Download instructions below – but read this post first to understand how important this is…
———————————————
It doesn’t take long to see just how sporadic the “search engine game” is when you’re trying to get indexed and ranked. Especially when it comes to actually maintaining your rankings.
It’s not a cake-walk.
Any moron can target some keywords, buy a bunch of text links and “voila” – they get a 1st page ranking. But this is almost always short-lived…
Maybe you’ve seen this as well, but I’ve seen first-hand how many of my direct “affiliate feeder” sites (which provide little to no value, other than “value” in terms of conversion on my end) will quickly gain rankings, and then gradually just fall off the map – regardless of additional linking efforts, site editing, etc.
And in the same way, my sites that actually provide good content or are of some on-site use to the visitor always seem to maintain their “overall” rankings – meaning that though the rankings might bounce around, they never fall off the map. Any quality site will always remain a “contender”, so to speak.
At least from what my experience is.
And for a long time, especially recently – this has puzzled me.
It’s as if Google is actually manually selecting it’s “valued” sites. It seems impossible, based on the sheer volume of content that it indexes, but that’s how it seems to respond. MSN and Yahoo are all over the map in this respect (hint: that’s why they’re the favored engines of black-hatters the world over), because with the lesser engines, it’s still just a matter of using ”the formula” to get and STAY ranked.
But Google is a different thing altogether.
In fact, what I’ve got for you here is - ALLEGEDLY – a leaked internal document taken from the training materials for the ”quality-rating” review staff over at the Google HQ. It very clearly explains to the reviewers what sites are deemed as valuable, webspam, “thin affiliates”, vital, relevant, non-relevant and so on.
There’s some controversy over whether this “leaked document” is real or not.
Let’s just put it this way – everything you’re about to see in the ‘report’ makes sense. It’s logical in that you can see exactly why, from Google’s perspective, taking these steps and ranking sites according to these guidelines is what will make their business model (providing relevant results) successful.
It’s also written in a very professional tone, and the amount of detail that’s been laid out in regards to how a reviewer can identify “good” and “bad” sites is very, very revealing.
If you’re creating scraper sites, adsense fodder or even just relying on “mini-sites” solely – this document is NOT going to be a pleasant read. But if you’re serious about learning how to build sites that Google WANTS to rank and send high-quality traffic towards, then this is an absolute gold mine.
It has effectively answered my question about why some of my sites fall off the map, while others are still contenders – even when I use IDENTICAL SEO/linking tactics for each of these particular sites.
Now I know.
My sites were literally (and manually) pruned by a reviewer.
They ain’t coming back.
They still get “some” traffic from Google, but the majority of their traffic now just comes from MSN, Yahoo, ASK, and reffering sites.
The following report shows you exactly how Google’s review staff are trained to rate sites. There might possibly be a few shreds of valuable information inside of its 43 pages:
http://www.TheLazyMarketer.com/GoogleLeak/
Enjoy 
-Chris
P.S. Check my first comment on this post for 2 ways to “Google Proof” your business. You shouldn’t solely be relying on search engines for your livelihood…
(I’m “admin”)
32 responses so far ↓
1 Iain // Apr 14, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Hi Chris
That makes interesting reading especially the webspam section and the ratings descriptions. I have to say it feels real to me and will actually make me look at a few things i do differently!!!!
regards
Iain
2 admin // Apr 14, 2008 at 8:22 pm
It’s becoming more and more apparent that the search engines are trying to do whatever they can to PREVENT us (webmasters) from influencing their results.
They’re reinventing themselves continually, which often leaves some vulnerabilities and loopholes in its wake.
For example – did you know that there’s actually Black-Hat SEO services for DELISTING a domain from Google’s SERPS?
You can pay a “BHSEO” to literally knock out your competitor’s URLs, because there’s still loopholes where Google is so overly concerned with things like spam-link injection, paid links and a few other variables where their current policies seem to be “Shoot First, Ask Questions… Never”
They can literally frame a site for allegedly trying to “spam” Google.
And in the overall picture, this is just ONE factor of many that makes obtaining (and sustaining) a profitable, consistent stream of traffic from search engine results a business model that simply hangs from an “ever-thinning thread”.
I don’t know about you, but I have no desire to see sites earning full-time incomes just up and evaporate because some green-haired little punk thinks it’s fun to “Google Bowl” my sites.
It’s like building your house upon the sand, as they say…
Alright, so as promised, here are 2 ways to “Google Proof” your business:
1. Build a List
The prerequisite to this is to first of all choose niches where this is truly profitable. Your client-base needs to be one where the niche subject matter (the overall topic) is one that will affect them for years to come.
Things like relationships, pets, debt, fitness, mental health, hunting, investing, horse training, real estate, etc. etc. are all examples of “evergreen” markets.
Niches that cater more to “one off” sales often have higher conversion. People need a certain thing, they get it, and then their profile effectively changes back to “untargeted visitor”, because their problem (and your solution) was isolated.
An example of this would be password recovery software, background check services, “how to beat a speeding ticket”, or similar types of instant problem/instant fix kinds of markets.
However – these won’t be as profitable LONG-TERM unless you can maintain a steady flow of NEW customers.
Client-databases can be extremely valuable IF they trust you. Treat them right, and you will be amply rewarded for years to come.
People often say you can earn $1 per subscriber per month if you have an email list. First of all, that’s based on someone else’s experience. Second – there IS NO set “rule”.
I have a list UNDER 3,000 people that consistently generates at least twice that “estimate”.
I also have lists much larger than 3k that don’t even come close to the “$1/subscriber/month” rule because of the client profile.
It really depends, but the one thing that’s certain is that in niches where the clients are always involved in the topic itself (like investing or golf), then there is literally no limit to how much you can make from your list.
It will depend solely on the impact that YOU personally have on them based on your style, your communication and your track-record.
For learning more about how to build and profit from opt-in lists, I strongly recommend Jimmy Brown’s ListAndTraffic.com.
JB’s a traight-up guy, and a marketing genius.
—————————————————-
2. Traffic Diversification
Not only do you want targeted traffic – you want targeted traffic from as many different SOURCES as possible.
This means developing a profitable and efficient system of using videos, SEO, viral materials, software/freeware, articles, word-of-mouth, advertising, partnerships and affiliate programs to create NUMEROUS incoming sales channels for your business.
Of the strategies briefly mentioned, an AFFILIATE PROGRAM is by far the most powerful.
Why?
Because it “includes” all of the others (and then some) within its capabilities.
Let me ask you something:
Who’s benefiting from your search engine results?
While it’s you to an extent, the one who’s REALLY benefiting is the merchant(s) you’re promoting, who didn’t have to lift a finger to get YOUR rankings.
And not only that – you’re just one of tens, or hundreds or perhaps thousands of other affiiates doing the same thing.
You can be absolutely certain that the more popular merchants out there are benefiting directly from some of the most advanced traffic strategies EVER – that their affiliates are discovering and workng at – without even realizing it.
It’s ultimate leverage.
This is why feeder products and using a variety of traffic sources are crucial to getting LONG-TERM results on the front end.
——————————————–
Just some food for thought.
By the way, that leaked report gets really good after page 30….
Cheers,
-Chris
3 Trevor // Apr 14, 2008 at 8:53 pm
You know Chris…
In maybe ten years from now these search engines are going to be so sophisticated feeder sites may not even be useful and we will have to be developing large content rich user friendly sites first thing instead of second.
I have been focusing more on developing my own products for more net savvy affiliates to promote simply because a decade from now these linking tactics and seo boosting services may be near completely out the window.
Or am I just being too careful?
4 Dexx // Apr 14, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Amazing find as always Chris, you’re pretty much the only list I’m still subscribed too in regards to IM since you actually provide VALUE with each email (i.e I dont have to consider instantly clicking delete)
I think some of the “gurus” out there should be coming to you for list advice.
Cheers!
5 Dave // Apr 14, 2008 at 9:22 pm
For a second there I did think the sky was falling in
.
Just having a glance over it now but it’s a very interesting read. Especially about the part of not going over board with one type of information and having relevant links leaving your site.
Thanks for pointing out the report Chris.
Dave
6 ROADDOG // Apr 14, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Hi ya Chris,
long time no type to, Roaddog here.
Once again you have “allegedly” peaked my interest,
with something “relevant”!
But seriously we all seem to forget sometimes
that in simple yes or no terms, what a lot of this boils down to, is the beginnings of censorship.
And I understand that there has to be rules and people who try to steal or cheat, should be penalized. But who is Google (besides being the 900 pound gorilla) to tell me or anyone else what is relevant?
Isn’t relevance, relative? Lol
I know how you feel about adsense sites and I am not here to defend or damn anyone, I have read
things on (blatant) adsense sites (and I just use that as an example) that I didn’t know, or pointed me in a direction I might not have gone.
What I am trying to say is
” you can learn as much from fools as from sages” as the saying goes.
Considering how much “power” google has ,and that for most of us here, is self explanatory, that
report is somewhat scary. Even without the monetary consideration .
They need a competitor, a competent competitor. Otherwise they could quite possibly be the embryo of the real BIG BROTHER.
I may just be” giggle” and they may be google
but that is my irrelevant opinion
Regards to you and yours Chris
(when’s the new book?)
Roaddog
7 ROADDOG // Apr 14, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Whew! been holding that rant in for awhile.
Peace
Roaddog
8 Ben Shaffer // Apr 15, 2008 at 1:22 am
Hi Chris,
Just wanted to pop in to say excellent post and even more excellent comment.
Keep well,
Ben Shaffer
9 Will King // Apr 15, 2008 at 4:16 am
Great article Chris! As Dexx said above, you are one of maybe two IM lists I’m still on and boy am I glad.
Your comments are spot on – build a list and recruit affiliates.
I’ve only had a quick look over the report, but it is revealing. Yet the basics remain the same:
Target a specific search phrase with each page. Give quality information and add value. Simple.
Too many people fail to get the basics right. Keep up the good fight Chris!
Thanks,
Will
10 Johnner // Apr 15, 2008 at 10:04 am
SBIers are going to eat this one up.
11 Jeff // Apr 15, 2008 at 10:53 am
Your right it really doesnt start until page 30. The first part just seems to be “how to do your job” manual for google. The rest pretty much says what to look for when flagging websites as spam or not spam, sort of deal.
And yes, its pretty much common sense that most people dont seem to be using. People keep saying “Content is King!!” well, yes, DUH. But its more like, “Useful, quality content is King”. You can have all the content you want on your website, and if its not good useful, quality stuff, you’re going to get bumped plain and simple.
Thanks for the info on this Chris. You’ve done it again! =)
Ciao.
P.S We’re going to get some crazy snow in Edmonton, this weekend you going to get hit? hehehe
12 JT // Apr 15, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Hey Chris
Nice post,
Looks to me like Big G doesn’t want Affiliate programs especially Amazon and Ebay getting even more powerful on her resources.
Do you think there is any future in building Amazon Storefronts, Bans sites,Store Stackers and PHPbay blogs even if they are customized and have high quality relevent content?
It seemed that anything that involved clicking through to another site to pay for your item put you on the fast track to the land of nod. Amazon and Ebay were both singled out..specifically
whats your take on that ?
Thanks
John
13 admin // Apr 15, 2008 at 6:22 pm
Hi John,
I think the key issue is spelled out in the last sentence of the PDF:
“When trying to decide if a page is spam, it is helpful to ask yourself this question: If I removed the scraped (copied) content, the ads, and the links to other pages, is there anything of value left? If the answer is no, then the page is probably Spam”.
So it seems as if they view pages that don’t have additional content relevant to the specific topic of the page (likely a product) as spam.
So in other words, if you simply use datafeeds and nothing else (like a review or an opinion of your own), then they would classify that as “not as relevant”.
Or possibly spam.
StoreStacker and other feed integration tools like it aren’t “useless” – they still work great. They just need to be INTEGRATED into an existing site with its own actual functions and content, rather than being the actual SOURCE of function.
This should be on a page-by-page basis, though.
-Chris
14 Rip // Apr 15, 2008 at 9:09 pm
It seems that the sites you are theoretically building, Chris, as described in your Lazy Affiliate ebook, would NOT be marked as spam.
Wouldn’t you agree? Reviews of different products, unique content, etc. So in that case, your sites must be losing their rankings for some other reason.
15 admin // Apr 15, 2008 at 9:13 pm
Hi Rip,
Not all my sites have lost rankings. Only a small handful, and they all had one thing in common:
They used a “teaser” script that simply directed to the merchant.
The mini-sites in this case were truly just feeders.
The other sites (including that Registry example) have fluctuated a bit – as is expected – but they’re still getting steady Google traffic because they contain helpful content.
-Chris
16 Slade // Apr 16, 2008 at 10:00 am
Chris,
Not trying to hijack this topic with unrelated questions but this seems to be the best way to get in touch with you.
Are you still using the link building strategies that you outlined in Lazy Marketer?
I’m trying to market the hell out of one of my sites and want to make sure Im spending my money wisely.
I use GAF, any linkbuilders you can recommend?
Thanks for the insight.
17 admin // Apr 16, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Hi Slade,
Yes, although I’m only doing link exchanges with topically relevant sites at the moment. Recip links do still work pretty well with MSN and Yahoo especially, but since it’s not a priority, I’ve scaled it down a bit.
Some recent sites I’ve launched I haven’t even bothered with recips.
As for other strategies, what I’m doing is using LinkVana, 3WayLinks and I have one linkbuilding service that I use consistently and they are the “shiznit”, so to speak
As for who I recommend, I don’t want to reveal my own source – he’s busy enough
– but I can say that you want to ideally find people who will build one-way links back to your site (via 3 way exchanges or targeted content creation/submission) for a reasonable cost-per-link.
One thing I’m not doing anymore is buying individual links off of link marketplaces. This still works, but it’s just a personal choice I’ve made.
I have reason to believe that Google is taking extra measures to penalize sites that they catch buying text links.
Therefore, I don’t want my investment to end up being void.
If you’re promoting a “REAL” site (authority site or actual product site), then you want to keep it as natural as possible.
The best use of your time here is to legitimately acquire authority links from sites in your market. One of the best ways to do this is to write unique content for them in exchange for a link.
I don’t mean your typical EzineArticles.com submission – I mean writing and submitting guest articles to actual web-based publications in your market.
That and “linkbait” by way of naturally creating something worth sharing from your visitor’s perspective is paramount if you want rock-solid #1 rankings for years on end.
It’s just that you obviously can’t really do that if you’ve got a mini-site or a small affiliate site of some kind. That’s why it makes more sense just to use LinkVana or whatever to automate the process, as it’s more of a “bulk” approach.
I hope this helps to answer your question…
Thanks,
-Chris
18 Slade // Apr 16, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Chris,
Thanks for taking the time out to answer, I really appreciate it. Perhaps I should have been a bit more specific.
-I’m having a linkbuilder submit 1100 directory submissions alternating 5 keywords
-I have another freelancer who submitted 200 social bookmarkings alternating two of those keywords
That’s my start so far. Am I wasting my money with those two avenues? Please be honest, I can take the bluntness if you think I wasted my money. Id rather lose it now then make the same mistake over and over.
As far as where I plan to go from there I was going to
-have my freelancer build 80 one way links (relevant or not? does it matter?)
-have my freelancer build 20 reciprocals from relevant sites
-build 5 squidoo lens with the titles/content targeting my 5 desired keywords
What do you think? What would you add besides linkvana and jon leger’s 3way links?
Be as critical as you need to be, I’d rather get it right this time instead of doing it improperly over and over.
Again, thanks for your time.
Slade
19 Tony // Apr 17, 2008 at 7:54 pm
I don’t get it..What is the difference between a thin affiliate and a normal one? No matter which, I will have a link pointing to the product which my visitors can not buy from my site. I am heavily involved with ebay partner program, they were singled out…I hope Microsoft buys Yahoo.
I am left assuming no affiliate program is safe, I am not spamming, probably just taking up space in their universe. What’s a better way?
20 Neo // Apr 17, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Hi Chris,
I just watched your latest video. I have seen you recommending linkvana a lot. But I thought another service called traffickahuna is better and I signed up for that.
What is your opinion on TrafficKahuna?
Regards,
Neo
21 admin // Apr 17, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Hi Neo,
My thoughts are that LinkVana is under-marketed (doesn’t have the fanfare and hype that TK does), and also that it only allows original, un-spun content.
TK seems to be a lot more liberal as to what it passes as content in its network.
I personally think that LinkVana should beef up their site a bit, but at the same time… I can see how it sort of helps to keep the service a bit more low-key and targeted towards people who understand the tremendous impact of the features, and how they “translate” into benefits.
Benefits being hands-free rankings for sites like my latest.
Cheers,
-Chris
22 Neo // Apr 19, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Chris,
Thanks for the reply.
I will see my progress with TK for couple of months and tell you my results. If it is not working, I will go for Linkvana.
TK must be very similar to Linkvana. Just for your info, TK got a Blogfeed system where we can post article upto 30 blogs. It allows to post all at the same time or at certain time gap. Instead of posting the same article on all blogs it allows article spinning. But it is not a markov type spinning. It is a phrase/word replacer. So if the article poster use it wisely it can create good unique articles.
TK also got a article exchange system and a 3 way link exchange system. Still not sure if 3 ways links good or not. Google might be able to track them down.
Once again, thanks for the reply.
regards,
-Neo
23 admin // Apr 19, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Neo,
Spun content just isn’t unique.
That’s the issue.
Try it out by all means, but I would be concerned about the long-term value of the service.
-Chris
24 Jeremy Hier // Apr 19, 2008 at 7:25 pm
You can rank higher with less inbounds by theming your website, linking pages to only related pages,
and using the “nofollow” to stop theme bleeding.
Another term for this is siloing your website.
This works.
25 Neo // Apr 20, 2008 at 2:04 am
Jeremy,
I tried that. But it doesn’t work always.
After buying Chris’s ebook, I started a site on a one year old domain. I bought several links and some directory submissions. Google indexed most of the pages of my site very quickly. But no traffic even after couple of months. I have no outgoing links on the site except to the affiliate sponsor. And all those links carry nofollow tags.
Anyway I will try TK for a month or two and see the results. Or may be I chose the wrong niche.
26 cheetu // Apr 30, 2008 at 6:26 am
For my first site I used ken evoy’s suggestions in SBI. Its a great system, it takes time but to create authority sites its good. I am ranked for my target keywords form last 7 months non stop.
27 admin // May 8, 2008 at 4:32 am
“Google indexed most of the pages of my site very quickly. But no traffic even after couple of months.”
———————-
That either means there’s no demand for your topic, or you’re targeting stuff that’s too competitive and getting buried.
Either way, though, indexed content should at least be getting “some” traffic by way of long-tail search terms.
Remember that as your primary-target rankings climb – it usually runs across the board. Meaning that you’ll rank more highly for hundreds or perhaps thousands of keywords.
Cheers,
-Chris
28 Neo // May 9, 2008 at 9:52 pm
“That either means there’s no demand for your topic, or you’re targeting stuff that’s too competitive and getting buried.”
—————————
Chris,
Thanks for the reply. I think my site falls in second category. That is too much competition.
But I have tried to optimize my site for the “money keywords”, so that even if the traffic is low, it should bring me some sales. And as a result I made my first sale from that during this week.
(If you would like to take a look at my site, it is at: http://www.dietcontrolpills.com )
I still need to work more on the sales text on my site. But my initial aim is to bring more search engine traffic.
Anyway, thanks for all your valuable suggestions.
Regards,
Neo
29 Bibokz // May 22, 2008 at 12:18 am
Google SPAM, still unsure if this issue is real or just another bait.
30 Jeff // Jun 4, 2008 at 5:47 am
Chris, can you please once and for all end the debate on duplicate content? You say in your book that the theory is crap, though most harp on it.
My main concern is, if I write an article, and cut and paste it in a bunch of directories, will I get penalized?
31 admin // Jun 8, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Hi Jeff,
No, your article won’t get penalized.
What happens is that only a few of the major sites (usually EzineArticles.com) will actually have enough authority to become the “ambassador” for your article in the SERPS.
The other sites might only show up for supplemental results, etc.
Also, remember that with the lesser engines (like MSN), they still seem to be hugely influenced by the influx of one-way links from these sites, reprinted content or not.
I would generally agree that submitting unique articles to individual sites is the better way to go for long-term results, but it might not be as efficient.
What I do is a mix of mass-submissions along with individual requests to niche sites. It’s actually surprisingly easy to get one-way links just by asking, so long as your site has something worth linking to.
Now, in regards to USING reprint content, there is no penalty. The only “risk” you take is that the time spent publishing/using reprintable content might not equate to much traffic.
But it WILL equate to some, to be sure.
One thing you DO want to avoid though is “duplicate content” on your own domain. Each page should contain largely unique content as it relates to your other pages.
THAT’s what Google is talking about in regards to duplicate content.
Think about it – sites like Reuters, PRWeb.com, several news sites, Answers.com and a whole slew of other aggregators would go out of business overnight if “duplicate” content was being penalized.
Take care,
-Chris
32 googleleak maps // Jul 5, 2008 at 6:43 am
[...] that???s why they???re the favored engines of … TheLazyMarketer.com/GoogleLeak/. Enjoy
…http://www.thelazymarketer.com/blog/2008/04/14/leaked-document-googles-2007-site-ranking-guidelines-…Google accidentally leaks Google Reader orientation video | Googling …Garett Rogers explores the [...]
Leave a Comment