from Germany, then search engines figure the site is German, or at the very least, of interest to German searchers.
  • Language of pages: Again, language is technically a different relevance factor than country, but the two go hand in hand. If a site is in French, then it’s likely a site from France. The biggest signal used here is probably (as you might imagine), the language of the text on the pages. This criteria isn’t foolproof. What if the page includes multiple languages, for instance? The meta data and character encoding can help here. For instance, if you are translating your English pages into other languages, don’t forget to translate your title tag and meta description tag as well.
  • Address: For local queries (for instance, that [pizza] query from a Seattle searcher, search engines might use the physical address it finds on the page, as well as any information from the search engine’s local index (for example, Google’s Local Business Center). If your site is for a local business, make sure you include your full address and register with each engine’s local index.Even if your site isn’t specifically for a local business, you may want to include regional signals on your site. For instance, if your site is windycityrestaurantreviews.com, and you have a page about each Chicago restaurant, you might assume that anyone coming to the site understands the context is Chicago, and that you don’t need to include “Chicago, IL” in each restaurant’s address. However, when a search engine sees “Joe’s Pizza, 123 Main St.”, there’s no indication that this restaurant is in Chicago. This can cause a usability issue with visitors coming to the site from search as well. Those visitors aren’t coming to the page from the home page that may say “Reviews of all Chicago Restaurants”. They may go directly from search to the page about Joe’s Pizza, and would need confirmation that 123 Main St. is indeed in Chicago.

How should  a site owner architect a geographically targeted site?

Ideally, a company should maintain separate sites for each country, each with the correct TLD. When you do this, search engines can easily determine which page to show for searchers in different countries.

What about duplicate content?

Even if the content is the same across each site, you don’t need to worry about duplicate content. Remember that search engines generally don’t penalize for duplicate content, they filter. And in this case, filtering is exactly what you want. You want the search engine to show the UK page to searchers in the UK and filter out the US page. And that’s what search engines typically do.

If you are targeting only one country and have the .com rather than the correct TLD, make sure it’s hosted in the target country. (Check with your hosting company, if you use one, to verify where the server is actually located.)

Sounds easy enough, but this solution doesn’t work for everyone. You may not be able to get the TLD for every country you operate in, or for other infrastructure-related reasons, you may need to host all the content on the same domain. In that case, I would recommend the following:

  • Putting content for each country on a subdomain or subfolder. (Either is fine; but  if you’re starting from scratch and have a choice, I’d generally suggest going with a subdomain.)
  • Ensuring all content (including title tag and meta description) is localized.
  • Focusing on regional link-building efforts. For instance, make sure that your PR team is targeting newspapers in local regions, not just near the corporate office.
  • Including location-specific terms in internal anchor text. For instance, you might want to create an HTML site map that links to each country’s “home page” on the domain.
More strength in one domain?

At SMX London, there was some debate about if it was better to have a single domain for all countries to consolidate PageRank, and if multiple domains (one for each country) would dilute the overall strength.  Remember that relevance is a critical factor for search engine ranking and PageRank alone doesn’t equal relevance.  A page that is deemed highly relevant for a query, but has low PageRank is going to rank above a page that has high PageRank but has low relevance.

With that in mind, TLD is a strong relevance factor for results in a particular country. As for the argument that it’s more work to build links to multiple sites than to one, I content it’s around the same, since even if you had the country-specific information on subdomains or in subfolders instead, you’d still want to build regional links to each. So, I would generally recommend TLDs if you can get them.

However, if you have a .com (for instance), with separate subdomains that you’ve been maintaining for a period of time, it probably makes sense to leave things as is and consider the other relevance factors (regional links, language of content, etc.). If you radically change your site structure (for instance, from subdomains to separate TLDs), you’ll need to have the content recrawled, reindexed, and reranked, and may need to change user perception, branding, link building efforts, among other things. And that may take some time. In a situation like this, I would recommend changing only if you’re having substantial problems getting the right content to be returned for the right country indices.

What about targeting multiple countries?

What if you want results returned to everyone? Or you have German content you want returned in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria? Unfortunately, there’s no perfect solution. In some cases, you’ll have to rely on the search engines to understand what results your pages are relevant for, but keep in mind that a more specific site may be seen as more relevant.

In some cases, other sites may be more relevant. For instance, if you have a US site in English that targets tourists worldwide, your content won’t be shown to searchers in France who select “only French pages”. And even if searchers don’t filter using that option, a site that has created content in French, targeted to tourists in France who are planning a visit to the US is likely to be seen as more relevant than your site targeting the world.

What about IP-Targeting?

Some sites detect the location of the visitor based on IP address, and redirect them to a country (or other location)-specific page. While this seems to be a user-friendly solution, some issues exist:

  • The location may be incorrect. For instance, many AOL users appear to be coming from Virginia.
  • The searcher may want a different location. For instance, when I was in Zurich, I still wanted the US Hertz site, but Hertz sent me to the Swiss site automatically and gave me no options for navigating elsewhere.
  • Search engines need unique URLs in order to index content separately.
  • Search engines crawl your site from a particular location, but you want all locations indexed.

If you have your site set to detect a visitor’s location and show content based on that, I would recommend the following:

  • Serve a unique URL for distinct content. For instance, don’t show English content to US visitors on mysite.com and French content to French visitors on mysite.com. Instead, redirect English visitors to mysite.com/en and French visitors to mysite.com/fr. T hat way search engines can index the French content using the mysite.com/fr URL and can index English content using the mysite.com/en URL.
  • Provide links to enable visitors (and seach engines) to access other language/country content. For instance, if I’m in Zurich, you might redirect me to the Swiss page, but provide a link to the US version of the page. Or, simply present visitors with a home page that enables them to choose the country. You can always store the selection in a cookie so vistors are redirected automatically after the first time.

Google isn’t the only search engine

Of course, Google and Yahoo and Live aren’t the only search engines. If you’re targeting other countries, research who the dominant search players are there and how to best optimize for them. Mona Elesseily recently wrote an article on Search Engine Land about international search markets, and while she was focusing on paid search, the players and numbers are similar for organic search.

An international strategy is about more than targeting

Of course, a lot more goes into creating localized content. You should localize, not just translate, the content. Searcher behavior and customer needs may be different from country to country. Even simple phrasing may be slightly different. Different PR efforts may be need to build awareness and links. Hopefully, this article can help sort out some of the issues that arise when planning a global site strategy, but it’s certainly only a starting point.

More information

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live

El bounce rate importa en el posicionamiento

Tuesday, November 25th, 2008

Hace ya mucho tiempo que se habla de este factor. La verdad es que todos sospechavamos esto… pero recientemente SEO BlackHat ha realizado una série de tests que demuestran en parte esta afirmación.

Después de ver este post… he realizado algunas pruebas… y creo poder afirmar que también he reproducido un comportamiento similar.

Sea como sea, Google lo mide… lo tiene en cuenta y es un factor importante.

¿ No creeis que toca revisar Bounce Rates en vuestros portales ?

Diminuindo bounce rates

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live

New Yahoo! Algo Update

Sunday, November 23rd, 2008

Nuevo algo update en Yahoo! anunciado el 21/11/2008.

We’ll be rolling out some changes to our crawling, indexing and ranking algorithms over the next few days and expect the update will be completed soon. As you know, throughout this process you may see some ranking changes and page shuffling in the index.
To share your thoughts or check in with other Yahoo! Search users, please visit the Site Explorer Suggestion Board.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live