On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 17:44:00 +0000, Paul B
<customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 18:08:27 +0100, "Jezsta Web Productions"
><Please-use-our-contact-form@jezsta.com> wrote:
>
>>"Borek" <m.borkowski@delete.chembuddy.whats.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>newsp.ton96la5u0t02r@borek...
>>On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 14:34:19 +0100, Jezsta Web Productions
>><Please-use-our-contact-form@jezsta.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> I'm wondering if they aren't, then maybe Google now judges that the
>>>> pages load really slowly so you've fallen foul of some slow page
>>>>> loading time filter.
>>>
>>>> He had this problem some time ago and was forced to pay for additional
>>>> bandwidth (or was close to), I recall showing him how to save on
>>>> transfer.
>>>> Can't recall what he finally did with the problem - but he did something
>>>>
>>>
>>>> He moved hosting.:-)>
>>
>>>Wasn't it the second stage? I mean - I think he started modifying
>>>pictures, and moved later.
>>
>>I don't know I don't think a lot of his pictures are compressed.
>
>They are. Also used jpg cleaner to remove photoshop garbage. Also,
>some of the images are just a few k in size. These too have
>disappeared.
>
>>His BW is still quite high for an average site he got close to his limit in Jan.
>
>Average site ? tsk
>I have people spending hours on there, and there are 1000's of images
>on there.
>
>>I am doing some researching and tests with the hotlinking filter to see if that
>>is the cause of the images being removed.
>
>Thank you Stacey, but you should be spending quality time with
>"something" else atm. I can wait.

She should?

BB
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/internet-mark...l-business.htm
http://www.kruse.co.uk/google-mountain.htm
http://www.kruse.co.uk/seo-tips.htm