So the rules have changed. The gurus will just figure out new ways to boost the ratings. It keeps us on our toes and the search engine 'experts' in business.

There's some truth to the Google claim of stopping gaming, but their degree of success appears to vary. If you Google "Los Angeles advertising agency" I come out as the first entry which is reasonably reasonable since I run an advertising agency in Los Angeles.

Considering how many ad agencies there are in L. A., however, I'm not sure that #2 should be a "Russian Advertising agency" (the same outfit comes out relatively high for 'advertising agency' and various other combinations).

As far as real estate agents go, apparently there are quite a few of them that got down-rated. I found a link (using Google news search) to the Inman site that works http://www.inman.com/inmannews.asp?ID=38632 where you read:

"Rob Emerick, lead developer for Vegas IDX, a real estate business development company, speculated that Google looked at the number of links with the same text going to one Web site and deemed those Web sites to be overly optimized."

"For example, major newspaper Web sites have gained high rankings in real estate searches over the last few weeks."

If the allegations are true I question the ethics of playing favorites when you have the monopoly for search engines. It is incumbent on Google to keep a level playing field. After all, that is what attracted us to the internet in the first place. It gave all of us little people an opportunity to compete against the big boys.

My personal experience is that Google gives the best results of any search engine for shopping or general research or anything else. Not only that, but my perception is that the results have been slowly improving bit by bit over time.

There are issues of gaming the system, and it is the job of Google to overcome those. It is not so much to counter some particular gaming technique, though, as to figure out better and more precise ways of ferreting out just what it is that consumers are actually looking for.

If their best algorithmed guess at that does not turn out to be John Mudd, tough titty. As any supposed conservative could tell you, the ultimate objective measure of this will come from consumers. There is certainly no shortage of search engines. If Google starts stacking the deck and not giving the consumers the best results they could, then they will go elsewhere.

Again, if businesses don't like their search rankings, they can BUY ADVERTISING. You can do that much cheaper and more targeted on the net than you could ever hope to in print ads. In any case, they have no RIGHT to expect or demand free listings and rankings AT ALL.

All in all, the whole bunch of whiners are welcome to QUIT THEIR MOANING.

Let's play devil's advocate and consider this for a moment. You decide to start a business and choose the internet because it is less expensive than the traditional business model and gives you an opportunity to compete against big business. So you invest a substantial sum of of money and time and in fact you are one of the pioneers of this new medium. Then along comes big biz and government who arbitrarily decide to change the rules, and suddenly you find yourself no longer able to compete . Who wouldn't complain under the circumstances?

what, you have more of a right to be listened to than someone who starts an offline business to compete with the "big boys" but then goes bust due to the "big boys" using aggressive marketing?

Al, this isn't just about me, John Mudd. It's about a change that has affected quite a few industries, real estate being one of them.

Click here to read Inman News's second article to see how it's affecting the entire real estate industry.

Since i'm a blogger Google's change probably hasn't affected me as much as some other Realtors. But the other Realtors have lost quite a few business prospects because of Google's change.

My prediction: Google will lose business over the algorithm change. Al is right. If it wants to make a shoddy, hasty decision that effects more than one industry and negatively effects the real estate industry, it can. Of course, it can also lose its dominance to Yahoo!, as well.

Inman News: Brokers scramble for Google exposure

Want to help me regain the sales I lost from Google's algorithm change? Click here to buy beautiful beach condos in Tierra Verde, St. Pete Beach, Treasure Island, Madeira Beach, Indian Shores, Indian Rocks Beach and Sand Key in beautiful, sunny Florida!

Looks like we've gotten rid of the ads as original posts, but I see they're now spamming the comments.

Well, I wasn't interested in this thread anyhow, so adios.

Sorry, Hal. Just trying to make up for the leads I lost from Google's algorithm change. ;)

John I sense your frustration and the message I am giving you is I sincerely sympathize. Sometimes when we are upset we say things that we regret later. Fortunately for myself I am not running a for profit business but if I were I probably would be as angry as you are. I am however planning a business in the future and these events have certainly been an opener and I thank you for bringing to our attention.

Anybody who thinks Google will lose "business" over this is clearly delusional. Google may have annoyed advertisers, but this sort of thing is pure gold for us users. We want Google to work hard to filter out commercial results for the most part. Commercial ventures can always buy Google ads, which I do click on often when I'm looking for commercial results.

Argue over the details if you want, but this sort of thing is likely to boost Google's marketshare, not cut it down. Well, it would if Google's marketshare wasn't already nearly as high as possible anyway.

Things like your multiple context-free links to your commercial site on this page, John, are exactly what we users expect Google to filter out. :-)

Part of what I see here is confusing learning to maximize a system as-it-exists-right-now with a sense of entitlement that as-it-exists-right-now is the same as the way it should be, even must be, so that when a change occurs there is a sense of violation of that entitlement. i agree that it is very important for us to learn of this and to realize that these changes can take place at any time and there isn't much we can do about it, but I think the indignation is probably misplaced.

It's very apparent that google is pretty much weeding out commercial sites on popular search terms and only showing directories or informational sites. Don't you get it? It FORCES the commercial sites to PAY for traffic, Google Adwords. That is what this is all about. Even Google.com has succumbed to the almighty dollar and expanding their wallets. Why is it wrong? "Forcing" sites to advertise is NOT what Google claims they are about, but that's what it appears almost without a doubt to be. Their "uniquely democratic" nature has appeared to turn into almost a "monopoly or dictatorship". I only use yahoo.com or altavista.com on my searches now. At least it's honest. Commercial AND info sites on results, a little something for everyone. Democratic. Free. Something Google seems to have forgotten about. They are losing a lot of faithful users because of this. Besides, nothing good lasts forever. Time to move on!

In our industry which is personals, dating, and romance, the competition is fierce and every trick in the book is played on search engines. Its seems that no matter what google does, including this last update, the same irrelevant results appear for my keywords which are in a niche area. Searching for Latin brides should not result in a ton of websites for Russian brides at the top of the SERP's.