Posted: Sun May 01, 2005 5:43 am Post subject: Why Martell's been banned by google.
I had a martell style site that got whacked along with his. I never got a response back from google until today (only 8 months later) The site was a 1st-in site. The official response from google is my site was banned for these 2 reasons and this is why Martell ain't talking:
1)Make pages for users, not for search engines.
2)Avoid "doorway" pages created just for search engines, or other "cookie cutter" approaches such as affiliate programs with little or no original content.
When you think about it, that's exactly what Martell is telling us to do. Your making optimized pages for search engine ranking rather than the user. Your also creating "original content" that is really a useless article that the user is not interested in so that it can be wrapped by advertising links that the user will click to get off your site and get to what he really was looking for. I think this will be the first of many attacks on what we can call content spam.
It's clear Martell's money comes from selling the book and then selling you hosting and templates. That's where his big cash is now. The affiliate stuff doesn't cut it and probably hasn't for a few years now. Think about it. With all his sites he had in the index and 90000 pages, you would think that he would have been a premium adsense advertiser since that more than beats the minimum requirements. Instead google made a change to their algo specifically targeting his sites. That says to me his adsense earnings were crap and google decided to sacrifice the revenue off his sites in order to "clean" the index. They would never do something like that with about.com which essentially uses the same model but are a premium advertiser. It sounds to me like Martell is nothing more than a con man who made his money selling the how to dream.
Posted: Sun May 01, 2005 8:16 am Post subject: Re: Why Martell's been banned by google.
I build sites JM style.
momotan wrote:
1)Make pages for users, not for search engines.
About 10 % of my visitors adds my site to their favorites. I don't know if this is good or bad. If my sites was filled with SE food only, I can't imagine anyone want to make return visits
momotan wrote:
2)Avoid "doorway" pages created just for search engines, or other "cookie cutter" approaches such as affiliate programs with little or no original content.
I've never heard or read Martell suggest building doorway pages. He is teaching the exact opposite - Create sites with LOTS of original content.
momotan wrote:
It's clear Martell's money comes from selling the book and then selling you hosting and templates. That's where his big cash is now.
This is what's scary about the Internet. Anyone can claim absolutely everything about anyone without concequence. Can you prove your allegations? If not I suggest that you make it clear that this is your own thoughts, not your knowledge. _________________ Ben Sather
http://www.a2-weight-loss.com/ http://www.a2-gold-jewelry.com/
P.S. Please pardon my English writing... (That's why I use Elance for content...)
Interesting post... You must have read a different eBook and listened to different Affiliate Buzz'z than I have!
What program are you using to pick up those 90,000 pages... I want to use it!
Read it... using it.... making $$$
All the Best,
Gary _________________ Gary
- ONE is to small of a number to be a success!
Learn HOW TO create targeted, focused Content for your website!--> http://webcontenttips.com - Join Our Weekly Newsletter
my guess why you and JM got banned is a little deeper than poor site design and 2nd rate content. I think because JM advertised so much that he knew how to get to the top of G, they decided to take out all 1st-in that had his linking structure and that included you.
My guess is that there are many on this forum that are using his methods and have not gotten banned. Am I right, anyone care to comment?
John _________________ Get Paid to Surf the Net Unbelievable but true. No cost, no buying, no surveys, do nothing different. In a world where you don't often find things that are too good to be true, this one is legit.
If being banned STOPS your income completely.... you need to relook at your business structure. If I'm reading right.... momotan you think it's perfectly fine to base ALL the TRAFFIC of your sites on ONE method -- free SE traffic.
Here's a bigger question to ask.
If I could not get into the FREE SE... how would you get traffic?
Banning makes no difference. Content is based upon everyone's interpretation... that includes the SE's.
All the Best,
Gary _________________ Gary
- ONE is to small of a number to be a success!
Learn HOW TO create targeted, focused Content for your website!--> http://webcontenttips.com - Join Our Weekly Newsletter
I am giving you google's reasons. It's clear they percieve the PAD pages as nothing more than doorway pages. That is why they mentioned it. Like I said, if you follow the Martell way by the book, then you will get whacked because they consider it content spam. No better than traffic equalizer pages in their eyes. If you do a combination method like i do with all my other sites which is more of a mixture of Martell for the seo and usefull stuff for the user rather then endless articles that mean nothing to them then you will be fine.
My take is that Google would have been happy to let his sites stay in the index had he not started to heavily advertise his methods. Google loves nothing more than "good content" in that they can turn around and sell that ad space to companies and claim, look at our network, it's full of quality sites. That way when you search for "hosting", the top 10 are not hosting companies but people reviewing hosting and conveniently most of them have adsense. If google was really interested into accuracy they would have hosting companies in the top 10 but that doesn't make money. To maximize revenues, better to have sites that grab the target traffic in free serps and then give them a place to click that brings some cash in.
The problem with Martell is he pretty much tells the world this is how you can make money and by extension Google makes it's money. When they were private that was ok. When they went public, scenarios like that are just what all the bloodsucking attorneys are looking for to pounce. I have no doubt that the order to whack his sites came from the legal department.
.. It's clear they percieve the PAD pages as nothing more than doorway pages. That is why they mentioned it. Like I said, if you follow the Martell way by the book, then you will get whacked because they consider it content spam.
The PAD technique is nothing new and been around for a long time... So I guess we should get rid of article directories?
Quote:
My take is that Google would have been happy to let his sites stay in the index had he not started to heavily advertise his methods. Google loves nothing more than "good content" in that they can turn around and sell that ad space to companies and claim, look at our network, it's full of quality sites.
Don't think they care... if they did they would return money to the advertisers for ALL the clicks to "crappy" content sites.
Quote:
If google was really interested into accuracy...
They should limit their index on only 1 billion pages and only the most relevant content "wins"... who decides what is relevant?
If you're selling a digital camera and have a wonderful review on it --- if that's what I want it's relevant. If your content tells me about what a digital camera is and I want to buy the camera.... is that relevant?
The reason I feel so STRONGLY THAT YOU"RE WRONG is I've seen purely good content sites whacked... HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM sounds like a machine and an algo to me!
Just thoughts....
All the Best, _________________ Gary
- ONE is to small of a number to be a success!
Learn HOW TO create targeted, focused Content for your website!--> http://webcontenttips.com - Join Our Weekly Newsletter
Joined: 09 Nov 2003 Posts: 86 Location: Langley, BC, Canada
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 4:02 am Post subject:
momotan,
Do you have any other "Martell style" sites that were banned with domain names other than a "1st-in" domain? The reason I ask is that I have a number of site that are pretty much by the book and have not been banned by any of the SE's. If your 1st-in site was the only one, it could have been "guilty by association" if James' 1st-in sites were in fact banned as a whole.
I don't think anyone, likely even James Martell himself, could say why they were banned with 100% confidence. There are just too many variables to be sure of the reason without knowing the ins and outs of the SE algorithms. I've seen a lot of 1st-in sites that were created by students of James Martell. It could even be possible that some of these other 1st-in sites contributed to the banning.
I think the number of 1st-in sites that were created by students of Martell's are a perfect example of why he doesn't publicize his sites any longer. The exposure brings imitators, and that could potentially cause problems. (I'm not saying your site was an imitator of any of his sites, just his series of domain names.)
I've been following the Martell system for about a year now and I have never read anywhere in his manual that the articles were supposed to be optimized for the SE's and useless to the reader. My understanding was that they were supposed to be optimized for the SE's and USEFUL to the readers.
If anyone following the system is writing useless articles, or having them written by someone else, I think they likely realize that. 99% of my content is outsourced, and if I receive a low-quality article, I know it is low-quality. Whether I choose to post it anyway or not is my own decision, not the result of the Martell training.
I agree with your post on one point. I do think that a lot of the content on some of James' 1st-in sites was pretty superficial, without any real benefit. My understanding of his updated manual and the information he provides on the Buzz is that he realizes this as well and is now creating much more valuable content than he used to.
When you say you're just giving us Google's reasons for the banning, that's fair. I don't think Google told you that Martell's money comes from selling the book, hosting, and templates, however, nor that he is nothing more than a con man. I don't think those comments are fair or accurate.
Joined: 09 Aug 2003 Posts: 1838 Location: Columbus, OH
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 2:10 pm Post subject:
Quote:
It's clear they percieve the PAD pages as nothing more than doorway pages
For being such a Martell advocate, I think you're confused on what are PAD pages.
These are the articles that you distribute to other websites, who post them on their sites with inbound links pointing to your site. These are not what Google classifys as "doorway" pages.
Doorways are pages on your site that you use to funnel SE traffic to specific pages of your choice. It is likely that Google's algos were tweaked and started picking up James "article pages" (not product pages) as doorways. I'm not saying I agree with this assesment, but the "article pages" were only linked to once on the entire site (Martells), on a page listing tons of these article pages.
This is extremely similiar to the linking structure to sites hosting other types of doorway pages. What's the solution? Link more naturally to these article pages; ie from other article pages, product pages, your homepage, etc. (From what I can gather, James is trying this out on his new sites and hasn't been affected by these algo changes). _________________ Robert
Instant Site Comments - Allow Visitors to Comment On Your Content! EbookNiches.com - 4 PLR Ebook Packages Each Month
Learn About DropShipping
I'm not choosing sides here, although, I do want to add a couple of comments for thought.
I have 6 JM sites and have followed the book still get the and Buzz. These sites are not making anything in the way of affiliate income - (Thank God for Adsense) or these sites would be worthless.
All I am saying is that I think the affiliate game has changed a bit since it started - which leads me to my second thought.
I would like to preface the following comments with this:
[ I like James and think that he must be a smart businessman, or he wouldn't be successful. ]
The one thing that has definately been on my mind lately, and makes sense, given the recent banning of most all of James' sites is this:
How could you lose most of your sites and still have a great income, as discussed on almost every Buzz? Thoughts anyone?
Here's my 2 cents - A couple thousand eBook sales @ $167 each = $334,000 plus lets say 1600 Buzz subscribers @ $9.95/month = $15,000 per month. -$180k/yr- (heck, that's a half a million US right there?!?) *** NOTE: This is just a WILD guess - please don't run around the net' saying this is what James' makes - it's just an estimate I threw out for discussion - I have no inside info on this ***
I am not casting judgement - I just wanted to throw this out there to see if I am the only one that has thought that the book and Buzz are probably the "big" part of his income, and that's why he wasn't hurt as bad as he could have been if the 1st-in sites were generating the bulk of his income.
(Sorry James, but it's the only thing that makes logical sense to me given the facts we've been given)
Wish we had more to go by, but it has been so quiet regarding the sites losing pagerank and getting de-listed.
What I will say is that I have learned a valuable lesson through building and optimizing my sites (which do get some traffic). Its the old, famous clique' ... "Don't put all of your eggs into one basket".
I think that this is especially true in internet marketing.
All I am saying is that I think the affiliate game has changed a bit since it started - which leads me to my second thought.
Andrew,
what are your thoughts on how the affiliate game is changing?
John _________________ Get Paid to Surf the Net Unbelievable but true. No cost, no buying, no surveys, do nothing different. In a world where you don't often find things that are too good to be true, this one is legit.
Joined: 09 Nov 2003 Posts: 86 Location: Langley, BC, Canada
Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 11:40 pm Post subject:
JustBuildIt wrote:
How could you lose most of your sites and still have a great income, as discussed on almost every Buzz? Thoughts anyone?
As far as I know, the sites were only banned from Google. There is probably still a significant amount of traffic coming through Yahoo and MSN. I've got one site that is built with the Martell system that gets probably 95% of its traffic from Yahoo, but has not been banned by Google. I have others that get almost all their traffic from Google.
I think your point about not putting all of your eggs in one basket is exactly right. Anyone who relies on Google too much - whether for free traffic, PPC traffic, Adsense income, or whatever - is putting all the eggs in the Google basket. If Google changes something or decides your site is breaking a rule, they can wipe you out.
I think this also applies to how you build your sites and run your business. If you follow a single system, whether Martell, SBI, or something else, without continuing to learn and try new things, you're at the mercy of the "gurus" who are leading you. If they don't tell you what to do next, what to try, or what to change, you're liable to miss some big opportunities.
I happen to think that James Martell's system is the easiest to follow and most thorough of any that I have read, but that hasn't stopped me from personalizing the way I build my sites. The underlying framework is based on his methods, but I make changes and test new things as I learn them, whether from his updates or from other sources. Realistically, his system is not unique to him anyway. There are plenty of other authorities in this field that do things in much the same way. He just happens to sell an ebook that - for me at least - puts it all together in a way that is easiest to follow.
He may very well make the bulk of his income from his training products. Personally, I don't think that is the case, but even if it were, he would be in the same boat as far as having all his eggs in one basket.
With the topic of his site bannings coming up on this board fairly regularly, anyone searching for info on his book is liable to come across it. I don't really frequent any other affiliate marketing boards, but odds are there are discussions in other places too. If there is enough "bad press" his sales could conceivably start to drop off. I think it would be much more difficult to replace lost revenue from his affiliate training empire than it would be to build some new sites and replace the income from the ones that were banned.
That went a lot longer than I expected, so I guess this was more like my 50 cents worth
I think the affiliate game has changed a great deal in the past few years.
On the positive side, companies like CJ (Commission Juction) have given us more opportunities to choose from. And AdSense sure has made it simple to monetize every page quickly and on theme.
My hunch (and it IS only a hunch), is that years ago, it was a fairly limited game so the ones that figured it out early on (both publishers and product companies) benefited from the limited # of competitors.
Now, almost every "real" theme site has affiliate links and AdSense on it - so payout amounts seem to have decreased on certain items while other items have become "overcrowded"
I'm just saying that, as with any business, it takes staying on top of the everchanging systems that are needed to succeed.
John said it best with:
"Anyone who relies on Google too much - whether for free traffic, PPC traffic, Adsense income, or whatever - is putting all the eggs in the Google basket. If Google changes something or decides your site is breaking a rule, they can wipe you out. "
That's all I meant - While it used to be easier to put a site together, get traffic and convert it to cash, Google and others have "tighted the reigns" so to speak on businesses building sites like JM's and others.
James definately stays on top of this - but my new take on his business model is that it will take a "continuous pour" as he refers to adding content on a regular basis to stay ahead of the algorithm changes - so, sites built today, may very well provide income for some time, but I would not expect them to last for 5-10 years. _________________ Andrew C.
Joined: 09 Aug 2003 Posts: 1838 Location: Columbus, OH
Posted: Tue May 03, 2005 2:56 am Post subject:
JustBuildIt wrote:
(Sorry James, but it's the only thing that makes logical sense to me given the facts we've been given)
Regardless if his 1st-in sites were banned from Google, they're still making money. Say he has 100 banned 1st-in sites, for example. If each makes $3 a day (Yahoo and MSN traffic), that's still a healthy $300 a day, or over $100,000 a year.
James started working on a new group of sites while the 1st-in series was alive and well, and I've personally seen over 40 of them.
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 Posts: 6231 Location: by the beach, Australia
Posted: Tue May 03, 2005 10:59 pm Post subject:
John Lenaghan wrote:
As far as I know, the sites were only banned from Google. There is probably still a significant amount of traffic coming through Yahoo and MSN.
That's possible. I have an experimental site which is being penalized by Google. It's main traffic source is MSN, with Yahoo! next.
However, I wouldn't mind betting that MSN and Yahoo! will improve their algorithms and the whole scene will change again. _________________ Allan Gardyne
AssociatePrograms.com - You're here. Explore it!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Your host: Allan Gardyne. Earning a good living from affiliate
programs since 1998.
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
The site was a 1st-in site. The official response from google is my site was banned for these 2 reasons and this is why Martell ain't talking:
or these sites would be worthless.
- A couple thousand eBook sales @ $167 each = $334,000 plus lets say 1600 Buzz subscribers @ $9.95/month = $15,000 per month. -$180k/yr- (heck, that's a half a million US right there?!?) *** NOTE: This is just a WILD guess - please don't run around the net' saying this is what James' makes - it's just an estimate I threw out for discussion - I have no inside info on this ***
