Hi I wanted to clarify whether what I am describing is a link wheel and is this black hat ?
-
There is a SEO company that is creating a page on each of their clients' sites called 'pages of interest' or 'links' they then list all their other clients websites - using a variety of their keyword phrases as anchor text as well as a brief description. But then in the footer of these sites the SEO Company are also putting a link back to their own website using a variety of keywords such as SEO, search engine optimisation,link building etc and linking to their home page. At the moment the SEO company are ranking really well for their search terms. I thought that this was really quite 'dodgy' as the only two things that link all the clients are -(1) that they are all clients of this one firm and (2) all the websites come from the same country - no theme, or related industry at all. The clients that I have spoken to were not even aware that the company had put the link back to their site in the footer which in itself is pretty sneaky
-
I agree Mat, but it's difficult to tell who is who. Client worked with a big name in the world of digital marketing. They checked references, put in place a carefully worded contract (phew!) and (thankfully) I had the knowledge to identify a well-hidden blog network, and secure link takedown. The SEO industry needs an aggressively policed quality standard, in my opinion.
-
That's like not trusting builders, or cab drivers, or in fact anyone because there are bad ones out there.
There are plenty of agencies that don't use such tactics. There are others who will use tactics from across the spectrum, but ensure that the client is able to make informed choices based on risk v reward.
-
Exactly the reason I don't use (or trust) SEO agencies. I've seen this, I've seen blog networks. You name it...
-
It's not what I would call a link wheel. However it certainly does demonstrate the intention of building a network of sorts. Sadly quite a few SEO firms (including some quite large ones) do this. What is really bad is that they don't tell the clients that they are effectively abusing their websites for them either. Really underhand tactic if you ask me. I don't think that the "white hat / black hat" thing is particularly useful. It's over simplistic and makes our industry sound childish. However these are not links that have editorial merit, so you would think/hope that they don't pass authority. It is also a clear case of trying to manipulate pagerank, which is against google quality guidelines. As such it would seem to be putting the host sites at risk. Oh... it's really damn easy to spot as well.
-
Totally agree, even if they seem to be getting results at the moment it's not sustainable and will likely do far more harm than good in the long term. Give this SEO company a wide berth!
-
Send the PM - I'm curious - I want to analyse their site. Plus what are the sites you are comparing i.e. yours and their clients....
-
Thanks for the response I really thought it was. What gets me is that they are continuing to rank highly at the expense of their own client's who really don't know the first thing about Seo.. Will pm the name
-
Dodgy and risky as hell!!! If the sites have nothing in common and link in time it will all fall apart. At this stage I think it's risky but probably getting away with it....
Go on rat on the company or at least private message me the name... I'm curious
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
-
Inbound link is follow link but we put no follow link back - is it beneficial for rankings?
Dear Moz Community, We are operating in a niche market, where there are not so many content marketing options. What we are left with are link exchanging with relevant sites that are on the same topic but to not directly compete with us. Now we know that if we link back to site A and site a links back to us - for google this is not a very good link. But, some of the sites we are exchanging links with, do not know the term follow vs no follow links. My question - if your link is to site A is a no follow link but they give us a follow link - does it mean thats a better option than a follow vs follow. Thanks for help!
Link Building | | advertisingcloud0 -
Any benefits to having Wikipedia links now they are 'no-followed' (apart from traffic and natural link prof.)
I see that Wikipedia outbound links are all no-followed, is there any benefit (aside from the traffic) for having links here now ? For example is their co-citation and co-occurance benefits. I know there is without the links since from seeing previous Moz content about this saying Google getting good at connecting brand/s and topic mentions on a page (without any links) so appreciate Wikipedia is still good for that sort of thing. And a no-followed link is obviously good for the potential traffic. But is there any additional SEO benefit to having a no followed link on a wikipedia entry/stub too ? (aside from its contribution to your no-followed links which in turn contribute to a natural looking link profile) Cheers Dan
Link Building | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Ecomerce: Would 4 link sections leak too much link juice?
Hello, In my content management for our ecomerce site, I've found that there are sometimes links to sites in our industry that have "helpful links" sections. Several strong sites link directly to these resource sections. There are 4 different topics that fit this trend in our industry. Would it leak too much link juice to make 4 comprehensive link sections and place a link to them on our "Useful Articles" page? Or should I stick to one comprehensive link section? Or perhaps a small link section? Or none at all? Thanks.
Link Building | | BobGW0 -
What is a good ratio of total links to linking root domains?
Is 100 total links for every linking domain too high? I suppose I could also look at ratios of sites that are doing well in the rankings.
Link Building | | ProjectLabs0 -
Link building
I keep sending personal emails to website asking for a link form them but every one says no how do other website get so many links to there website whats the best software to use
Link Building | | homesandindustrial0 -
Whats with these links
I have a competitor
Link Building | | AlanMosley
that has shot up lately taking number one spot for various keywords when I look
at his links in Open Site Explorer I find many links that are links to downloadable
objects, not web pages. A few
examples, if you click on them, do not open who knows what they are. But what
the story, how are these links to his site, anyone know anything about this. Thanks http://wolfet.co.uk/etmain/mitchelldown.pk3 http://www2.dupont.com/Tyvek_Weatherization/en_US/assets/downloads/cad_fluidapplied/FA-S-201.dwg?Action=livre_or&start=24750&forum=alainfrancois http://mobile.earthcam.com/download/EarthCam%20Mobile%20v4.0.msi?faq&page=39560 -
You Tube Videos and links
I know how to make my you tube videos rank better on their site. My question is specific to....Does it benefit your videos to show up better on google to have back links pointing to the page its on?
Link Building | | joemas990 -
Porn link ...
I just ran https://www.majesticseo.com report for back links and showed me that I have one link at porn site ... not sure if it will be appropriate to post it here. The link was discovered on 03.05.11 and when I visited today link is not there... I dont know who put that link there. Can I get penalty for that from google? Can it be a mistake?
Link Building | | DiamondJewelryEmpire1