Social Networking Conference, EIG and CAC

21/09/2008 by admin.

Well I’m off to London today and packing for 2 days there and then onto Spain. I have to admit I’m looking forward to Spain even if it involves another plane trip. I have a few clients I’ll get to catch up with and hopefully do some networking as well. Its great to meet new people that are excited about the industry it pumps new life into me.

Benn watching the Dave Naylor blog issue with Google. Seems pretty rediculous that Dave outed Twitter, told Google, and now is suffering the Google wrath. Best of luck to Dave.

GaryTheScubaGuy

PR: wait…  I: wait…  L: wait…  LD: wait…  I: wait… wait…  C: wait…  SD: wait…

Posted in General Discussions | No Comments »

Google Patent Summary/Analysis

18/09/2008 by admin.

1. Google scores a document using history data which includes:

2. the inception date of the document.

3. on a difference between the ages of the documents and the average age.

4. on an elapsed time measured from the inception date corresponding to the document.

5. a date when a search engine first discovers a link to the document, and a date when the document includes at least a predetermined number of pages.

6. the frequency that the content changes over time.

7. comparison of a rate of change in a current time period with a rate of change in a previous time period.

8. the frequency at which and the amount by which the content of the document changes over time.

9. a ratio of a number of new pages associated with the document versus a total number of pages associated with the document, and a percentage of the content of the document that has changed during a time period.
10. weighting different portions of the content of the document differently based on a perceived importance of the portions, and determining the amount by which the content of the document changes as a function of the differently weighted portions of the content.

11. determining a date on which the content of each of the documents last changed, determining an average date of change based on the determined dates on which the contents of the documents last changed, and scoring the documents based, at least in part, on a difference between the dates on which the contents of the documents last changed and the average date of change.

12. on the amount by which the content of the document changes over time.

13. on at least one of a number of new pages associated with the document within a time period, a ratio of a number of new pages associated with the document versus a total number of pages associated with the document, and a percentage of the content of the document that has changed during a time period.

14. weighting different portions of the content of the document differently based on a perceived importance of the portions.

15. how often the document is selected when the document is included in a set of search results

17. whether the document is associated with the search terms.

18. whether the document is associated with queries that lead to results that change over time.

19. whether the document is stale.

20. whether stale documents are considered favorable for the search query when the document is determined to be stale.

21. determining whether stale documents are considered favorable for the search query is based, at least in part, on how often stale documents were selected over recent documents over time for the search query.

22. behavior of links associated with the document.

23. appearance and disappearance of one or more links pointing to the document.

24. rate at which the one or more links disappear over time, and a number of the one or more links that disappear during a time period.

25. how many links associated with the document appear or disappear during a time period, and whether there is a trend toward appearance of new links associated with the document versus disappearance of existing links associated with the document.

26. assigning weights to the links based on the determined freshness

28. how much a document containing the link is trusted, how authoritative a document containing the link is, and a freshness of a document containing the link.

29. on the age distribution associated with the links.

30. on the change in anchor text associated with a link to the document.

31. whether the content of the document changes such that the content differs from the anchor text associated with one or more links to the document.

32. freshness of anchor text associated with one or more links to the document.

34. on the characteristics of traffic associated with the document.

36. user behavior associated with the document.

37. number of times that the document is selected within a set of search results and an amount of time that one or more users spend accessing the document.

38. analyzing domain-related information corresponding to a domain associated with the document over time.

39. the domain associated with the document is legitimate.

40. expiration date of the domain, a domain name server record associated with the domain, and a name server associated with the domain.

41. the prior ranking history of the document.

42. the quantity or rate that the document moves in the rankings.

43. a rate at which the document is selected as a search result over time, seasonality, burstiness, and changes in scores over time for a URL-query pair.

44. monitoring a rank of the document over time for spikes in the rank.

45. user maintained or generated data indicates that the document is of interest to a user.

46. the user maintained or generated data relates to at least one of favorites lists, bookmarks, temp files, and cache files associated with one or a plurality of users.

47. a rate at which the document is added to or removed from the user maintained or generated data, and whether the document is added to, deleted from, or accessed through the user maintained or generated data.

48. the growth profile of anchor text associated with one or more links to the document.

49. on the number of independent peers.

50. performing topic extraction relating to the document, monitoring a topic of the document for changes over time.

51. a relevancy score for the document based on how relevant the document is to the search query.

52. the plurality of types of history data.

53. one or more types of history data.

54. ranking the linked document based on a decaying function of the age of the linkage data.

57. linkage data includes a rank based, at least in part, on links and anchor text provided by one or more linking documents and related to the linked document.

58. the longevity of the linkage data and the indication of content update for the linking document.

59. penalizing the ranking if the longevity indicates a short life for the linkage data and boosting the ranking if the longevity indicates a long life for the linkage data.

60. penalizing the ranking if at least a portion of content from the linking document is considered stale over a period of time and boosting the ranking if the portion of content from the linking document is considered updated over the period of time.

61. determining an indication of link churn for a linking document providing the linkage data; and based on the link churn, adjusting the ranking of the linked document.

63. penalizing the ranking if the link churn is above a threshold.

Posted in General Discussions | No Comments »

Keyword Density

17/09/2008 by admin.

Keyword Density

I’m asked about keyword density and what is the optimal keyword density for a page.

Keyword density doesn’t matter as much as the theme. This is where LSI comes into play. Each page should have many variations of the same keyword/kw phrase, so the SE’s know what its about. Theming downwards like this gambling>>>online gambling>>>online gambling reviews

This is why I target online gambling reviews as one of the keyword phrases. The link juice will funnel upwards to all related phrases. The key is to mention the primary keyword on each page more frequently than the other related terms, and to link out from this page to the page below it, within the content (text). So If page 1 was targeting gambling I would mention ‘online gambling’ in the content, but not more frequently than gambling. Then in sticking with the theming principal I would include ‘online gambling reviews’ on the ‘online gambling’ page, again, not more frequently than ‘online gambling’.

So there is no right or wrong density. I’ve even read when there is only one instance of a keyword on a page that ranks well for it. The key is the navigational structure, link sculpting and theme of your site.

Can you over-do it? Yes, so don’t go crazy. That’s called keyword stuffing.

Posted in General Discussions | No Comments »

SMX London 2008

16/09/2008 by admin.

Since I got my speaker invitation to SMX London this morning, in celebration I’m going to do what I’ve been promising to do for ages now, which is to start my blog. I doubt I’ll be the type that can post every day, but I’m going to try.

To start I’ll publish my schedule for now;

Here is my current schedule;
September
10-13 Internet Marketing Show - Vancouver, Canada
21-24 Social Networking Conference - London
24-26 EiG Conference - Barcelona, Spain
25-29 CAP Conference - Barcelona, Spain

October
13-16 Affiliates 4U Conference - Barcelona
26-30 iGaming Conference - London

November
3-7 SMX Conference - London
18-27 CAC Conference - Macau, China

 

Related:

SEMPO Circle Member
Goolge Ad Pro
Yahoo Ambassador
SEO Chat Moderator

Posted in General Discussions | No Comments »