Google Panelizes to much SEO

[JarnoNijzing]

I just read this interesting article about a new Google Penalty that will be up in the next upcoming weeks/months about Google making changes to the algorithm.

The penalty will be targeted towards websites that are over optimized or over seo'ed. What do you think about this? Is this a good thing or is this not a good thing for us as SEO marketeers?

here's the link: SEL.com/to-much-seo

I'm really curious as to your point of views.

regards

Jarno

[Aran_Smithson]

Don't quote me on this but Google has been heading this way for quite some time, has it not?

Remember keyword stuffing, content farms, dodgy link practices?

As long as we build websites that

1. Function correctly
2. Have good unique content
3. Are easy to use

We are on the right track and have little to worry about.

I'll carry on with my current strategy of putting the effort into content and doing my damnest to get people to notice it and perhaps give me a link, +1, tweet, like or bookmark.

[JarnoNijzing]

Aran,

i totally agree with you on the points you made but since Google is letting out more and more information about wanting to level the SEO market I was very curious as to what other SEO's think about this.

I can image that Google is going to make a point out of a lot of things but there are some factors that SEO's use that can be an issue. That is what i can imagine about it anyway.

thanks for the reply

[Aran_Smithson]

Hi Jarno,

You Say "there are some factors that SEO's use that can be an issue", what do you image these could be?

Cheers

Aran

[JarnoNijzing]

Aran,

for example  it could mean the number of times the keyword is displayed in a page. I might think i use it naturally but Google might decide otherwise..

on the article of searchengineland some of the feedbacks enroll external linking to your site. By buying links to your competitors your might invoke them as harmful websites. I don't think Google is stupid but it could be influential.

Off course it goes without saying that the only way we are going to find out what it entails it buy waiting for it and then testing. I agree with your white-hat theory. Keep using white-hat and you should always be fine.

[DanHill]

I'd like to see a lot less weight being put into keyword matched domains for a start..

[Aran_Smithson]

Agreed.

[My-Favourite-Holiday-Cottages]

Speaking from a users perspective, thats the one I would like to see changed the most myself.

So meny times there is some exact match keyword domain with poor content ranking high on the first page on seemingly the weight of that factor alone.

If the changes are along those lines it will make SEO 'easyer' unless you were using such technicques yourself.

My other guess is that they're going to improve their 'best guesses' for those pages without semanticaly correct html e.t.c. That would 'even the playing feild' but still would favour optimised content.

[JarnoNijzing]

Daniel,

though i can imagine your thinking in this i do not agree with you. One of our main websites is focused on camping at the farmer (in dutch it's like: kamperen bij de boer) and we have a domain name that is similar to that. So our website:

www.kamperen-bij-de-boer.com is build for user but it does use the exact keyword people are looking. If Google changes the algorithm to penalize websites that use keyword "stuffed" domains then my website, build for users, would be demoted. That's not fair is it?

I do agree with you however in some cases. There are a lot off websites that keyword stuff the domain or use - to separate domain names from competitors. So in some cases i totally agree with you but there are still some websites that have a domain name that is the main keyword. What would happen to them?

[DanHill]

I'm not saying that a keyword matched domain should receive a penalty, I'm saying that it should be a more neutral ground when it comes to ranking factors.

If your site happens to have a keyword matched domain but has great content and value for a visitor then it should rightly rank higher for relevant queries - and if they changed the weighting on the matched domains then it should(in theory) weed out the thinner value sites.

Matt Cutts did mention in that interview the phrase 'level playing field' - not that I personally believe this could ever be achieved with an algorithm