Google Sandbox Defined = Yea Right!
By Igor Mordkovich on Jun 9, 2006 in Google, Link Building, General, SEO
This is, in my opinion one of the most controversial topics for Search engine optimizers. The “Google Sandbox”. Some say it’s there, some say it’s a myth.
Quick recap for those who have no idea what Google sandbox is believed to be. (People believe that Google employs a Sandbox effect in their algorithm as new websites take a long time before Google shows them in their search results … for keywords other than the name of the site being searched for)
Anyway. There is a good thread ad the SeoMoz.org blog about Google sandbox issue.
Here is my take on the Google sandbox. Yes, there is some sort of a “delay” period before you will see good ranking on Google for your new site, BUT I don’t think Google engineers place a code that says …. “If site is = less than 7 months old, then it will be on pages 800 in Google results”. That would be silly.
To me it seems that Google is cautious about new sites. If your site is brand spanking new, Google will wait to see what other sites say about you (quality incoming links).
Think about it … if every new site would fall into this “trap” that means that Google would be outdated. New innovative technology sites would be trapped and at the end of the day (aren’t you tired of this “end of the day” phrase people use 24/7), Google would be considered as a “Slow to show info” site.
What makes the delay process seem like a sandbox? Few things.
- Age of links (the more authority the site has that links to you, the less you’ll wait until you get all the juice from that link)
- Your domain expiration date. (Yes ladies and gentlemen … Google looks at this as well)
- The speed at which your new site gets links. (No … slower is not better. If you get 200 poor quality links, Google will “punish” you, BUT if those 200 links are related to news and they are quality … you’re in good shape.) Note: They can’t all be good high quality links or it won’t look natural.
Look … Google admitted having about 200 different methods to determine how to rank a site, we can’t place all the weight on just 3 that we know or feel most comfortable with. Want to avoid the SANDBOX? Think natural quality.
I will not be surprised if people will disagree on this issue. You know why? Because it’s not a scientific study. No one came out and proved the sandbox. We speak from what we see in our own SEO efforts.
In my experience …. the more authority and quality you get on the net, the less of a delay you’ll experience. (oh and it also depends on your industry and TREND).
Yep, sounds about right to me. The fact is that there IS a sandbox effect, not intentional per se, but what it does Google likes. I think one can still do everything “right” and still be sand boxed, ’cause ultimately that is up to Google, but there are smart ways to avoid or limit it’s impact.
St0n3y | Jun 12, 2006 | Reply
Stoney, it’s just that sometimes it’s silly that one authority would say “There is NO Sandbox” and wow, now they got themselves some PR going. It creates a buzz for them and now everyone again remembers who they are and what they said.
It seems as if we need our B.S. filters to recognize when something is being said for the purpose of quality information and when it’s just a controversial Buzz/PR.
Igor M. | Jun 12, 2006 | Reply
I think the people arguing this will largely be in agreement with exception to the terminology they use. There is no deliberate sandbox but there is an aging delay for links. Now, I seriously doubt that anybody can circumvent that 100% of the time as the article seems to suggest, but there aer ways around it, for the right sites in the right industries, doing the right things.
St0n3y | Jun 13, 2006 | Reply