Help, Losing Money!

Strange things happening. I work for a company who relys very heavily on google rankings to generate business. Lots of employees etc. Anyway we lost our google ranking seemingly put of the blue last week and our sales enquiries have diminished from 150 a day to 1 to 3 a day. We could all be out of work by christmas. So how did it happen. Our site designer alleges deliberate sabotage by a dmoz editor who wishes to gave an advantage to a competitior of ours. Frankly, thats why I am posting here as I was not really aware of dmoz until now.
I have submitted an abuse report to dmoz and have had no reply but when I check the status I am told that the matter is resolved.
ID: abb69868164a96394791714aef087069

the site that seems to have been removed from dmoz is www.antleroffice.co.uk
Strangely (well it seems to me) www.antler-office.co.uk still has a good page rank in the google toolbar.


The thing is, I am surprised that people could have the power to remove a site from dmoz without as far as I can see any accountabilty. At the minute were losing tens of thousands of pounds and we genuinely could be facing losing our jobs before christmas.

Any help, advice, (abuse even) from anyone whatsoever would be appreciated.

Thanks
Ken

Both sites are the same -- why would we want to list both?

I have to be honest -- if your business could be affected that badly by the simple removal of a mirror listing, you've got some serious business operation issues that are, frankly, not our problem. http://www.antleroffice.co.uk/ isn't going to be relisted (and, in fact, it hasn't been listed for over a year). Your company is more than adequately represented in the directory.

Whatever happened last week is unrelated to the ODP.

We specifically prohibit submissions of mirror sites - please refer to http://www.dmoz.org/add.html - I believe you are required to read that page as part of the site suggestion process

where the possible consequences are outlined

Do not submit URLs that contain only the same or similar content as other sites you may have listed in the directory. Sites with overlapping and repetitive content are not helpful to users of the directory. Multiple submissions of the same or related sites may result in the exclusion and/or deletion of those and all affiliated sites.

I'm frankly surprised that people are willing to jeopardize their listings by spamming us. The abuse does not lie with the editors.

motsa has already explained why http://www.antleroffice.co.uk/ shall not be listed in DMOZ. Your Google rankings have dropped because this site is not being indexed by Google. They are getting quite efficient at removing duplicate content. To be impartial and objective in site reviews, the editors can not consider any financial implications resulting from a listing in DMOZ.

Yes, it is highly unlikely that an ODP change (for whatever reason) a year ago suddenly started affecting Google. Rather, Google is always tweaking their index for their own reasons.

**the following post is a personal opinion and relates to google and NOT dmoz**

google recently made a major tweak, one that is very strict about duplicate content...

its also rumored to have tighten up its ability to spot keyword stuffing and text shoved right at the bottom of a web-page in a light font on a light background..... familiar?

On top of that it helps your google ranking if your pages are nice and tight and validate - something that as a UK website is very important considering the DDA and accesibility laws applying to companies offering services or information online.

**this post is a personal opinion and relates to google and NOT dmoz**

I have to seriously wonder about the viability of any business whose survival and business plan revolves around how well it does in search engine rankings.

I certainly don't trust my business' success to the viccissitudes of another company's whims (except possibly my bank )

Google has indeed been tweaking it's engine of late to the great consternation of many trying to "game" the system.

Our site designer alleges deliberate sabotage by a dmoz editor who wishes to gave an advantage to a competitior of ours.

Click to expand...

We see this on a regular basis, people who have no real understanding of how the ODP works decide that the best strategy is an attack strategy, so they attack our integrity, accusing unnamed editors of "sabotage" and "being unethical" when in fact, that is not the case. Why is it not the case? Because more than 200 editors - situated around the world and representing all sorts of interests -- can edit in any given category, thus making it exceedingly difficult for your site designer's scenario to come true.

If this were my personal forum, which it is not, I would offer the following challenge: have your site designer to register here, using his or her real name, and make the same accusation -- then we would let the courts decide. I'm sure the folks who are in charge of this forum would rather that not happen. So, since it is not my forum, I can't suggest that course of action, but if you are at all curious, you might want to ask your designer if they are confident enough of that accusation to stand behind it in a court of law -- or is he/she just blowing smoke after getting caught by Google?

Oh well.

Sabotage is hardly plausible if the company is still listed.

But the site designer's own deception may have caused him trouble -- when the ODP editor spotted the mirror sites, the mirror that was removed may not have been the one the DSD intended. (But, according to the ODP policies, BOTH URLs could have been removed, as a penalty! So far the deceit has not been penalized.)

However, if the URL that is listed is not the one that your deceitful friend prefers, tell him to set up a 301 (permanent redirect) from the listed URL to his preferred URL. Then make an "update URL" suggestion. The combination makes it almost certain that an editor will look at it (with a view towards changing the URL.)

(But tell him, DON'T, repeat louder, D-O-N-'-T, try to re-suggest other "related URLs" instead. The penalty is lurking, and we're onto him!)

I must thank you all for posting. I must say that my company are not experts in this and so have to rely solely on our web designer for an explanation of how this all works, and tbh, I think hes being economical with the truth. What some of you have posted here makes a hell of a lot more sense than what he is telling us.

If www.antleroffice.co.uk was removed from dmoz a year ago and our google ranking was fine until just over a week ago then his insistence that is a dmoz issue is perhaps untrue?.

I have asked him many times would we better off with paid adverts on google but he has always been adamant that we should not worry.

Maybe we need a new web guy?

Again thx for your input much appreciated.

hutcheson said:

mirror that was removed may not have been the one

Click to expand...

I think the designer was not so smart when he installed mirrors in the first place. If you spread your rankings (google, msn, or others) for the same data to two or more addresses, all of them will be much lower than for just one. Yes, we also discourage and delete mirror listings, but it's first and primarily a matter of your own intelligence...

hutcheson said:

Yes, it is highly unlikely that an ODP change (for whatever reason) a year ago suddenly started affecting Google.

Click to expand...

Its worth pointing out Ken that many sites survive very well without dmoz - I've had sites rejected from dmoz but they still rank highley in google.

kenheaven]If [url]www.antleroffice.co.uk[/url said:

was removed from dmoz a year ago and our google ranking was fine until just over a week ago then his insistence that is a dmoz issue is perhaps untrue?.

Click to expand...

Almost certainly - google seem to be picking up edits that i have made about two months after i make them... a whole year i would be very unusual.

kenheaven said:

Maybe we need a new web guy?

Click to expand...

I'd say that was a rather fair assesement, there are no standards for web designers, but there are "reccomendations" for web design. It's increasingly important in the UK to employ a designer who is familiar with these reccomendations and can implement them.

I can't make any reccomendations about individual designers but there are some non-profit organisations in the UK intrested in accessible and compliant design

http://www.gawds.org/

http://www.ukwda.org/

are two and if you can handle the technical side read the reccomendations at W3C

http://www.w3.org/

However at dmoz its all about unique content - even if you created a fully compliant site it may never ever get listed in dmoz on the other hand a badly designed site that breaks apart can get a listing if it has unique content.

kenheaven said:

I must say that my company are not experts in this and so have to rely solely on our web designer for an explanation of how this all works

Click to expand...

I am just rendering a guess, but maybe he doesn't really know either

kenheaven said:

I have submitted an abuse report to dmoz and have had no reply but when I check the status I am told that the matter is resolved.

Click to expand...

I am curious as to how/why it was felt that an abuse report needed to be filed? Before I would allow my company to file a complaint/abuse report against another person, I would personally want to make sure that all the facts were straight and accurate and not just fly off with wild-unwarranted accusations upon another person without knowing 100% that I was in the right. Sorry if that sounds angry, but now a group of investigators have had their time wasted investigating a non-event and more importantly an editor (or group of editors) were wrongfully accused of actions that didn't exist.

Two issues here: one, the mirror sites. On the one hand, it's a rather small contribution to spam, but it is spam none the less. We deal with that, the net is filled with malicious spam. And some people may not realize how much they are imitating the scams, frauds, fake businesses, and the like when they purchase two similar domains and put related (non-interlinked) content on them. "Which is the REAL company, and which is scraper fraud? -- or is there a real company at all?" is the question which any informed surfer will ask -- and it is a rhetorical question, there can be no possible satisfactory answer. That seems obvious to me, but I'm amazed how many people it's NOT obvious to!

That may be just complete BUSINESS cluelessness (but the guy is being paid for website development, not business consulting, right?) or it may be that most of the guy's other business is internet frauds, and therefore the legitimate-but-faux-fraudulent-mirror may be the technique he knows best. There's perhaps less to judge there than might seem at first glimpse.

As for the "blame it on the ODP" -- well, editors tend to take that personally, for obvious reasons. But again that is sometimes (often?) ignorance and not direct malice. The guy may not have been watching his ODP listings -- which is more a sign of honesty than dishonesty -- and may not have noticed the disappearance of the duplicate listing -- at the time. Again, ignorance or neglect of SEO doesn't necessarily make a web developer evil. But -- and this is a big but: I would never trust anyone whose first impulse is to CONFIDENTLY accuse someone ELSE of deceit -- that tells you too much about what they would have done themselves in the same position.

Now, when someone claims to be an SEO professional, and then shows he doesn't understand how the ODP works -- he's incompetent or fraudulent, pure and simple, because understanding the ODP is such a simple and basic part of SEO skills. But that may be a different issue.

Now, when someone claims to be an SEO professional, and then shows he doesn't understand how the ODP works -- he's incompetent or fraudulent, pure and simple, because understanding the ODP is such a simple and basic part of SEO skills.

Click to expand...

Well that just about covers the 95% of SEO professionals who think ODP is a marketing tool. You are better off not using an SEO professional to suggest your site to DMOZ - the vast majority do more harm than good to their customers.

oneeye said:

You are better off not using an SEO professional to suggest your site to DMOZ - the vast majority do more harm than good to their customers.

Click to expand...

Your often better off not using one at all! (but thats just my own opinion) Any experienced designer/developer knows how to create a site that #1 serves it audience and #2 is accessible to search engines. If SEO tricks are the answer why do we none of their tactics on websites like the BBC, Government Sites, Banking Sites etc.

Everything there is to know about submitting to DMOZ can be found here or in the submission guidelines.

and everything there is to know about submitting to Google or MSN or Yahoo can be found on their own sites.

Your often better off not using one at all!

Click to expand...

It does pay to learn at least the rudiments yourself. Enough to know whether you are being spun BS at least. Especially if your business is dependent on getting it right. But becoming expert at it takes a hell of a lot of time and patience especially as the search engines change things so frequently. But that is about search engines, for DMOZ knowing SEO is useless and in many cases potentially dangerous if you can't switch off the "must hype" braincell.

oneeye said:

Enough to know whether you are being spun BS at least. Especially if your business is dependent on getting it right.

Click to expand...

I agree with learning to spot the BS, the sad truth about the web design industry is that anyone can set themselves up in it... actually that is the beauty of it beauty too!

I honestly believe that other than a number of small but innocent "tricks" (creative but rational use of H1 tags and document structure, clean and logical site structure, informative links and smooth but not stuffed use of keywords in real content) that there is not much else to know.

Sadly some people seem to mystify the "Much Else" and charge people a fortune for it.

It's interesting that google strives to create an algorithim that favours content and penalises "spammy practices" i'm sure one day they will get close - they will of course be years behind DMOZ, google is fine for a mass carpet bomb of a search but if i want to get straight to unique and good information DMOZ is my first stop.

SEO is not about tricks, if it's being done ethically. SEO, like ODP, has been given an unfair bad rep by some. Sadly though, there are some unethical practioners and that is where tricks and not tactics are employed.

SEO, for example, is about title, file structure, image naming, etc. to wit you're correct, any decent designer should have a good enough working knowledge of to get along well with search engines. For those not up to speed or for a novice site owner, SEO can make a huge difference.

It's not fair to label all of SEO as tricks no more than it would be to label ODP as corrupt.

Don't Whine

I used to be one of the folks that actually believed that the world revolves around DMOZ. I also did not understand why I could not have my Web Design site and my computer repair Site included.

I now realize that DMOZ is a small part of what makes the web go around. You want your site to be in the search engines do not wait for DMOZ editors go out and promote the site. The first thing is add good relavent content. Content is the key to sucess and of course the hardest to do and that is why it is valued.

Look at it this way do you go to a library to get advertisment? No, probably not. However you would go to the library for a magazine with usefull articles that has advertisment. The web is the same way stop making websites that are nothing more than commercials and put some usefull information and the rest will follow.

By the way my second site has a PR of 3 and is not included in DMOZ. I also have other sites that I submit but never depend on DMOZ editors that would be foolish.