Many people think a search engine is broken or their site is banned if they do not rank in one engine while they rank great in others.This article will hopefully help searchers understand the different relevancy criteria used by different engines.Sites with the trust score of Technorati may be able to get away with more unnatural patterns than most webmasters can, but I have seen sites flamethrown with poorly mixed anchor text on low quality links, only to see the sites rank pretty well in Yahoo! A few years ago at a Search Engine Strategies conference Jon Glick stated that Yahoo! If you search for Viagra, for example, the top 5 listings looked useful, and then I had to scroll down to #82 before I found another result that wasn't spammy. also manually reviews some of the spammy categories somewhat frequently and then reviews other samples of their index. has also pushed a question answering service called Yahoo! to have a somewhat commercial bias to their search results. In many fields they not only have internal customers, but in some fields they have product duplication, like with Yahoo! I believe if you do standard textbook SEO practices and actively build quality links it is reasonable to expect to be able to rank well in Yahoo! If you are trying to rank for highly spammed keyword phrases keep in mind that the top 5 or so results may be editorially selected, but if you use longer tail search queries or look beyond the top 5 for highly profitable terms you can see that many people are indeed still spamming them to bits. pushes more of their vertical offerings it may make sense to give your site and brand additional exposure to Yahoo!looked at both links to a page and links to a site when determining the relevancy of a page. Sometimes you will see a referral like if they reviewed your site and rated it well. Answers which they heavily promote in their search results and throughout their network. They believe strongly in the human and social aspects of search, pushing products like Yahoo! 's traffic by doing things like providing a few authoritative answers to topically relevant questions on Yahoo! MSN Search had many incarnations, being powered by the likes of Inktomi and Looksmart for a number of years. bought Inktomi and Overture it was obvious to Microsoft that they needed to develop their own search product. Using descriptive page titles and page content goes a long way to help you rank in MSN.puts quite a bit of weight even on common words that occur in the search query. seems to be more about text matching when compared to Google, which seems to be more about concept matching. is still fairly easy to manipulate using low to mid quality links and somewhat to aggressively focused anchor text. also frequently reviews their search results in many industries. Answers with professionally sourced content in verticals such as Yahoo! Search pushed that they didn't agree with link buying.Rand Fishken recently posted about many Technorati pages ranking well for their core terms in Yahoo! Those pages primarily have the exact same anchor text in almost all of the links pointing at them. Publisher program does not have the depth that Google's ad system has, and they seem to be trying to make up for that by biasing their targeting to more expensive ads, which generally causes their syndicated ads to have a higher click cost but lower average clickthrough rate. has many editorial elements to their search product. Search Submit that content is reviewed to ensure it matches Yahoo! For competitive search queries some of the top search results may be hand coded. Offering paid inclusion and having so much internal content makes it make sense for Yahoo! 's biggest weakness is the diverse set of things that they do.
I think one of the hardest parts of explaining SEO is that the web is such a diverse place where things that make sense in one industry would make no sense in another industry.MSN has got better at crawling, but I still think Yahoo! It is best to avoid session IDs, sending bots cookies, or using many variables in the URL strings. or Google at crawling deeply through large sites like e or at processing queries for meaning instead of taking them quite so literally, but I do not believe they are as good as Google is at it.While MSN offers a tool that estimates how commercial a page or query is I think their lack of ability to distinguish quality links from low quality links makes their results exceptionally biased toward commercial results.While some machines automatically evolve search relevancy via genetic algorithms each major search engine still has some human input in how relevancy is calculated (at the very least humans write some of the algorithms). Diaz wrote a PDF research paper about Google's biases. For many years they outsourced their search service to other providers, but by the end of 2002 they realized the importance and value of search and started aggressively acquiring search companies. has a boatload of their own content which they frequently reference in the search results.Originally when I started writing this article I wanted it to be more about search relevancy perhaps from more of an academic type standpoint, but my perspective on search is as one who understands it more from a marketing perspective. Since they have so much of their own content and make money from some commercial organic search results it might make sense for them to bias their search results a bit toward commercial websites.