Web Promotion Service

The GGG (Great Gateway Generator) project was born in 2002 as a gateway page generator. Over the years there were 2 spinoff softwares: Keyword Thief (a keyword retrieving spider) and Synonymizer (a content generator). There are also some beta-stage PHP scripts that complemented the main product: Octopus Link Quadrangulator, Search Engine Optimized FAQ System, and Delinker.

Over the years we collected several testimonials from customers who succeeded in improving their SE rankings using GGG, and we used it to provide service to our customers. Several buyers requested special features and appointed custom programming from us. Most of those improvements were incorporated into the products.

We suddenly realized that the gateway pages WERE NOT the reason for the good ranking results obtained with GGG… Something else was, and the links had something to do with it. Thus, the product should might be renamed from Gateway Generator into “Optimized Site Generator”, “Website Ranking Enhancer” or something like that. The new name would also reflect the fact that the product did not rely on Black Hat techniques, like gateway pages.

The many changes in the Google algorithm have not affected the ranking power of GGG. However, there is a need in a strategy change. Very large projects are no longer acceptable, because the sudden increase in pages and links is seen as unnatural by the Search Engines. Slow but permanent site growth is now required. In GGG, that means periodically adding more domains or directories as secondary hosts holding random pages.

The other change in Google is related to subtle penalization of domains that do not follow some hidden guidelines, like “No Content Duplication” and “No Bad Neighbourhood Linking”. For that, we are developing special tests that set off the alarm before having the offensive pages indexed.

Having said this, we admit that we never completed an extensive testing on the optimal settings of the GGG Projects, the minimal and maximal values for keywords, domains and pages, and the limits for safe operation without getting penalization.

At this point we have 3 goals:

- create an effective communication channel for users of GGG. At this point, I publish the results of the Web Ranking Experiments in this public blog. However, the most critical info will be mailed to paid subscribers of the future Page Generators Newsletter.

- release GGG 4.0 in no more than 3 months.

- offer a Website Ranking Enhancer service for those who do not have the time and patience to obtain the new software, create the contents and upload the pages. We will use the latest GGG, Synonymizer and Keyword Thief, plus all the knowledge on optimized page generation that we have collected and keep collecting.

- run a permanent Testing System for our GGG pages, in order to be aware of the best site settings according to Google, and to provide the best possible service to our customers.

- acquire more hosting services with different IPs, in order to host our pages without loss of ranking value.

For all those web promoters out there that want to enhance their web rankings, we announce different service packages in this site.

In only 10 days I got results for the experiment that tried to detect Goog penalization. It turned out that 2 domains are penalized with a -20 fall.

The other result refers to the extent of indexation. It seems that penalized sites receive only superficial indexation. For instance, if a site is well indexed, all the word strings will be indexed, and searching for phrases within quotes will find them. If the site is badly indexed due to penalization, only individual words will be indexed, and the strings will not be detected. Interesting…

The other result is that penalization covers all subjects, even those unrelated to the main one. For instance, a domain penalized for duplicate content will be penalized for content that has nothing to do with the abused content.

However, I am not making a difference between penalization types, which probably exists. In the next test I will include one domain that was penalized for duplicates and other penalized for linking to bad neighbourhood. Let’s see if the penalizations are similar.

I am now working on a new experiment (3rd of my controlled series) using more domains, mixing penalized with healthy domains.  

On the other hand, I am analyzing the directories I use for submission with reciprocal link exchange. It seems that some of them are considered bad neighbours, maybe because they include black hat sites, or they sell links, or whatever. My analysis includes only existing factors, because I am not free to upload test pages to them.

There are a few factors that warn you against bad directories: bad ranking in Google while searching for their own Home Page Title or Description, as compared with Yahoo or MSN. Also, few indexed incoming links, and other parameters. We are trying to establish the most reliable of those parameters.

For all the Penalization Detection experiments we need to focus on keywords that have 10-200 results. Less, is not enough to detect a fall in rankings. More, are difficult to detect and count.

We plan to offer a Standard Penalization Detection service (exact value), and a Penalization Diagnosis which will try to find an explanation for the issue. In most cases we detect bad linking, code problems or duplicate contents that explained the problem and could be corrected. 

Sometimes the effort we make to position a website is fruitless, and the client and the SEO wonder why.
A full penalization is obvious: the website disappears from the search engine under every keyword, even under its own domain name. It won’t have a Google PageRank, not even zero. And it is common for a domain banned from Google to rank perfectly well in Yahoo and the other search engines, more lenient penalizers.
Nevertheless, partial penalization is hard to detect. The website has a worst ranking than it should, and there is no way to know why or for how long.
A good website and link strategy analysis can suggest some of the exclusion reasons, and the measures to be taken. However, even after asking and begging the search engine for forgiveness, a response could take months. The best thing to do is to rapidly create a new site with similar content.
To be sure the best is to run the Penalization Test. It involves selecting a group of uncommon keywords, or even made-up ones. For example, the Antolineck family. Its members are Gualter Antolineck. Serap Antolineck, Rupert Antolineck, Torib Antolineck and Egbert Antolineck. The name and last name of each brother must appear in the URL and in the Title, and once in the page body under the H1 header.

We create one page for each brother, hosted in each tested domain. We also create a sitemap in an independent well ranked domain pointing to each brother. Something like: “The Antolineck family is composed by (Gualter link), (Serap link), (Rupert link), (Egbert link), (Torib link).”
That’s it. After a couple of weeks we will see the results. We will search Google for every brother, and register the rankings. And if we search for Antolineck, every indexed page will appear, ordered by the real positioning value of each domain. This value is not necessarily the same that Google’s PageRank.
For this example I used a made-up last name, completely absent in search engines, for clearer results. However, the test can be performed under less common but existent words, say 1000 results. In this way the search is more natural and detects the -30 or -100 penalizations (descending 30 or 100 results in any search).

Are the domains penalized? We will soon see. Will the domains be penalized because of a test? There is no breaking of the S.E. rules here.

I plan to repeat the test periodically with my own and my client’s domains, because if a penalization occurs I need to instantly be aware of it and fix whatever it is that I did wrong. The test is also open to individual SEO webmasters who want to share the data.

Ask a SEO-focused webmaster to position your site. Webmasters today are quite specialized, and the guy that designs, programs, writes and hosts, does not necessarily get you a good ranking…

First of all, the algorithm is the mathematical formula that Google uses to decide which website goes first. Knowing this formula would be of great value, as it would make our web positioning job easier, but it is a very well kept technical secret.

I have been collecting clues on the algorithm for a while, and running some quiet experiments. The latest non-official disclosure of the algorithm is from Rand Fish, in his seomoz.org site, obviously very well positioned under the SEO keyword. The article’s name is “A little piece of the Google algorithm revealed”.

And the formula is:

GoogScore = (KW Usage Score * 0.3) + (Domain Strength * 0.25) + (Inbound Link Score * 0.25) + (User Data * 0.1) + (Content Quality Score * 0.1) + (Manual Boosts) - (Automated & Manual Penalties)

The different factors are calculated as follows:

KW Usage Score
• KW in Title
• KW in headers H1, H2, H3…
• KW in document text
• KW in internal links pointing to the page
• KW in domain and/or URL

Domain Strength
• Registration history
• Domain age
• Strength of links pointing to the domain
• Topical neighbourhood of domain based on inlinks and outlinks
• Historical use and links pattern to domain

Inbound Link Score
• Age of links
• Quality of domains sending links
• Quality of pages sending links
• Anchor text of links
• Link quantity/weight metric (Pagerank or a variation)
• Subject matter of linking pages/sites

User Data
• Historical CTR to page in SERPs
• Time users spend on page
• Search requests for URL/domain
• Historical visits/use of URL/domain by users GG can monitor (toolbar, wifi, analytics, etc.)
Content Quality store
• Potentially given by hand for popular queries/pages
• Provided by Google raters
• Machine-algos for rating text quality/readability/etc

Automated & Manual Penalties are a mystery, but it seems they lower the ranking by 30 entries or more.

The mentioned factors are generally known in the experts’ forums, but the relative value that Rand gives them is useful. Rand’s conclusion is that little we can do to apply this algorithm, but to improve the content quality.

Some factors are too basic for Rand to mention, and relate to selecting a good domain, writing with a reasonable density of keywords, intelligently programming links, good code, sensible writing, etc.

Surprisingly, there are very few companies publishing results on the Google algorithm. However, competing search engines do very well their research, because they were able to copy almost the same ranking features as Google. Most of the times when I get a good ranking result in Google, Yahoo follows. A clear difference between both algos lies in the penalties, being Yahoo more lenient.

Most algo crackers show only a small sample of their knowledge, to prevent their competition to take advantage of their findings, and to avoid identification and possible penalizations. However, some of us are a bit more open, trying to use distributed thinking in order to achieve our algo cracking goals.

At some point most of us wanted to sell our websites. The perspective of selling a virtual item for real dollars is very attractive, but most developers get disappointed when facing the website market.

Before Adsense, the perspective was even worse, because not even high traffic websites achieved revenue. Thanks to Adsense, the advertisement serving program run by Google, things have gone better for webmasters, who can now collect some money. This advertisement serving was Google’s and Yahoo ‘s great success.

So, it is all about signing up to Adsense, place a little Javascript on the pages, and start making money. For example, PodcastDirectory.com gets 35.000 dollars per month for Adsense, and seatguru.com gets 15.000. Right, the first one has a million hits per month, and the second, 700.000. Humble websites with 400 visits a day (which are not that easy to obtain) can collect 40 dollars per month, luckily and with tail wind…

There is also a theme-related matter. A website in an “expensive“ field, such as medical malpractice, will get more valuable clicks than a website with poor advertisement opportunities, such as a personal blog.. If we multiply the monthly revenue by 18, we will get the approximate value of each website, following a pretty conventional valuation model.

Let’s suppose our site has no Adsense, either because we do not want to damage our image, because the revenue is not enough, or other reasons. Thus, we have a highly visited but profit-less site.¿How do we value it?

Websiteoutlook.com is an online free tool for website valuations. According to it:

PodcastDirectory.com is worth $60580
seatguru.com is worth $70200

This is less than the value coming from the real revenue, but is still pretty good for a website that pops up a number live and free, without asking for anything but the domain name.

See these SEO related sites:

seochat.com is worth $340,000
seobook.com is worth $342.000
webuildpages.com is worth $37,529
seoadministrator.com is worth $23,000
domaingrower.com (this site) is worth $2,379

If I was to valuate a website, I would ask lots of things. Firstly, how the website makes money, its development and maintenance cost, etc. And after offering my valuation to the clients, I would listen to their opinion, and, maybe, basing on it I would adjust my value algorithm.

Analyzing some small and medium size sites, own and from clients, I find that the automatic valuation comes quite close to the real asking price for the developed sites. The predicted values for very large sites (google, yahoo, microsoft, cnn, wired) are not related to real market values, as expected, because many other considerations apply, besides some site metrics.

So, what is this website valuation model based on? In the linked spreadsheet there are some details, as indexed pages, Alexa ranking, backlinks, and the relation between these values.

Website valuation data.xls

Another factor, not taken into account here, is web positioning. Websites positioned for SEO, that allows offering services, should have an increased value. To know, a positioning index should be established for each site for a group of keywords, as the one I suggest elsewhere, and multiply it by an activity-specific rate.

The site itself, WebsiteOutlook.com, has an Alexa rank of 11.000, 370.000 indexed pages, and, according to itself, it’s worth $217.000. The many indexed pages correspond to every search saved in a new page. They double as cache and indexed content.

Having figuring out their algorithm, we should be able to duplicate their valuable site, improve it, and also calculate the increase in value of any client website enhanced by SEO (Google ranking) and Domain Development services. Is is also a nice tool to establish link value, predict traffic and check the value of promotion campaigns.

Ideas are hard to define, and more to buy and sell, so an Idea Marketplace is a tough challenge.
The globalized world is extremely open to idea flow, to dismay of a few dictatorial governments. But flow is not necessarily trade, and quantity does not imply quality. A good idea marketplace should have a way to tell the golden ideas from the sand, and deliver them to those who can appreciate them and turn them into profit.

A well-deviced but unsuccessful approach to the Idea Market

Around 2000 there was Ideaexchange.com, where ideas could be bought and sold. The ideas had a short public description, and a longer hidden explanation. If you paid the price, you would access the whole thing. Idea authors charged for their complete ideas and the website collected a percentage.  Buyers could call for an idea on a certain topic and also comment on the ideas they bought for others to join or beware.

To my deception the website did not last. I do not know why, because in my opinion it was a hell of an idea. Possible failure explanations: Ideaexchange.com did not have a mechanism to convert ideas into projects. The fact that idea posters had to pay a small fee beforehand probably prevented them to reach critical mass. Also, the ideas were too wide (proposals together with jokes, gossip and varied information).

The word “idea” has many meanings, and the marketplaces should limit itselves to measurable ideas, and to ideas that can have any useful follow-up or consequence.

Idea Futures

There is also the concept of Idea Futures, which implies prediction power about the truth of an idea. A nice website called Ideosphere tries to predict events using the reputation of the predictors. Those who earn points predicting accurately are more credible at predicting new issues. The site covers future facts or hidden facts, like science issues.

So, this site deals about Future and Hidden Facts, not just “ideas”. Predictions often deal with the stock market or sports results, and those activities are heavily regulated, which limits this peculiar subset of the idea marketplaces.

Got an idea? We will invest on it!

There are several inventor-investor matching sites, where business ideas can develop into projects. However, most of them are inefficient, with worthless ideas and false investors. Worthless ideas rank from perpetual movement to cold fusion in the kitchen, with better mousetraps in the middle. False investors include those who require a “fee” to analyze the idea and then disappear, and those who are willing to invest up to 10 dollars in your idea, plus those who demand the inventor to fill a 100 page form before anything, with no assurance that even the title will be read.

I have seen them all and I recognize that good matching requires many right properties on each part: financial, geographical, language, age. Also, like in romantic matching, there are many hard-to-define human qualities.

Regulating the entry of both parts (good inventors – real investors) would be an assurance of quality for these idea marketplaces, but that requires time and money. It is hard to find someone able to predict which idea will fly and which will not take off. Who could that be? An academic? A successful businessman? A psychic? Probably none of them. Most likely, a committee with the three of them.

The Web 2.0 is about filtering trash

The Web 1.0 had many data covering the valuable information. Search engines still post: “Results 1 - 100 of about 7,190,000 pages”. 95% of all email is spam.

The news aggregator systems like Digg.com, Reddit.com and Meneame.net (Spanish) became recently very successful as typical Web 2.0 mechanisms. They use qualified voting, social networks and automated quality rating for entries, usually news.

You probably are reading this article because you found it on Digg.com or similar aggregator.

Aggregators as idea marketplaces

Are News Aggregators feasible idea marketplaces? Can you post an idea and see if it catches on? I assume you can .

Business ideas can be filtered by the News Aggregator public and that could be a predictor of its future acceptance by the general public. If the idea is accepted by the masses, savvy investors will be able to catch them.

Political ideas can also have a similar mechanism. Anyone could launch a proposal and the politicians fishing for good ideas could profit from it. Conversely, someone who reaches Top-Digg user status (good Karma in the pligg-like systems) can become a good real-life politician.
 
Empty domain names are like business proposals, and are also subject to Aggregator treatment. Such Aggregator could be the ideal automated domain valuation system.

Aggregators could be used for painters to test their sketches, for advertisers to test their logos or catchy phrases, for models-to-be to expose their beauties, or for conferences looking for appealing speakers. The Barcamp geeky Web 2.0 conferences use such a system.

There are a few necessary conditions for an aggregator to be successful: good coding, critical mass and some of the features described above in IdeaExchange and Ideosphere.

Finally, I started one aggregator for business ideas at www.business-ideas.com.ar and one for local political ideas at www.ideaspoliticas.com.ar . I am ready to start others by request.

Our new website is www.business-ideas.com.ar uses the Digg technology, for ranking the ideas according to the number of votes from the users. Its purpose is to select the ideas that are best according to their popularity.

Sometimes the idea is theoretically good, but does not work in the real world. Why? Nobody knows. Probably a marketing issue, or the way people perceive it. On the other hand, some ideas go to the top in spite of being lame quality. Just turn on the TV and judge: the more popular shows are often bad quality, but they have something that appealed the audience.

So, this Business Idea Aggregator will help us pick up the best received idea. After that, it will be easier to obtain funding to carry it out.

At this point, most of the published ideas are mine (Sergio’s). This means that you will find an heterogeneous and unpredictable mix of crazy, far fledged, long shot, plain stupid, sensible and Net-oriented projects.

The site is open to anyone who wants to publish, vote or comment on the projects.

We are representatives in Argentina of the DVT Module technology by Magely USA.

It’s revolutionary for the culmination of data that we use to adjust your presence online. The data is accurate, up-to-date, and delivers today’s answers.  Information about your niche, competition, desired market placement, brand is gained and manually applied. The result is then used to create an optimized module for your site.

Generally it takes weeks to gather the needed data which is not always correct and accurate when using other online ranking specialists and developers. Making use of the DVT system ensures accuracy, and it’s done in a fraction of the time.

Through many years of technical consultations amongst search engine specialists, individual private contacts (established with the major search engine companies), as well as web site designers that adhere to W3C standards, the collection module was developed.
The data we now have come to understand as a melee of confusing service choices and techniques can now be focused, streamlined and targeted for each client’s requirements. The DVT Module is a proprietary server based collection of data mining engines. It constantly collects, deciphers, and packages only the most pertinent and relevant information in the field of search engine ranking, key word marketing, web site aesthetics and compliant coding. The results are then used by our professional staff and manually applied to your website.

Ask us about the Magely DVT System!

We are launching an integral service for Domain Development. It is a standard Web Design and Web Promotion campaign, including:

• Domain
• Hosting
• Design
• Optimized Wordpress blog with all the SEO plugins
• 20 weekly postings with original content (synonymized by me, from the web)
• Submission to search engines and directories
• Guarranteed Top Ten position for some (uncommon) keyword or money back

You will see it advertised as:

INVEST IN VIRTUAL REAL ESTATE, THE 2008 GOLD RUSHSECURE A TOP RANKING IN THE SEARCH ENGINES

DOMAINS ARE MORE VALUABLE AS THEY ARE LONGER ALIVE

It can be used for:

• Personal Marketing –> get a blog to promote yourself as an employee, consultant, politician or whatever.
• Idea Marketing
• Regional Real Estate Marketing –> for Real Estate companies that already have an institutional website, but desire to strengthen their position in a specific region.
• Small Business Marketing
• Individual Product Marketing –> for large companies that already have an institutional website, but desire to build traffic on a single product.
• Niche Marketing

By the way, look in Google for Domain Development Service , and this DomainGrower.com site is 1st among 12,400,000.

Prices can divided into 3 ranges:

• Standard 300-400 U$D
• Intense 600-800
• Full Effort 1900-2500

Ask us about it!

This is the 4th article in the Googleometry Project Series.

Saturation is usually defined as the number of indexed pages in a website. However, supplemental results can be a significant part of the indexed pages, with no ranking value whatsoever. So, a deeper analysis of saturation and indexed pages is needed.

We define 3 kinds of poorly indexed pages:

- Foreign Pages: pages not assigned to any known language, so it show only if the searcher uses “all the Web” in the Language Preferences.

- Pages non associated to keywords: the only appear in the listings when you request site:domain.com, but they have no keywords associated with them. So, they are useless.

- Pages in the Reduced Indexation Set. Those pages are shown when a Stop Word appears in the search query. This indexation is probably limited to the page Title alone.
We researched the effect of combined searches such as:

site:domain.com keyword1 OR keyword2

Experiments were performed along several days, but data sets need to be obtained in the same day, because there is some day-to-day variation.

We found these consistent indicators of website indexation quality:

- number of pages within English filtered pages, versus pages for all the Web. This setting is modified in the Preferences section of Google. Google not only supplies English pages, but also quality-filtered pages. Most pages in any Web search are discarded in the English-only search, although they are in perfect English. These works equally for Spanish or French pages.

For some reason, the English searches tend to place the Supplemental results inside a link, the well known: “In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries….”, while the Web searches directly add the Supplementals at the end of the regular organic results. 

Stop Words are specific for each site.

Ask us for specific experiments that you want us to run…