Ranking a New SIte? Forget it...

Source Title:
A Successful Site in 36 Months - Old Sites Rule Supreme
Story Text:

I can't help feeling very sorry for folks that don't live and breathe SEO when they start out on a brand new domain, a great idea, tons of supremely authoritative content and get what? Nothing. In terms of up to date content, i'd go as far to say that Google is less than perfect, in terms of their responsibility to the web, i'd say they were negligently blazè about information, their stock in trade...

Stuntdubl has a nice post on ranking new sites today. In it he quotes one wmw member talking about his experience in terms of Brett Tabke's guide to 15k a day from a few years back.

-12 months sandbox
-12 months link penalty
-welcome to ground zero. - jaffstar

I've not had to work on a brand new domain post Sandbox, Google's dubious method of keeping new sites from ranking for anything competitive, that may have been further explained in their equally contraversial big brother patent, except for Threadwatch of course. This site is not seo'd at all, beyond some consideration in urls and taking certain pages out of a spiders reach, but I don't think it's in any way sandboxed. My point being, that maybe the 'contraversial blog' approach as a way of getting links from many sources would work well for regular commerical websites?

Im not sure...

One thing i do know, is that workarounds that won't have too much potential for trouble are scarce, and i'd like to discuss it with those that have actually been in that position if anyone would care to comment?



build a site the same way you always would, be aggressive in building links as always. get great traffic from yahoo! and MSN.

18 months later, after manual sandbox review, you should be doing well in Google.

Long Tail Lives Out of the Box

I constructed a site 2 months ago and targeted towards certain long tail terms. It is experiencing traffic and decent rankings for those terms from Google, Yahoo and MSN. From organic long tail alone, the site has brought in $1,000 in revenue for highly competitive products so far this month.


You mean 4/5 word phrases loren?

Long Tail

They'll only let out of the sandbox queries with not many competing pages...In the thousands, not the hundred thousands.

Work arounds are risking..buying subpages and subdirectory on authority domains..but it's risky as they can take over the page and you're helping to build someone else's domain.

I'm taking a risk

Just rebranded my biz and as part of it have a nice shiny new domain. I've decided I'm going to build out the site like I normally do and see what happens.

It had been suggested to me that I keep the old domain and name as changing it invariably means being sandboxed in Google for a loooong time. Decided G wasn't going to dictate how I run my business. Besides G aren't the only gig in town. Aaron if you're out there your SEO in a Vacuum was a help in my decision. ;)


IMO sandboxing is very much about off-site link anchors.

So a site can develop good search traffic from general links - especially good use of internal links - and strong content, but heaven forbid should you develop links aiming at a particular keyword.

I'm especially uncomfortable at the market dynamic that seems to create - as a real or simply perceived phenomenon - people could soon be contacting myself not to rank sites, but instead to try and sandbox specific competitors from Google.


Decided G wasn't going to dictate how I run my business.

Couldn't agree more: isn't this what all SEO is about in the first place - taking, maintaining, gaining control?

Right you are

Nice post Fanto; that's the goal.

Not everyone(anyone?) can game the system to perfection but everyone can find ways to make it work "for" them. Observe, learn, test, adjust, repeat (and hopefully spend a bit of time cashing checks each month.

I agree

With Brian_Turner and I'm also concerned about the anchor text percentages. You could flood a competitor with text links having the hot keyphrase(s) and push them over and out.

Google is not only getting very stale (in terms of new sites), but it's also opening that barn door wide to competitor sabotage.

I just don't get it

I have never once had a site for myself or a client not get indexed in under 3 weeks. I hear all this stuff about sandboxing and it seems never to effect any of the sites I develop. I really am starting to wonder why. One of these days I am going to have to test it. I haven't changed the way I get a site listed in over three years.

I believe it, I'm just wondering why I'm not seeing the same thing?



indexing is one thing. Ranking well for competitive phrases is entirely another. Are your sites ranking top 10 for phrases with more than a few hundred thousand results? One, or two word phrases?


That's one of the issues that muddies the sandboxing - newer sites can still get SE traffic, but IMO tends to be ranked for on-page content, rather than powerful off-page markets such as anchor text on third-party sites.

On-page content based rankings

would make a lot more sense within this context, I agree, Brian.

Though this begs another question: if Goo's only physically spidered about 50-60% of the pages it's featuring in the index, relying on link and search behavior analysis for determining what the others are all about, this wouldn't really work out unless they caught at least 90-95% of all new, virgin sites - provided they're really interested in keeping their index fresh. (And there's a lot to indicate that it's not exactly their top priority currently.)

Freshness benefit

Not sure if this is real or imagined but new sites seem to flash up in the serps for a few weeks *then* get "sandboxed". Kind of like they do a quick "hello, I'm here" then drop to page 1000?

Have heard of this happening

but cannot confirm it from our own experience.

Sites popping in and out and speculation

Guessing this is how they keep "viral" sites near the top. It they have explosive link growth from the onset and it continues, perhaps they stick around as "news resources" or other content that MUST be fresh. Sites for current news, viral topics, and the latest fads seem to pop out so there must be some criteria in place for that.

I'm not so certain about manual review, but would speculate "periodic threshold checking" since groups of sites seem to pop out on occassion. Now to figure out what the thresholds are based on and where the limits are:)


I concur with this. That's why most 'click-pimp' sites are built to get a big initial hit and not designed to ever come back in post-sandbox. They gain lots of links fast and achieve big traffic. Initial GBot lets them through. It has to as topical news sites (eg. tsunami) follow this pattern. Then more in-depth GBot comes along and realises the site is spam and kills it.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.