Pages plummeting in ranking
-
Hi all,
I have a question, which i hope you can answer for me. I have a site www.betxpert.com (a danish betting site) and we have tried to do some SEO to improve conversions.
One of the steps we have taken was to link to all of our bookmaker reviews in our menu (a mega menu). All of our bookmakers have an img and text link in the menu. The menu is shown on every page of the site.
Since we have made this change we have been plumeting down the SERPs. For the search "betsafe" this page http://www.betxpert.com/bookmakere/betsafe is no longer in the top 50.
We also added the "stars" so that the google result will show our over all review for the bookmaker, in order to stand out in the SERPs.
Can anyone explain to me what the problem might be? Over extensive internal linking or?
-
You can always private message me thru moz as well.
Best of luck. -
Okay. Thanks a lot for the effort and answer. I hope it helps me...lets see when the changes take effect. I will post back here in a couple of weeks if i see improvements.
I have removed the links from the menu, apart from on the frontpage. Also i have added nofollow to the links in the section which caused the "extreme linking" warning. This should stop the fall in ranking if this in fact is the issue.
I will try and reduce the number of links on the page. In general we have a lot of links on every page. But if that is a crime i will try to avoid it
-
Based on GWMT, the links still count toward the total. I am not sure, if it would reduce the likelihood of a penalty though or if it would negate a penalty in place. I did a quick in WMT and could not find an answer to that portion.
-
Will it help me in getting fewer links if i set "nofollow" for some of them? Will google regard this as fewer links?
-
Yes, absolutely, it can and likely does have something to do with the fall in rankings. The rel= "no follow" should help. What is happening, is that they are seeing way too many links and that is considered "spammy."
What I would suggest is to take off links where they are not really needed. This should assist you immediately. If you make a big enough dent in unlinking (I suggest no more than 100 internal links per page...but, not on every single page if you can avoid it.) you should then consider submitting for reconsideration. A question is: Are any of your pages showing up in search?
The other thing you should consider is backing up a step and looking at the overall mapping of the site: Does it make sense? (remember, I am in the US, speak passable Spanish and no Danish..sorry) Using Google translation, I think some of it could be streamlined to provide a better experience for your bettors. Take off the articles if they are not needed. (Do people spend time on them? Do they migrate to betting from them?) There is a lot to look at and that, even for a bettor, may be too much.
Hope it helps,
-
Hi,
Thanks for the fast answer.
One thing i did not mention, but could be of relevance. A year ago the site was rebuilt and therefore a lot of URLs were redirected with 301 redirection. However a lot of links in a section of the site did not redirect due to settings on the new server. This issue was fixed last month, so now all the old URLs are being processed by Google and the pages which they redirect to have a lot of links (it is a statistics section) and i have received a warning in webmaster tools about an extreme high amount of links in the web site. I have today set rel="nofollow" on the larger part of the links on these pages (since i really do not want them all indexed).
Can this warning have anything to do with the fall in ranking? I am thinking if we are punished by having pages with too many links - all with links to the bookmaker pages on them?
In general we have a lot of links on the site. Is this really a problem? Is it a known fact that Google punisheds for having too many links in pages?
Regards,
Rasmus
-
Rasmus,
First, not knowing when the changes were made and assuming the only changes made are described above, here are some possibilities:
If the change is in the last few weeks, it may be a temporary fluctuation in the rankings and you may need to wait 3 to 6 weeks to see if there is a bounce back.
If that is not the case, in my opinion with the number of links you have, you have two issues: First, from GWMT:
- Make a site with a clear hierarchy and text links.
- Keep the links on a given page to a reasonable number.
There are other issues beyond this, your H1 is picking up the articles in the middle of the page (makes it unclear). The load time is long (D or F in YSlow depending on which test version). etc.
However, I would look at it from the standpoint of what did you change given the site itself. Again, if the only change was the links you described, it would be easy enough to delink them and see if you come back.
I understand with a betting site you want to show all a person can bet on and that you are trying to get people to look at info on their favorite sport, but to me the site is way over busy and could use some simplification. I cannot tell you whether or not Google sees it as spammy. I do believe there are too many links. Without testing it and just looking at it cursorily, I came up with close to 200.
Hope this helps,
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Lower Level Pages Being Ranked for Key Terms
Good Afternoon We've been having problems with a site for a little while now. It had a penalty (partial link) a few years ago and never really recovered back to it's full potential despite the fact that the penalty was eventually removed and we've since changed the domain completely as well as moving over to https and left behind / disavowed bad links. In the Moz ranking stats now, I'm seeing that some of our lower level pages are ranking for core terms and the erratic nature of the ranking graph seems to indicate that Google is confused and not knowing what page to pull. For example, the top level page would be Hotel in Spain but the page that is ranking for that term is one of the individual hotel information (lower level) pages lets say the Holiday Inn . The lower level page has info on the individual property but also makes reference to it being a "Cheap Hotel In Spain" My suggestion to resolve the problem is to scale back the references to the top level terms on the hotel pages and reintroduce breadcrumb links to help Google follow the structure of the site again Does this sound reasonable or would anyone be able to suggest anything else to try?
Technical SEO | | Ham19790 -
Not ranking - Scarped content
Hi, I have a problem with a website, that never compe up with before. The website is: https://www.enallaktikidrasi.com It has a bunch of excellent articles, good enough on-page SEO and a medium backlink profile. However, it is ranking just for very very few keywords. The major problem is that there are original articles that searched by their title won't appear in top100 results but they will appear in other websites that scapre them (even if they give a backlink to our original article!) Also, the website has good rankings in Bing and Yahoo but not in Google. There are keywords ranking in #1 in Bing but nowhere in top10 pages in Google.... I am guessing for 3 issues: 1. Majestic shows a very low trust score (just 13). However, the website has not got any kind of penalty in the last 3 years. 2. There are many scarpers. The odd is that scarpers with no real value outrank our content. (Scarpers with almost zero backlink profile) 3. We ran Sucuri on website as there were a large bots attack. Is there a correlation between it bots attack and Google results? (but why not in Bing and Yahoo too?) It seems like Google underestimates the website when indexing websites for some reason. Moreover, some of the articles are really the best around but the keywords they are targeted are not either within the 30 first pages... Any help?? Thanks..
Technical SEO | | alex33andros0 -
Why my site is not ranking for any of the keywords?
We have a site for Property management software, we have done everything like set proper Title and descriptions, heading tags, robots tag is also ok, set schema and its ok with Google webmaster too also we are doing Social media promotion. can you please check our website and tell me what is the problem??
Technical SEO | | rootwaysinc0 -
What I am Doing Wrong with My Rank
Hi, I am doing something wrong but I don't understand what is the issue. The rank of my website for a particular keyword is by far lower than one of my competitors (they are in top 20 while I am not even in top 50 in google). I did all fixes recommended by MOZ, I have higher number of backlinks (natural built), relatively similar social media activities, bigger content but still I'm far away. Do you have any idea what is wrong? Best, Tony
Technical SEO | | Threeding.com0 -
Wrong page ranked in Google, specific example
Hi All, I've searched for previous questions and many talk about the same problem but do not post an actual example. I am also thinking to do a blog post and a series of experiments once there is a theory. My target keyword is "Exhibition Stand Hire" and this is the target page on our site http://goo.gl/qt54lb Site appears on page 6 of SERPS (google.co.uk), but instead of this page a homepage is listed. But if I'm searching for the term using quotes, ie "Exhibition Stand Hire" the right page appears on page 4 of the SERPs. Our home page only uses the keyword in the body text, while target page is very optimised. Could it be over-optimised? I've tried mixing up words in the title tag to not offer an exact match, also i've varied the anchor text of all incoming links but that didn't fix the problem. (Hence why at the moment they all use different terms to point to this page) None of this helped alter what page is chosen to appear. Is it simply the matter of page not being strong enough compared to other less relevant pages on the site? How come many other sites rank better with much less effort? (i'm using OSE to determine competition) Thank you.
Technical SEO | | georgexx0 -
Can I canonical the same page?
I have a site where I have 500+ Page listing pages and I would like to rel=canonical them to the master page. Example: http://www.example.com//articles?p=18 OR http://www.example.com/articles?p=65 I plan on adding this to the section from of the page template so it goes to all pages - When I do this, I will also add the canonical to the page I am directing the canonical. Is this a bad thing? Or allowed?
Technical SEO | | JoshKimber0 -
Page that appears on SERPs is not the page that has been optimized for users
This may seem like a pretty newbie question, but I haven't been able to find any answers to it (I may not be looking correctly). My site used to rank decently for the KW "Gold name necklace" with this page in the search results:http://www.mynamenecklace.co.uk/Products.aspx?p=302This was the page that I was working on optimizing for user experience (load time, image quality, ease of use, etc.) since this page was were users were getting to via search. A couple months ago the Google SERP's started showing this page for the same query (also ranked a little lower, but not important for this specific question):http://www.mynamenecklace.co.uk/Products.aspx?p=314Which is a white gold version of the necklaces. This is not what most users have in mind (when searching for gold name necklace) so it's much less effective and engaging.How do I tell Google to go back to old page/ give preference to older page / tell them that we have a better version of the page / etc. without having to noindex any of the content? Both of these pages have value and are for different queries, so I can't canonical them to a single page. As far as external links go, more links are pointing to the Yellow gold version and not the white gold one.Any ideas on how to remedy this?Thanks.
Technical SEO | | Don340 -
Pages extensions
Hi guys, We're in the process of moving one of our sites to a newer version of the CMS. The new version doesn't support page extensions (.aspx) but we'll keep them for all existing pages (about 8,000) to avoid redirects. The technical team is wondering about the new pages - does it make any difference if the new pages are without extensions, except for usability? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | lgrozeva0