Google Sandbox and Getting Out!
Michael Martinez, who is been in the SEO space for sometime now, has blogged a piece over at SEOmoz.org on what he believes the Sandbox is. Not that everyone else hasn't added their 2 cents to wha they believe the "Sandbox" is, but Michael brings up an old post from John Scott that talks about link age:
If you scroll down to the comments, you'll see Andy made a post that, IMO, really its the nail to the coffin.
Why do I believe that?
Well, I don't believe the Sandbox is primarily based on link age. Sure, that is a factor, but it would really hurt the G SERPs if it was completely based on link age. Any top news story or new site with mass appeal wouldn't get ranked if link age was the main culprit. We've soon a number of sites never get into the Sandbox because of the "TrustRank", links from highly authoritive websites.
As the common website, what should I do?
If you just have a hobby site and that's what is REALLY is, meaning you don't care if it makes money or not, then don't worry about the Sandbox. If you have a site that you would like to generate revenue, start building links to it and expect revenue in 1 year. Think of it as an investment.
When I through a new site up, I don't think its going to start making me money from day 1. I expect it to start making the bucks...this time...next year. And why not? Why not think that way? Why not just develop a whole crap-load of sites and let them sit? The internet isn't going anywhere and you'll always need cash. I like to tell people this: 5 years is going to come whether you like it or not. Would you rather have 500 sites in 5 years (100 a year/8 a month) that are generating $600 a day or have a few sites that you gave up on because you just couldn't get the whole "sandbox" or "internt" thing?
...I'm building my empire too. :)
It applies to links, not sites. And the age of the link is not the only factor. The IP range of the links and other considerations are made, and the person who I discussed this with said that Krishna Bharat is at Google primary to develop and implement this new algorithm. It is supposed to radically change the way links are evaluated.
If you scroll down to the comments, you'll see Andy made a post that, IMO, really its the nail to the coffin.
Why do I believe that?
Well, I don't believe the Sandbox is primarily based on link age. Sure, that is a factor, but it would really hurt the G SERPs if it was completely based on link age. Any top news story or new site with mass appeal wouldn't get ranked if link age was the main culprit. We've soon a number of sites never get into the Sandbox because of the "TrustRank", links from highly authoritive websites.
As the common website, what should I do?
If you just have a hobby site and that's what is REALLY is, meaning you don't care if it makes money or not, then don't worry about the Sandbox. If you have a site that you would like to generate revenue, start building links to it and expect revenue in 1 year. Think of it as an investment.
When I through a new site up, I don't think its going to start making me money from day 1. I expect it to start making the bucks...this time...next year. And why not? Why not think that way? Why not just develop a whole crap-load of sites and let them sit? The internet isn't going anywhere and you'll always need cash. I like to tell people this: 5 years is going to come whether you like it or not. Would you rather have 500 sites in 5 years (100 a year/8 a month) that are generating $600 a day or have a few sites that you gave up on because you just couldn't get the whole "sandbox" or "internt" thing?
...I'm building my empire too. :)
posted by Voasi
PermaLink
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home