Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.

Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.

Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).

Sitewide links and owned site

Intermediate & Advanced SEO

365

Locked

Kepass last edited by

Hi everyone,

I need the community opinion on something. I am webmarketer and SEO for a pure player who runs a couple of e-commerce sites.

On one side we have bigsite.com. It makes all our revenue. I have been in charge for years. Results are good.

We have smallsite.com. It is starting. But small revenues for the moment. We have a new SEO working on this.

My question is :

We always had a banner on bigsite.com's homepage, sending valuable traffic to smallsite.com.T

he new SEO, has footer sitewide links from smallsite.com to bigsite.com homepage.

Considering both sites share same ssl, server and company name, I am quite sure this is out of google's guide lines and would hurt bigsite.com.

Do you agree that this is wrong from the new SEO, and that it could hurt my work and the search results for bigsite.com and smallsite.com, as well as team work ?

Thanks
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0

Browse Questions

View

From

Sorted by

With category

Explore more categories

Related Questions

Links Not Detected by MOZ, AHREFS, GSC-ARE THESE QUALITY LINKS?

Our SEO provider has been creating content (6 blog posts per month as well as building page write ups) and has been promoting that content. Several links per month have been created as a result of this effort. Many of the links have been from commercial real estate publications. I am concerned that the quality of these links is not high enough to improve our ranking. Most links do not appear on AHREFS, Google Search Console or MOZ. Is this a red flag that these links are weak? Ranking and traffic on the site have improved considerably since this provider began the project in April of 2019. They have been writing about 30 pages about New York City. commercial buildings each month in addition to 4 short blog posts and 2 extremely well researched and authoritative blog posts. My concern is that the links are not of sufficient quality to result increased ranking. That the improvement in ranking is solely due to the addition of new content rather than the creation of these links. Basically, that I am incurring the cost on an ongoing basis of an link building campaign with little to no benefit. That being the case, I would shift resources to content creation and increase and improve content rather than develop links with little value. A sample of links are below: Would greatly appreciate some feedback as to whether these are in fact helpful to the domain authority, reputation and ranking of our website. Thanks,
Alan https://patch.com/new-york/bayside/bayside-queens-priciest-area-retail-office-space-study https://qns.com/story/2019/12/04/these-commercial-streets-in-queens-were-among-the-most-expensive-in-2019/ https://patch.com/new-york/brooklyn/flatbush-ave-priciest-retail-spot-outside-manhattan-study http://thejewishvoice.com/2019/12/07/nycs-most-expensive-commercial-streets-neighborhoods-in-2019-would-surprise-you/ https://atalyst.com/investment-banking-interview-metro-manhattan/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1

0
How to proceed? Older ecommerce site, unnatural link warning 2013, disavow, now what?

Hello all, I have a small, older ecommerce site. It has been around since 2002. It ranked very well until a few years ago. It currently does rank for some terms, but not many. (I am trying to say that it is not completely off the map.) Our domain authority is 36. Our Spam Score in Open Site Explorer is a 2/10. We received a notice in GWT in May 2013 re: unnatural links. That notice has since cleared from our account. I assume that it has expired. We were working with an SEO consultant when we received the notice from Google in 2013. He started working on cleaning up our link profile at that point. He submitted a disavowal file to Google with all of the domains that he was not able to get cleaned up manually. He kept working and updated the file again in June 2014. He told me that we did not have to file a reconsideration request. He did find that an SEO company that I hired in the past had gotten me a lot of spammy links. We got these taken down. There are still some spammy links that seem to keep cropping up. I have started going through Open Site Explorer to again contact some of these spammy sites to ask them to take our links down. Of course, the emails immediately bounce back to me. I am documenting everything. I feel like I am in a hole and can't dig out. What am a doing wrong? Should I disavow again? Should we have filed a reconsideration request a year or two ago? At this point, is it too late to do so as the penalty no longer shows up in my GWT account? How should I proceed? I prefer not to post my URL, but I would be happy to PM it to anyone who can offer advice. Thanks in advance. Melissa
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pajamalady

0
Should I remove all vendor links (link farm concerns)?

I have a web site that has been around for a long time. The industry we serve includes many, many small vendors and - back in the day - we decided to allow those vendors to submit their details, including a link to their own web site, for inclusion on our pages. These vendor listings were presented in location (state) pages as well as more granular pages within our industry (we called them "topics). I don't think it's important any more but 100% of the vendors listed were submitted by the vendors themselves, rather than us "hunting down" links for inclusion or automating this in any way. Some of the vendors (I'd guess maybe 10-15%) link back to us but many of these sites are mom-and-pop sites and would have extremely low authority. Today the list of vendors is in the thousands (US only). But the database is old and not maintained in any meaningful way. We have many broken links and I believe, rightly or wrongly, we are considered a link farm by the search engines. The pages on which these vendors are listed use dynamic URLs of the form: \vendors<state>-<topic>. The combination of states and topics means we have hundreds of these pages and they thus form a significant percentage of our pages. And they are garbage 🙂 So, not good.</topic></state> We understand that this model is broken. Our plan is to simply remove these pages (with the list of vendors) from our site. That's a simple fix but I want to be sure we're not doing anything wring here, from an SEO perspective. Is this as simple as that - just removing these page? How much effort should I put into redirecting (301) these removed URLs? For example, I could spend effort making sure that \vendors\California- <topic>(and for all states) goes to a general "topic" page (which still has relevance, but won't have any vendors listed)</topic> I know there is no distinct answer to this, but what expectation should I have about the impact of removing these pages? Would the removal of a large percentage of garbage pages (leaving much better content) be expected to be a major factor in SEO? Anyway, before I go down this path I thought I'd check here in case I miss something. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarkWill

0
Would a sitewide link to a 1mb exe download harm rankings?

We're in a games market and we have a link on every page to our download. The link is an aspx but there is no downloadpage as such - clicking on the link triggers an executable download that is just less than one meg. We've been looking at the top results in our very competitive market and the top 8 don't seem to have a download. Coincidence or a real factor?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dancape

0
Should I 'nofollow' links between my own sites?

We have five sites which are largely unrelated but for cross-promotional purpose our company wishes to cross link between all our sites, possibly in the footer. I have warned about potential consequences of cross-linking in this way and certainly don't want our sites to be viewed as some sort of 'link ring' if they all link to one another. Just wondering if linking between sites you own really is that much of an issue and whether we should 'nofollow' the links in order to prevent being slapped with any sort of penalty for cross-linking.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | simon_realbuzz

0
Website architecture and sitewide link

Hello, I was reading this article about website architecture http://www.seomoz.org/blog/site-architecture-for-seo and I have a question about site wide link... I don't think site wide link are good if you want your homepage to have the most " juice " can someone confirm that to me. What I mean by site wide link is let's say I have a page about golf in califorina and I create a link to another page of my website which is about golf in florida that a good practicee to do that or not ? I just used this calculator http://www.webworkshop.net/pagerank_calculator.php and and if I do site wide links the juice doesn't go to my most important page ( the homepage ) which is the one I currently want to have the most juice. However, I noticed that website like amazon do site wide link let's say you are looking at a book and they have lots of links for other books or categories and they still rank very well for the word "textbooks" so I am kind of lost and don't understand why they still rank even though to me their juice goes away by doing site wide links to other books or categories ( even though it is related ) Can someone tell me more about site wide links are they good , bad etc... and is this calculator I use right or wrong ? Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics

0
Linking Sister-Sites - Diapers.com Example

Many of the big guns like 1800 Flowers, Diapers.com and others all have their sister sites in tabs at the top. Example: http://www.diapers.com/ with their 3 other properties. Since all properties link to one another on every page, it's really a wash, right? No real gain as engines know they are connected and it's the same link multiple times. No real problem either as it's natural for the user experience to have reciprocal links here between the brands. Any additional thoughts here?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEOPA

0
One platform, multiple niche sites: Worth $60/mo so each site has different class C?

Howdy all, The short of it is that I currently run a very niche business directory/review website and am in the process of expanding the system to support running multiple sites out of the same database/codebase. In a normal setup I'd just run all the sites off of the same server with all of them sharing a single IP address, but thanks to the wonders of the cloud, it would be fairly simple for me to run each site on it's own server at a cost of about $60/mo/site giving each site a unique IP on a unique c-block (in many cases a unique a-block even.) The ultimate goal here is to leverage the authority I've built up for the one site I currently run to help grow the next site I launch, and repeat the process. The question is: Is the SEO-value that the sites can pass to each other worth the extra cost and management overhead? I've gotten conflicting answers on this topic from multiple people I consider pretty smart so I'd love to know what other people say.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | qurve

0