Are sites that "smell of SEO" being demoted?
-
I'm working with a site owner who recently hired an SEO to work on just one particular type of keyword. It seems like the more work the SEO did, the lower the keyword gradually dropped. Granted, the "work" is pretty low quality - anchor texted bookmarks, comments and low quality articles. We're doing an experiment where we are going to disavow those links and see if the previous rankings return.
Another site that I am consulting with has a lot of good natural links and then some anchor texted links, but from decent sources - some guest posts (on good sites - not a spammy site that exists only for guest posts) and some places where decent websites have agreed to link to the site. The anchor texted links do not make up very much of the overall anchor text. There is good diversity and lots of brand and url anchored links. It seems like the more the SEO does for this site, the more the rankings drop. And it's not all about anchor text. The SEO placed a link in a relevant directory, using the url as anchor...rankings dropped a little. They obtained an expired domain with relevant and very natural links and 301'd it to the new domain...rankings dropped several places. And so on. Occasionally the rankings will pop up a little, but overall it's a downward spiral.
Check out this post by Gary Taylor. He did an experiment where he took an established site that was ranking well and threw some spammy links at it. To quote the article, 'every day goes by my ranking for the term “domains” is getting harder to maintain.' He recently tweeted that he has been removing and disavowing links and the rankings are returning.
I was looking at searches for real estate related terms in different cities. In some cities, the top sites are ones that have ZERO obvious SEO done to them. There are sites ranking on page 3 that have been SEO'd, and not all of them have poor SEO. Many are what I would consider really well done. Some of the sites ranking on page 1 have under 10 links. There was one with 2 followed links and they were not from super authoritative sites!
To complicate matters though, if you look at searches like "Toronto Real Estate Agents" some of the top sites have lots of keyword anchor texted links.
Perhaps this should be a blog post rather than a Q&A, but I would love to hear some of your thoughts. My personal thought is that Google's main goal with Penguin and the unnatural links warnings is to make it so that not only is it not profitable to try to manipulate the SERPS, but that every time you try to do so, you potentially do your rankings harm.
I used to say that Penguin could only affect a site on the date of a Penguin refresh, but I am thinking now that Google has managed to roll Penguin into the algorithm to some extent so that it can demote the majority of any work that smells of SEO.
Thoughts?
-
If you take a product, as an example let's say... "Joe's Widgets".
The site that received #1 rankings in the past might have been an article about Joe's Widgets on Wikipedia. That was simply promotion of the most powerful site with a relevant article.
Now, if Joe's Widgets appear on product pages on hundreds of sites, the brand site, JoesWidgets.com gets an enormous boost in the SERPs. Perhaps beating Wikipedia because of these "brand mentions". This is a relatively new development from Google within the past few months.
Still not recognized strongly enough, perhaps, might be HowToUseWidgets.com that has 40 pages of articles about how to use, Joe's Widgets, how to select them, how to main tain them, photos of the different models, comparisons of Joe's widgets to six other brands of widgets. In my opinion, this is the authority site but it gets lower rankings because it is not powerful and isn't the brand name website. However, this site might get more relevant traffic than JoesWidgets.com and wikipedia simply because it has saturated the SERPs for lots of the important secondary and long-tail keywords. This is the attack that I am building.
-
I'm glad to see this discussion, because I think we're experiencing a sea-change that began last year about this time with Google's big changes. I'm seeing that active linkbuilding without social-signal input is hurting some sites, whereas hands-off traditional linkbuilding (i.e., letting inbound links occur naturally rather than consciously creating them) with social-signal links/discussion is helping some sites.
For me, the big issue is whether SEOs can change the internal culture of clients, to get them to understand the growing-growing-growing importance of social media links (and brand discussion that doesn't necessarily include links). Clients who still don't "get" social media usually also don't "get" the need for a content-publishing plan, in which the best way to announce new content is through social media.
A related issue is the increasing importance of the authorship tag to Google rankings. Many organizations - large and small - still refuse to allow employees to identify as spokesperson-evangelists for the brand, yet it's clear Google rankings rewards those who publish as Google+ individuals. How will Google reconcile their ranking love for brands, with their new ranking love for Google+ authors?
UPDATE: just after submitting the above, I saw a new article on SERPs gains for content by Google+ authors:
-
Hi
Marie, I believe there have been many Penguin refreshes, but there was no official announcement. I even read in a post or a tweet when Dr. Pete also mentioned that there have been refreshes of Penguin. And Marie even, i am noticing these changes since last month.
-
Future Services to Game Google:
-
Get 10,000 visitors who spend 20 minutes on site, and 5000 return visitors!
-
Get 5000 Facebook shares, and 10,000 Retweets
-
Get A Comment With From an Author Rank of over 9000!
In all seriousness, though, I think this may already be happening. Going through the analytic histories of some of my clients I've seen them get several hundred visits in one day from a keyword that has less than 10 searches a month in the Google Keyword Tool, and they ranked on page 50 of the SERPS.
-
-
There definitely seems to be a sea change whereby much of the focus now is to concentrate on providing good content and great user experience. By getting your audience to remain on your site for longer, sharing your content, and potentially returning to your site again is what should pay dividends....
heh... this is replacing linkjuice. The new rocket fuel for SEO is contentjuice.
-
I work in the automotive niche, and almost all of the website providers have issues with duplicate content, and site structure. However, we are working to improve that.
Anyway, my off-site is mostly going after guest blog posts from local bloggers, as well as anyone writing in my clients niche. I'm not good with macro's in Excel, so all of my outreach is done by hand. Beyond that I focus on citations since my clients are always looking for local customers.
When you checked out the different real estate searches did you see a lot of local results? Whenever I do those searches I see the 6-pack of local results. That actually makes me really excited, because the average real estate person only has a handful of citations. So, you could really take over those searches, in theory, with a citation binge.
-
There definitely seems to be a sea change whereby much of the focus now is to concentrate on providing good content and great user experience. By getting your audience to remain on your site for longer, sharing your content, and potentially returning to your site again is what should pay dividends . That not to say that certain basic SEO principles should be ignored but user experience is surely the key.
-
Hi Cody,
Thanks for this comment. It's very helpful. Care to share a little bit about how you are accomplishing your off-site SEO? Or would that be spilling the secret sauce?
I bet that your sites have really good on page structure and great content as well and this is probably the key.
-
Hi Marie! I loved your recent post about the difference between Panda, Penguin and Unnatural Link Penalties recently.
First off, I'd like to say that I'm still getting awesome results with my SEO. I work on around 100 websites, and both my on-site and off-site techniques are improving the results.
That being said, I can see that the site level metrics are having a larger influence. I work in a niche that has lots of different providers for websites, and most of them create tons of duplicate content. The sites that are creating 1000's of pages of duplicate content have been hit hard in the past 6+ months, and it's getting harder to keep them ranking well, but the one's with great architecture are actually getting easier.
For a great example of a company taking the initiative on this I'd look at Autotrader. They recently, within the last year I believe, decided to no-index all of their inventory. They did this because all of it was the exact duplicate of what the dealers had posted in dozens of other places online. Right after they made that change I saw a dramatic improvement in rankings across the board.
-
My company was recently approached by someone who's done SEO for some quite big sites, promising a top three position within 4 weeks for a competitive area by "spinning".
Thankfully, my boss swiftly told him we didn't need his services as there's no such thing as a fly-by-knight in reality.
I guess it's just about keeping as up to date as possible so whatever we do has a positive lasting impression. Phew!: does take some work though.
-
"It's only terrifying if you aren't ahead of the curve with SEO" - Great point!
-
It's only terrifying if you aren't ahead of the curve with SEO. It's scary for people hiring SEOs too because they are hiring someone who is supposed to know but quite often they don't and wind up hurting the site.
Google is coming down very hard on links which is why they had to provide a disallow tool to help you combat poor SEO past practices or negative SEO attacks which before you could not really handle other than getting all the links down that are harming you.
Also, onpage optimization can hurt you just as easily, because Google knows you are in control of those factors, so under optimization is the new optimization.
-
I do believe that this is a terrifying prospect for anyone who makes a living at SEO. I don't believe that SEO is dead, but I do believe that the role of an SEO is definitely shifting from "link building". I think that the vast majority of SEOs out there today have a model that won't work in this new age of Google.
I think that the only SEOs who are going to succeed are going to be ones who can do a fantastic job of on-page optimization and then find ways to make the site not only attract links but also attract and keep users. Ultimately, Google wants sites to rank well because users find it helpful.
-
If true, that's pretty terrifying! I've not the experience to really be able to talk on the subject I'm afraid, but I've been putting in a lot of effort trying to learn. The idea that such work might be potentially hazardous is certainly a cause for mild alarm.
Do you suppose just playing things as straight as possible will be enough? Our focus is on creating really compelling articles for our blog and a site that's a cinch to use - fingers crossed!
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
-
Is a lot of inbound traffic coming from site a problem for SEO?
We have a site which is going to deliver content to a big news site and in return we will receive a lot of traffic from the news site. Estimates are that it will be about 50% of our daily traffic. Before this we have about 2000 daily visits, where 50% is from organic traffic. How will this affect our rankings? (It should be pretty obvious to Google that an increase like that in reffered traffic is bought - which I assume will ahve a negative impact on our organic rankings) What is the best tactic to use - regarding SEO - if (when) we proceed to deliver content/recieve traffic from that news site? (we have a lot of decent rankings on several branch keywords, and we don't want to risk those rankings. On the other hand - if we could improve our rankings from this deal - we would like inputs to that as well? Best regards, Chris
Link Building | | sembseo0 -
How do I distributing Articles to the correct sites
I'm relatively new to the SEO world, however, I've landed myself a SEO job for a mobility bath, shower and wetroom company.
Link Building | | desktop_nev
I've optimize the pages and added links to directories BUT I would like to start gaining quality links. I've wrote articles, including keyword links, but I would like to know the best strategy to get articles distributed to generic/industry specific sites.
Any help will be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance1 -
Reputable SEO Companies?
Can anyone recommend high-quality backlink building services? A company you can trust to not spam your site all over the internet?
Link Building | | JABacchetta0 -
Local SEO Help
Getting confused about what is helpful. I have a few questions. Is it beneficial to link to other sites like wikipedia from our main url or our wp hosted blog? Does that help our SERP? We have just built a new sitemap for our site, which is good, we didn't have one before. Should I still do internal linking? 3)If I can get a person with another blog to link to us, would it better to get it in a post or on their main page with a button or text listing? Thanks everyone:) I am just trying to figure out how to spend my time wisely here.
Link Building | | greenhornet770 -
Guest Blog Etiquette & Re-using "Expired" Content
Hi everyone, There's two parts to this Q, which is why the title's sort of split in half. We wrote a guest blog post that we were really proud of, which took a good few hours of work. It went live about a month ago, but I just happened to notice recently that it had disappeared off the person's website - I now get a 404 error and I can't find it either using a 'site:' search in Google or via the site's own search tool. I've tried getting in touch with the webmaster, but he's no longer responding to my emails. I really don't know if a) it disappeared by accident (for whatever reason), or b) they purposefully wanted to remove it and now they're avoiding me. My two Q's: Do you think it's cheeky to re-use the content, by giving it to someone else? Or would you say it goes against guest blogging etiquette? It seems a shame to waste it, for it to disappear. If I were to re-use it, would there be any implications regarding Panda, given the fact that it was content that was once live (i.e. effectively 'duplicate', once upon a time), even if the 'original' content is no longer indexed by Google? Would it even be considered a duplicate if published again now? Many thanks in advance!
Link Building | | Gmorgan0 -
Poor Links - SEO SpyGlass
Hello, I have been using a free trial of SEO SpyGlass and from what I can see we have a few low value links... Do you think we should get these removed? Is SEO Spyglass worth its money?
Link Building | | ScottBaxterWW0 -
Removal of "bad" incoming links
I have had my site registered for a long time (since January 1995) and in that time we have built a good number of incoming links. We have a vendor database that we expose as a service to our visitors, which numbers around 5,500. These sites vary dramatically from low-end, Mom-and-Pop type web sites (some ugly in the extreme :)) to nationwide, established vendors. Back in the day, we had the basic tactic to request a link to our site if the vendor wanted to be listed in our vendor database. We stopped that practice years ago but still have many sites linking to us. The quality of some of these sites is very poor. I want to come up with a strategy for dealing with these. To that end, some questions: How "costly", from an SEO perspective, is a poor quality site that links to our site? What metric(s) should be used to assess the quality of sites linking to us? If possible, for the aforementioned metric is there a "bar" we might try to hit? For example, would it be useful to request removal of links where <metric>is less than x? What is x?</metric> Given that we have thousands to assess, is there any report I can create to identify these sites? Is it generally preferred to have vendors link simply to our home page or is it more effectice to have them link to particular pages on our site (each vendor can generally be associated with a "topic" on our site). In short, I am willing to go through this process if there is real value in it. Thanks. Mark
Link Building | | MarkWill0 -
Why aren't links to my site showing up in open site explorer?
My site is http://www.thesquarefoot.com Google analytics shows many more (though more than a handful of links that we have gotten recently still don't show up there). Definite newbie here so please be kind... Thanks!
Link Building | | TheSquareFoot0