• http://www.michael-martinez.com/ Michael Martinez

    It would be nice if they would update their US Panda lists.

  • D.W.

    Panda went for the jugular on this one – cost us 2/3 of our UK traffic and an additional 40% in the US (after taking 45% with the first attack).

    They kinda spelled it out in their blog post on Tues. – specifically mentioning ‘long tail’ in association with ‘low quality’.

    And as far as I can tell, ‘quality’ has some close ties to ‘time spent on site’ – we’ve seen huge spikes in time spent on site for what little search traffic we still have.

    I suppose the silver lining is that we’re receiving better ‘quality’ visitors – just a helluva lot fewer than we were before.

  • Matt McGee

    We’ve asked them to do that, Michael. Will update this post or maybe write a new one if we get that data.

  • http://cellphonetrackers.org Alex

    So this time ehow is not that lucky. I wonder how ehow rankings will vary within US.

  • Ian Williams

    Interesting to see a number of directories listed there, including Qype, Hotfrog, and Cylex – all three of which are used by Google as citation sources to populate GMaps.

  • http://www.headbangtoday.com H.T.

    It seems like business directories are getting the axe. Is that good or bad news? Nice to see wordpress.com winning! \m/

  • Fraser Burt

    Fantastic article – thanks very much! I think this is a good movement by google. Feel bad for those companies that have lost their business over night though.

  • Tad Chef

    So it seems many shopping search engines like Idealo, Dooyoo, Ciao, Shopping.com etc. got slapped. Some article directories and content farms as well but mainly price comparison sites.

  • An

    So, in summary, a lot of shopping type aggregation sites lose out.

    I note that you didnt mention anywhere in this article about Google’s recent acquisition of BeatThatQuote.com for £37.7 million. Readers should also note that if you type the keyword phrase “compare credit cards” that you get Google listed at the top in a “comparison ad”.

    So, google’s new algorithm ranks down shopping aggregation sites, but it artificially ranks its own shopping/finance aggregation site at the top.

    Massive conflict of interest, anyone?