This was posted over at SEO Book and is an interesting read: Search relevancy algorithms are ever changing, but I recently snagged a good example of Google placing significant weight on exact matching domain names. When you search Google for search engine history there are over 20,000 exact phrase match pages and over 90,000,000 matching pages. The #6 result in this screenshot is SearchEngineHistory.com, which is a site that I never really developed. It has no inbound links on Yahoo!, Google, or MSN (as you can see on this screenshot and that one).

Also worth noting that SearchEngineHistory.com is a single page site, and with NO link authority it outranks a LifeHacker post that has the exact matching phrase in a page title (and LifeHacker is an extremely authoritative site).

Why could Google trust domain matches so much? Because they are often associated with brands which protect their trademarks more vigilantly than in the past, and there are so many domainers and so much vc money placing premiums on domain names. To get an exact matching domain it is probably going to cost you something (either lots of money or the foresight to be an early believer in a new field), so that in and of itself is some sign of quality.

There has been an article posted about the large number of dead pages in Google. I don’t think much of it. It only makes sense for the largest index to have the most dead pages. It’s going to happen. In a quick test of 42 competitive keywords, there were no 404 errors in the top ten results. To me, it doesn’t matter if there is a high influx of 404 or “dead” pages. Just as long as the search results are solid, which they are.

Andy Hagans posted his “Beating the Google Sandbox” article. Members of the SEO Revolution will get my commentary on this article in a few days based on our updated testing results.

Updated: July 6, 2009

Death of AdSense?
Now, I don’t profess to be a “guru” with AdSense by any means, but I do fairly well. There is a report floating around that many of you have asked my comments about, so while I watched football yesterday, I downloaded the report and read the PDF – 18 pages in all. It was a quick read.

< Report no longer available >

Here are my thoughts on the report:

The “real” information isn’t in the report – it is one of those “to be continued …” things. Hey, I hated getting those when I watched the “Batman” series as a kid, what makes you think I am going to like it now?

I should state that I don’t know Scott Boulch, and this is the first time that I have heard of him.

When I first read the report, it screamed of “Link Bait” – and we will have to wait until the 21st when the second part of the report hits the streets. Citing the AdSense “died” in November 2005 doesn’t match with the earning reports that I have: not in CTR, CPM or Total Earnings. Nor does it match those who I called to ask about the “death” of their earnings.

Stating that an advertiser who pays $10.00 per click in search and only 5 cents in the Content Network is misleading, as that advertiser may be #1 on the search side, but #40 on the Content side. This is not an “apples to apples” comparison.

Reference to Google “Big Daddy” Update. Um, “Big Daddy” is a datacenter, not an update. Whoops.

Showing off checks proving “earnings is a bad move.

To me, the examples that are given on why AdSense is dead are very poor. The sites that AdSense revenue was being generated was “garbage, machine generated sites and content”. Of course AdSense revenue has fallen off. What did you expect? Google is on a mission to “punt” MFA sites as quickly as they can. Were there stats shown that showed the traffic levels on the domains in question the same, but the revenue earned fallen off? No. Instead, a simple statement of “3,000 websites generating barely $500.00 per month”. For all we know, nearly all of the sites were banned for scraped, spam content. This just smells of “gloom and doom” preaching that the “sky is falling” and a pitch is coming shortly about a new “money making system” that cannot fail.

Let’s shift gears and let me share with you why I believe showing off checks is a bad move. First of all, it can be taken as bragging, or other ways that it wasn’t intended to do. Next, what is their motivation for showing you these checks? Do you know how they were made? What was the basis? How much money was spent to make this check? Why am I skeptical?

That’s simple.

Back about 15 years ago, I was “recruited” by a neighbor to attend a “workshop” that he was giving. He wanted me there to observe and give him feedback on his presentation. I agreed. What was really happening was I was being railroaded at a network marketing meeting and I wasn’t there to observe, rather I was there as a prospect.

Nice.

In their bid to “win me over” and convince me to sell their overpriced skin care products, they mentioned this single mom who was earning $30,000 a month. The “closer” actually said to me, “If a single mom could do it, anyone could, so why not you?” He even showed me a photo copy of the check and the amount was over $30,000.

Hmmm. Interesting. I recognized the name on the check.

“If she is so successful, why is she living at home and her parents are essentially supporting her and paying for her living expenses, including a nanny?” They were shocked. “How do you know this?” Easy. She’s my cousin.

It turns out she was, in fact, pulling $30,000+ a month, but she was spending more than that to earn it. Why? Because it made a great story. Her upline reassured her that if enough people heard her story and saw the check, they would all be convinced and jump on board. It was to be a great closer. And it was – just not to me who knew better.

When you see large checks, or outlandish claims, don’t get swept in the emotion of it. Settle down, think about what their motivation is, and ask the right questions. One of my personal favorite questions to a “big time” MLM is, “That’s a nice check, may I see your tax returns?” What comes up next is usually a creative back peddle excuse, filled with lots of “ums”, shifting eyes, and their head swiveling trying to locate the nearest exit.

Just remember, just because someone makes a claim of earnings, doesn’t make it true, and more often than not, they will show you outlandish earnings in hope of creating emotion inside of you to mask your better judgment.

Update July 6, 2009: My aunt, the mother of the “single mom” referenced above, called me this morning stating the above wasn’t true and demanding to know where i received the information. Mind you, the call was made before 7am (nice manners). The copy of the check was shown to me by an independent company representative in 1989, whose name I obviously can’t remember as it occurred 20 years ago. But the information about her living with her parents and having her expenses paid for was given to me by my late father. He spoke to his sister often. The information about supporting her daughter, even though she was a “Blue Diamond” in this company was told to my father by my aunt.

She, of course, denied this.

When I asked my aunt how my father could have so greatly misunderstood, she stated that he must have had some type of mental disorder. She also warned me that I better have a good attorney because she was going to sue me for slander.

That’s when I lost it. My father was a great man and he had no reason to speak ill of another unless it was true. He did not have a mental disorder and loved his siblings. He didn’t always agree with what they did, but he loved them, and to have his memory disrespected, well, I wasn’t going to put up with it. I basically told my aunt to “Shut Up” and then her husband got on the phone and told him not to call back.

Slander? Please. I just checked my stats and this post has received 7 views in the last three years. 7. I guess no one cares about this subject.

I don’t have an issue with my cousin Lisa, in fact, I like Lisa. I was just using her story as a point that when people start showing off checks to prove that an opportunity is “golden” that it probably isn’t. If Lisa has an issue, she should call me, not call her mom and have her mom call me. If you dispute the information, make a comment on the Blog and it can be discussed, but don’t call me early in the morning and bark at me that my father has a mental disorder and that is the reason he said you supported your daughter financially.

I believe my father. Period.