What can you do about negative SEO?
-
We have a list of 240 domains (look exactly the same) linking to our site for a certain keyword. over 3000 links in total. It means that 50% of our keywords are this keyword and it's not a branded keyword which can affect us in the long term.
I have done a WHOIS search and found a name, email and number. Vikas Kumar. I linkedin searched him and found his "legit" SEO site which has EXACTLY the same registration details as the spam sites.
I emailed him and he said it would cost 5$ a link removal. I phoned him and he DENIED these emails. He then denied owning these sites etc.
We have disavowed them but the anchor text % is still affecting us. Is there anything we can do? I know negative SEO isn't illegal but it's really frustrating.
Anyone else had any problems with this type of thing?
-
If you pay them, then they put you on their second network of sites.
-
Ah, I understand. Unfortunately there's really nothing you can do to fix that problem other than paying for link removal...which I really would not recommend.
-
Hi Marie,
Thanks for the reply. Sorry, let me re-phrase. Its affecting our reports in terms of anchor text %.
At the moment we have not been hit due to it but it would be far easier for us to have accurate reports on our anchor text %. These spammy links have distorted the analytics a lot if that makes sense.
We have disavowed them and hoping we can carry on as if they are not there.
-
Personally I wouldn't waste your time. Disavow and move on. I have had no issues with this approach.
-
I see these directory links all the time when doing link audits. While I always disavow them, my gut instinct is that Google is able to recognize that these are not self made links and as such, ignore them.
I would never recommend paying the money to remove them but I know several people who have.
**We have disavowed them but the anchor text % is still affecting us. **
How do you know that these links are affecting you? If you're seeing a drop in rankings I'd be looking for other possible reasons for the drop.
-
I obviously can't say for sure regarding the anchor text - however:
My understanding is that the anchor text ratio is more a signal rather than a trigger - as in it must be one of (X) amount of signals to then fire a penalty trigger (algorithmic/manual review).
So even if it was still sending a bad 'signal' as it were, it wouldn't be the final nail in the coffin.
Of course, this is my opinion, but it's based on my experience and a bit of testing with some spam sites.
-
Thanks for the detailed response, appreciate it!
We have disavowed them so hoping they won't do us any harm in the future. It's reassuring to know you've done a study like that. Very interesting.
I will still proceed to send him a legal document out of principle, he needs to be shaken up a bit.
thanks again
-
If your site has enough authority and trust (site age is also a factor here), those 3k links won't hurt a bit, no matter how many links you have. I have done experiments and a domain with 50DA/50PA and less than 100 links did not move at all after getting hit with 250k spammy links (from spammy websites - using a spammy link profile). In fact the site increased in the serps for a few keywords after about 1 month and stayed there (currently in the top 3). We did the same experiment on a high DA domain with only 8 links - nothing bad happened, rankings increased in 2-3 months.
Just think about it this way, if negative seo would be that easy to pull off, all the shady Kumars out there would start doing this. Fortunately, it's not about the links, their number or quality. Unfortunately, neg seo exists and google can't do much about it (but average Kumars don't have access to neg seo that truly works).
So if you didn't see any drop in rankings, or message in GWT saying that you have a partial penalty, there's nothing to worry about.
-
It was the same in our case. Could do nothing more, then just disavow him.
Unfortunately there are people who fall in his trap, and pay for the removal.
His websites are not indexed in Google. Therefore I hope Google doesn't count any links/anchor from his sites.
-
He's an absolute idiot.
Demanded 5$ a link removal, I phoned him then he said he never sent such an email. I sent him a screenshot of the email then he starts denying the links are his etc.
I hate people who build a business on such negativity. He claims it's not him after I make it clear I won't be spending a penny on link removals from him.
-
It totally depends on how many links you have to start with though? His 3000 links is treble what our official links are. Makes our anchor text 50% of the keyword he has targeted and just messes up our reports.
-
Ye I think I will draft up a legal document to send to him. He has really rattled my cage with his responses.
The issue I have isn't so much the links because I know Google (should) will know it's negative SEO. It's just that our anchor text is now 50% "table tennis tables" which comes from all his sites. Correct me if I'm wrong but disavowing will simply tell Google not to count those links but will my anchor text still be negative in Googles eyes because technically the links are still there?
I will be drafting a legal letter today and sending it to him. He is an absolute joke, people like him really annoy me.
His "official" site and all the spammy ones have the same IP, email, number, location how can he possibly deny it... rant over. Thanks for the reply!
-
Yes, at the top of my disavow file, I also mentioned about the negative SEO attack. In my case it was obvious from the anchor text used on all the backlinks. I don't think they even look at the disavow file unless it is with a manual penalty, but I did add the comments anyway.
-
Did your rankings drop? How old is your domain and what DA/PA do you have? How many links do you have (checked with all available tools)?
3000 links won't do much, that's not really negative seo, 300k links would be something to worry about. So unless your rankings dropped or your site is brand new, all should be ok.
Also, disavowing is not instant, not even fast, might take up to 2 (or more) months to see some effect.
-
Negative SEO may not be technically illegal - but extortion is.
What you have described there looks like extortion to me. 240 sites built to link to you, verifiable whois information, contacted the culprit, he has requested money from you to remove the links he built. That's extortion - and you have it in writing.
It might not be the most solid legal case, but it can be enough to scare off any disgruntled webmaster who is doing this. If you have anyone who can draft a legal letter to serve, I'd get on this. It should put a stop to it.
However, as Jonathan says, it is unlikely that this kind of negative SEO will have any sort of impact, particularly if you have disavowed the links. When uploading a disavow file, I'd also put a "# comment" in there saying that this is because of a negative SEO attack. 240 identical sites and links from the same whois (and probably IP) - Google is going to know this is a negative SEO attack on you and will discount those links.
But I'd scare that bastard into submission if I were you.
-
That Kumar guy is funny. We also had to deal with him in the past. He asks for a certain amount of money /links removed.
We have tried talking to him first, in order to remove the urls. But in the end his websites ended up in our disavow file. (and his response was: I do not care)
Keszi
-
I wouldn't worry. I got hit by negative seo. It had no effect on my rankings, and I just disavowed all the links anyway to avoid it hurting during a penguin refresh. That has since come and gone, and again no problems.
Those spammy links may just dissappear over time, but not something I would worry about as long as they are disavowed.
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
-
Can you combine YouTube and on-site hosting as part of a Video SEO strategy?
My question is sparked by how Moz uses its Whiteboard Friday videos. We are currently capturing video stories from our customers. Its excellent and engaging content we'd love to share with a wider audience. I'm puttting together a strategy for video SEO to drive traffic to our site and Moz's approach intrigues me. As we know, the world of video rich snippets changed in 2014 - their appearance in universal search reduced dramatically and what remained was almost entirely (90%+) YouTube snippets. Useless if you're looking to drive traffic to your own site. Of course, it's still possible to earn SERPs for video in Google video search, but I imagine the search volume is greatly reduced. From what I can see, first Moz host their Whiteboard Friday video on Wistia, complete with transcript and whiteboard capture. Suprisingly, I see no Schema markup for video. Can anyone shed a light as to why this might be a good idea? 3-6 months later the same video is then uploaded to youtube, with the same title and a similar description. The end result is multiple SERPs in universal search, almost always in the following order: the original post on Moz a YouTube result complete with a video rich sippet This has me asking the following questions - I have some theories - but i'd love your input: Why use two platforms to upload and host the video? Why not just YouTube? Why avoid using Schema on the Wistia video hosted on the original post? Surely, this would allow an additional result in Google Video Search? Why wait 3-6 months after the first post to upload the YouTube video?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RobertChapman0 -
Nothing I Know About SEO can Explain these Rankings?
Hi all, I have a client who wants to rank more prominently for "plastic surgeon jupiter fl", a key term in his niche that attracts 11-50 searches per month (but these are potentially big ticket clients). If you look at the first page of results for that term, I can't make any sense of them. I've checked page speed, Google listing optimization, on-page SEO, link metrics etc. and there seems to be no correlation with good on-page SEO, quality links (or volume of links). Any thoughts?? I literally cannot explain why the #1 site shows 2 inbound links via Moz OSE and almost no on-page SEO to speak of while sites ranking page 2 have better on-page SEO, more links, higher quality links (from what I can tell) etc.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RickyShockley0 -
Looking for SEO advice on Negative SEO attack. Technical SEO
please see this link https://www.dropbox.com/s/thgy57zmmwzodcp/Screenshot 2016-05-31 13.25.23.png?dl=0 you can see my domain is getting tons of chinese spam. I have 410'd the page but it still keeps coming.. 7tnawRV
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mattguitar990 -
SEO Behind a paywall.
Good Morning! Does anybody have any experience with SEO behind a paywall. If we have a portion of a website that is going to be locked, will google still be able to access all of that regardless of paying? If not is there any way to circumvent that? Any thoughts are greatly appreciated! MOZel Tov!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HashtagHustler0 -
Domain Forwarding for SEO
Hey guys, I recently created a new website for a client who was ranking #1 for the term "jupiter obgyn" but they have now dropped down to #4. This happened because their old home page was at www. instead of just jupiterobgyn.com. When you type in the www. version, it does take you to the root domain but it's not carrying the old PA! The www. version of the page had a 22 PA and the new root domain hosted page is a 1. How can I fix it so that "link juice" carries over? Is this something i need to do in 1and1 (their web host) or within Wordpress? Thanks!!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RickyShockley0 -
How to Implement Massive SEO Modifications
Hi everyone, I'm implementing some fairly significant changes on a clients website and wanted to know if it was better to implement all the changes at once or if I should implement the changes gradually. The changes are: 1. Amended information architecture 2. Completely new URL's 3. New meta data and some new on page content 4. Meta robots 'no index, follow' approximately 90% of the site Can I make all these changes in one go (that would be my preference), or should I gradually implement? What are the risks? Many thanks James
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jamesjackson1 -
Need Guidance On SEO Campaign
Hello, my website is www.mybluedish.com and I am launching an SEO campaign to increase our rankings, especially for the keyword 'satellite internet'. We used to be ranked #5 for this keyword and Google made some changes about 9 months ago that dropped us way back. We have recovered a lot back to #18 now, but have been stuck here for a while. I want to step up our SEO campaign and have come up with the following campaign. Could any SEO's please tell me if you think the following is the make up of a solid SEO campaign or if it should be adjusted? Thank you. 12 new blog articles/month 24 Articles submitted to 10 different directories each (total of 200 article directory submissions)/month 1 basic Press Release from PR.com/month 200 do follow blog comments/month 10 paid blog posts (on other people’s blogs of PR 1-5)/month
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MyNet0