>The first spider will place your site pretty much like it always did, but the second >one is looking for links to that new submission from other sites in their database. >If there is not a hunddred or so -- bye bye -- it's the old 22%. By that do you mean they delete the listing, or merely drop it to a low position? If it is the latter, go cultivate the Web, get some good links, and watch the rankings rise. See my post on the GATECH surveys: users report that they find sites via links from Web pages AS OFTEN as they find them directly from a search engine. You might not notice that pattern because you haven't bothered to cultivate links from other sites, but the oldest site I manage has 400+ links from other sites, and they account for 60% of the traffic. I continue to look for good places for links, and continue to work on the content.
>The reason this is such a good way to stop small guys is, now that you know, >now what? How are you going to find 100 pages already indexed to link from? You search on various engines for pages that are complementary to yours. Then you request that they link to yours, politely, and tell them why it would be beneficial to them to do so. Or, you create content that is SO GOOD that they will seek you out and link to yours without your asking. It's actually not hard to get 100 or more links to a page with good content, since the search engines will count personal pages with links as well as big sites with links.
>Even if you have that many sites in there (which I do) it takes way too long to justify >the time. For someone guaranteeing high rankings and expecting immediate results, yes. For someone whose clients accept that it will take 4-6 months to build traffic and links patterns, no. And I make sure my clients understand that they have to be in it for the long run, not a quick profit.
>There goes freedom and equal opportunity and the >whole time they have the perfect propaganda. >"It's not about the money, we're only trying to provide >better results to our searchers" I have discovered that the more independent links to a site, in whatever field, the better the site usually is ... consider all the links aimed here, for example. (shamelessly sucking up to the host again). Or all the links to here, for that matter: http://www.english.upenn.edu/~jlynch/18th/
>SUPPORT FREEDOM ON THE INTERNET! You mean support your ability to sell Infoseek rankings? I'm a bit cynical, but your annoyance at Infoseek's change in tactics seems to be directly related to your ability to bill clients for placing them high in the listings. The web is a rapidly changing marketplace: adapt or die.