What are the good strategies using satellite sites in SEO??
-
Hello to everybody,
We'are thinking about launching a massive amount of satellite websites in order to promote our website. Is it really efficient in terms of link building? Or is the ROI really small due to the amount of time and money needed to create and manage these websites?
Thanks a lot!!!
Update: Thanks to all of you for all these interesting answers!
-
Doing it this way is indeed pointless. But if you adjust the strategy a little, it can work very well.
What do I mean? Instead of satellite sites (new domains with no link history, no trust or authority), create satellite pages on established authority domains (Web 2.0 sites, blog platforms, etc, youi know the ones I mean). It's all about the domains (domain authority, links from domains are more important than page metrics).
And don't just stop at one page. Publish multiple pages/articles on those authority sites.
Of course, you must also build links to your satellite pages
-
Lots of people think... "I'll build fifty-five sites to kickass on my competitor because it will give me a shitload of backlinks."
Those backlinks are worth nothing. You can't manufacture links. Google is too smart for that.
They would be better off building a giant site that dominates the niche and THEN building satellite sites and powering them with links from the giant site.
-
Mine too!
-
Please call all of my competitors and sell them this service.
-
I think almost all of us have considered this strategy. I know when I first started out I had a main niche and then I bought up a bunch of keyword rich domains and created microsites. The thing is that these are rarely helpful at all.
A link from a site is only going to add significant value if that site itself is a good one in Google's eyes. So, a link from a brand new site with no backlinks itself is not going to be worth much. And, if this microsite is likely to accumulate natural backlinks, you'd get much more value if those backlinks were actually pointing to your main site.
The way I look at it is this - if you create links yourself, then they usually aren't worth much. One of the main points of Google's evolving algorithm is trying to determine which links are worthy and which are not. So, you'll find that self-made links are rarely helpful.
I'd put that time and effort into putting content on your main site and then alerting other webmasters of your awesome content.
-
Very common Tactic. I would say use your resources building great content on your main site, and you will see a better return. The question you are asking really comes down to a point of view, and then math.
A bunch of sites, with little or no juice, will help a little. A bunch of links back from Blogs. Sites, and social media will pay off big time if you can create the interesting content. Interesting is:
"something that concerns, involves, draws the attention of, or arouses the curiosity of a person"
So I would ask this question. What is it you can do with the current web site that will create Interest.
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
-
Thoughts on Google's Autocomplete hurting organic SEO?
A client sent over an article about how Google's Autocomplete eliminates your chance for clicks. Saying that if your competitor is higher than you, the user will bypass the page one organic rank and click on a specific business from the autocomplete which in turn presents an entire page one result for that business. So in a sense they are wondering why they're doing organic SEO if potential customers are just going to bypass the page one organic results. I would love to hear thoughts from like minded people on this as I have to start proving my case with articles, facts, data, and research.
Algorithm Updates | | MERGE-Chicago0 -
New .TLD domains - SEO Value?
Hi all, I see that a new wave of domains are to be released soon. We are not talking or 1 or 2 new extensions, but more like 700 new extensions on a TLD level. What's your views on their SEO value? thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | bjs20100 -
ALT TAGS for SEO - whats the latest recommendation?
ALT Tags used strategically have always been a part of my SEO recommendations (relevant, under 7 words, not keyword stuffed but focused on primary page keyword). I have been getting mixed views on updates that search engines don't use them anymore in ranking determination. The Q&A on this subject was last addressed in 2011, what is the most recent approach on this?
Algorithm Updates | | MikeSEOTruven0 -
Top resulting sites sites for a specific keyword
I'm teaching myself SEO so that I can speak more intelligently to it with my clients. I've spent a great deal of time on seomoz and love it. The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know and that brings me to my current question. I can search on a keyword and see results, however I see every URL available. I'm looking for a simple way to see the root domains for the top 100-500 resulting websites for a specific keyword. Is there an easy way to get this information I'm sure it's right in front of me, but I can't find it. Many thanks, ahossom
Algorithm Updates | | ahossom0 -
Local Vs National SEO Rankings
Hi Guys, I just had a quick question, is it truly possible to rank number one worldwide/nationally for a keyword phrase these days such as, Computer repair services. I'm not too concerned with the local serps that come up above the fold. I'm just more concerned, if Google is looking to serve more local results into the regular serps listing? I hope that makes sense thanks. Best, Peter
Algorithm Updates | | PeterRota0 -
Did The Last Google Algorithm Update, Hit sites with poor anchor text?
My content is quite strong within my niche, so I ranked well, but last month my rankings plummeted. On closer examination and scrutiny I discovered my anchor text needed updating. Has anyone else seen this happening in the last four weeks?
Algorithm Updates | | simonberenyi0 -
Should I use canonical tags on my site?
I'm trying to keep this a generic example, so apologies if this is too vague. On my main website, we've always had a duplicate content issue. The main focus of our site is breaking down to specific, brick and mortar locations. We have to duplicate the description of product/service for every geographic location (this is a legal requirement). So for example, you might have the parent "product/service" page targeting the term, and then 100's of sub pages with "product/service San Francisco", "product/service Austin", etc. These pages have identical content except for the geographic location is dynamically swapped out. There is also additional useful content like google map of area, local resources, etc. As I said this was always seen as an SEO issue, specifically you could see in the way that googlebot would crawl pages and how pagerank flowed through the site that having 100's of pages with identical copy and just swapping out the geographic location wasn't seen as good content, however we still always received traffic and conversions for the long tail geographic terms so we left it. Las year, with Panda, we noticed a drop in traffic and thought it was due to this duplicate issue so I added canonical tags to all our geographic specific product/service pages that pointed back to the parent page, that seemed to be received well by google and traffic was back to normal in short order. However, recently what I notice a LOT in our SERP pages is if I type in a geographic specific term, i.e. "product/service san francisco", our deep page with the canonical tag is what google is ranking. Google inserts its own title tag on the SERP page and leaves the description blank as it doesn't index the page due to the canonical tag on the page. Essentially what I think it is rewarding is the site architecture which organizes the content to the specific geo in the URL: site.com/service/location/san-francisco. Other than that there is no reason for it to rank that page. Sorry if this is lengthy, thanks for reading all of that! Essentially my question is, should I keep the canonical tags on the site or take them off since Google insists on ranking the page? If I am ranking already then the potential upside to doing that is ranking higher (we're usually in the 3-6 spot on the result page) and also higher CTR because we can get a description back on our resulting page. The counter argument is I'm already ranking so leave it and focus on other things. Appreciate your thoughts on this!
Algorithm Updates | | edu-SEO0 -
Does google have the worst site usability?
Google tells us to make our sites better for our readers, which we are doing, but do you think google has horrible site usabilty? For example, in webmaster tools, I'm always being confused by their changes and the way they just drop things. In the HTML suggestions area, they don't tell you when the data was last updated, so the only way to tell is to download the files and check. In the URL removals, they used to show you the URLs they had removed. Now that is gone and the only way you can check is to try adding one. We don't have any URL parameters, so any parameters are as a result of some other site tacking on stuff at the end of our URL and there is no way to tell them that we don't have any parameters, so ignore them all. Also, they add new parameters they find on the end of the list, so the only way to check is to click through to the end of the list.
Algorithm Updates | | loopyal0