Paul Burke wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2005 09:27:29 -0600, "Mikkel Møldrup-Lakjer"
> <mikkel@fabel.dk> wrote:
>
>>"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> skrev i en meddelelse
>>dcqgg2$2c38$3@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk">news:dcqgg2$2c38$3@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk...
>>>
>>> Have a look at the following. I noticed it appearing in an MSN SERP:
>>>
>>> http://www.successischildsplay.com/inspirationalpoemsuccess/
>>>
>>> For a given term, it has been moving around the top 10 for quite some
>>> time.
>>> This page is a linkbase with content that is ripped off other Web sites.
>>> There are plenty of such sites, but they rarely appear among the top
>>> results in good search engines.
>>
>>Is MSN considered a good search engine? (No sarcasm, honest question).
>>
>>Mikkel
>>
>
> It all depends if you rank high in the SERPS.
> If you rank high, then you love the search engine that you appear in.
> Human nature.
>
> As it is, I do rank high in MSN, so to me, yes MSN is good. <G>
That's quite true. Everyone favours the search engine that 'coopererates'.
My experience has taught that MSN will have much greater impact for content
that is not technical. In other words, if your site ranks very well for
keywords like 'matlab' or 'java' in MSN, do not expect many referrals.
In terms of quality of results, I haven't checked too carefully. I keep
track of 5 separate SERP's and in just about all of these SERP's (probably
all) Google gets it right whereas MSN does not. What does "right" mean? In
my particular case, I know the significance of the narrow set of pages
which correspond with to search terms. I know what ranks are most valuable
to the person searching . I am familiar with all the pages that are
returned, which probably makes it a good case study.
Roy
|
|
