you said the same thing before

I could dig up hundreds of thousands of "reasons why our business failed" that have nothing to do with Google. You make it seem like Google is on some sort of crusade against small businesses, which they are not, unless you carefully plot the story together with hand picked examples. Sorry but still don't buy it.

per your examples above:

1) Company had built a lucrative business model on Google's back and subsequently failed

2) Company had built a lucrative business model on Google's back and subsequently failed

3)Company had built a lucrative business model on Google's back and subsequently failed 

Why should Google be held accountable for another process in a natural Business Cycle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cycle)

Focus on SMALL BUSINESSES HURT - not me

Hi Steve, 

 

This is NOT about me. PR agencies are still asking bloggers to publish useful content that has a link to their client in the bio. THEY are going to get their clients slapped with an unnatural link penalty because they do not know about nofollow and neither does the average blogger. 

 

The point is Google penalizes small businesses that never hired a PR or SEO agency and never built links. They hide their products in Google product search. They send them worthless traffic and don't show their businesses or products for the money phrases in organic search. They intentionally created a zero sum winner-take-all game with AdWords. 

 

Google is DANGEROUS and while I do NOT expect SEOs or anyone else to publicly go against Google because to do so invites penalties, it is high time people quit defending Google's practices and insisting that only those who intentionally or even accidentally broke the rules deserve to end up with their employees in unemployment lines and losing what they built over years - often 10-12+ years. 

 

Businesses that are 100% innocent of any wrongdoing ARE being damaged. SEOs need to stop claiming that never happens. That recovering from unnatural links penalties is almost impossible is evident: 

 

Any time spent trying to recover a site that has been penalized is a waste of money. Even Michael Gray changed domains. That is how his site "recovered". 

 

Barry Schwartz on SEO Roundtable: Only 15% Say The Disavow Tool Benefits Their Rankings

 

“If you got hit by a penalty for bad links you’re probably looking at 6 months to a year to recover after you clean things up.” ~ Google spokesperson John Mueller in his Closing Keynote at SMX Israel.

 

Anyone who blames the victims of Google is making this situation worse. 

Focus on SMALL BUSINESSES HURT - not me

Hi Steve, 

 

This is NOT about me. PR agencies are still asking bloggers to publish useful content that has a link to their client in the bio. THEY are going to get their clients slapped with an unnatural link penalty because they do not know about nofollow and neither does the average blogger. 

 

The point is Google penalizes small businesses that never hired a PR or SEO agency and never built links. They hide their products in Google product search. They send them worthless traffic and don't show their businesses or products for the money phrases in organic search. They intentionally created a zero sum winner-take-all game with AdWords. 

 

Google is DANGEROUS and while I do NOT expect SEOs or anyone else to publicly go against Google because to do so invites penalties, it is high time people quit defending Google's practices and insisting that only those who intentionally or even accidentally broke the rules deserve to end up with their employees in unemployment lines and losing what they built over years - often 10-12+ years. 

 

Businesses that are 100% innocent of any wrongdoing ARE being damaged. SEOs need to stop claiming that never happens. That recovering from unnatural links penalties is almost impossible is evident: 

 

Any time spent trying to recover a site that has been penalized is a waste of money. Even Michael Gray changed domains. That is how his site "recovered". 

 

Barry Schwartz on SEO Roundtable: Only 15% Say The Disavow Tool Benefits Their Rankings

 

“If you got hit by a penalty for bad links you’re probably looking at 6 months to a year to recover after you clean things up.” ~ Google spokesperson John Mueller in his Closing Keynote at SMX Israel.

 

Anyone who blames the victims of Google is making this situation worse. 

Search Results

I hate to keep harping on it, but the results you see in Google are the popular results, not the accurate results.

What does this mean? If there are trillions of pieces of information out there on the Internet, and Google magically comes up with a result to your query in a split second, did those results come from the trillions of pieces of information? Or did they come from the same generic responses you always see on the front page? Popular results are a real benefit for Google. As long as a person getting the result sees a result...and as long as that result appears to be the right result (not necessarily the accurate result)...then Google keeps everyone believing that they have an amazing Algorythm. But if there are trillions of pieces of information out there and only 1 tenth of one percent of those results are popular by Google's standards (already found by the public like ebay/amazon), then those are the only results Google needs to carry/index and so answers come instantly. You don't find that obscure blogger that really did have the best price you were after.

So in essence humanity is being dummied down by what amounts to a nifty encyclopedia britanica called Google (not really artificial intelligence). We are not always getting accurate answers but believe we are. Datacenters are prestocked with the popular websites, and that's what you get in that split second..which is very easy for Google to do. So although Greywolf may have some accurate observations on SEO, if he's not deemed "Google" popular, he isn't in the index and we are all that much more ignorant about SEO because of it.

If you understand the limitations of the program, you stop seeing Google as the all-knowing OZ with a human personailty out to get you. Instead you see it for what it is. A flawed program that will eventually be replaced by humans.

 

Resolved!

A Google+ staffer left a comment on Rand's thread to let him know that the notice was an error caused by a bug. The warning has been removed and they are working to fix the bug.

I agree but....

I agree, but, why hasn't Google in any of this action against MBG mention the absense of NF? I mean if that was the lynchpin then why not state it? I think they wanted to send a larger mesage about guest blogging in general.

Becasue that would remove the

Becasue that would remove the FUD

One thing I struggle to

One thing I struggle to understand: Were we actually WORTH THE EFFORT? They clearly scraped the database, took some time to get ready (Matt was teasing us for a while), now there will be reconsideration requests, etc... WHY???? To prove what????

Just for the scare act? Aren't we scared enough?

Is guest blogging really such a big deal? Well, if you scale it (by paying money for placements, then yeah, probably) but any member of MBG would state that actually getting through the quality guidelines was a huge pain in the @ss each time! It was not scalable! We were not making any huge difference?!

All they proved is that people should go under the hood: All the shady services that were not investing into the brand (unlike us) are flourishing! So what exactly did they prove? :)

Also, love this rant: https://plus.google.com/+RobWagner/posts/cu84qT9Tjmc

:)

agreed

I think they simply decided that as a big player, MBG was a perfect candidate to make an example of, generating more FUD. The fact that the fallout would hurt a lot of innocent sites was characteristically written off as "acceptable losses".Poking the bear didn't help, but I honestly don't think Ann was targeted because of that. I think MBG was marked long before her post or Matt's tweet were thought of.

I Still Don't Get It

Hi all... I'm new here - thanks for having me!

I just did a post on my blog where I walk through all my steps and thoughts in attempt to make sense of this action against MBG - and I almost thought I got it to make sense.... until one thing that GOOGLE does totally confused me even more - then it was just Facepalm City for me.

Do as they say, not as they do, right?  Sheeeesh....

Jennifer