Penguin or paid link penalty, or both?
-
Hello,
I have a site, macpokeronline.com, that has seen dramatic decrease in visitors in the last few months, it has went down from 800 per day to 200 per day. It is a pretty complex situation.
The site owner purchased paid links from reputable mac sites for years (they were more of followed advertisements, but were only there for SEO Purposes), now that i'm going through the link profligate ins OSE, I can see that a majority of their links come from these sites.
There is also a branding issue, there are almost 15,000 links with the anchor text of "macpokeronline.com" These are obviously branded links, I don't know the best way to deal with them (though the majority are coming from the paid link sites)
We have just sent the request in to remove the paid links from the sites, and i'm guessing since he is paying over $1000 a month for the links, they will be removed quickly.
The site has been receiving significantly less traffic since penguin (apr 24-25)
We received a message on July 19th which was the generic unnatural link warning, saying that once we remove links make a reconsideration request. Then on July 23rd, we received another message that says they are taking a "very targeted action on the unnatural links instead of your site as a whole" which I have never seen before.
This damage was done before I was hired by this client, I just want to get his traffic back up so I can help him even further, I want to know more about the steps I should take.
1. I will definitely remove the paid ads
What else should I do,
thanks
Zach
-
Good stuff, let me know how you get on.
Have you done any analysis on which anchors are causing the problems? That is, which keywords has the site lost traffic for?
If you do a compare between the two weeks before and the two weeks after the penalty and look at the organic keywords in traffic sources you can see the specific ones that have dropped in traffic. This will give you more input into which anchor texts are problematic so you can dig further into the link profile.
Anyhow, do let us know how you get on.
Cheers
Marcus
-
Just as an update,
I turned the paid links off, they will be removed eventually (contract issues), but they are at least nofollowed right now, sot they are out of the SEO way.
-
If the client has a generally healthy link profile, with just some crap, then removing that will see you bounce back. This really becomes problematic when a large percentage (if not all) of the link profile is just pure dirge and then... it can be time to start over.
Keep us posted, would love to hear about it when you get this site to bounce back and updating this ticket would make it a better resource for all.
All the best
Marcus
-
Thank you for your response. My client has invested a lot of time and money into this site and understands that we have to fix the penalties before we can go acquire more links etc..
I got entered into this mess post penguin, and my all of my clients besides him were not penalized so this is kind of new territory for me. Overall, besides these paid links, his site is pretty healty link wise, and I think once these are removed he will be up and running in no time.
thanks again
Zach
-
Thank you for the response. I actually was abbreviating OSE, meaning open site explorer. I'm currently cleaning up the site itself in test mode, then making it live afterwards. I am also working on the links.
-
Hey Zach
The penalty issues in 2012 have become a nightmare to deal with in some ways as the messages from Google are unclear and there are just so many potential issues. So, to deal with it properly we have to diagnose what the issues are and then make sure that we show what we have done that was wrong and that we have made efforts to have it removed.
Looking at your case from like 10,000 feet it we can discern the following.
1. you lost traffic on the 24th of April so you were seemingly hit by penguin. We know penguin is going after certain types of links so a quick look at your link profile in open site explorer shows us that the most popular keyword used by a site to link to you is 'poker on line' and not a branded term as would be expected - this is used by 74 sites.
You also have 15,000 links with the URL as the anchor so a branded and safe anchor, but, these 15,000 links come from only 19 sites so you have another penguin favourite in masses of footer links.
These two points represent a large chunk of your links so cleaning these up may see you bounce back if this is purely an algorithmic penalty.
2. July 19th Message - if this is the standard message it would indicate you also have a manual penalty as well now and need to take further action. This is now more difficult as you need to ensure your link profile is squeaky clean as it will be reviewed by a member of the web spam team.
3. This further email lets you know that google are distrusting some links to your site rather than your site as a whole. Quite how this fits into your penguin and manual penalty situation is unclear but I would say that the action points you need to take for points 1 & 2 will cover this anyway.
Action Points
A. Contact the 74 sites and where they are not spammy links ask them to change the anchor on these links to something branded.
B. Contact the 19 sites with the sitewide footer links and have them removed OR no followed. If they are paid, then just get rid of them.
C. Review the entire link profile and contact the sites to have any dodgy links removed. You would do well to keep a spreadsheet and date the requests and if you do three attempts log the dates. If you want to go further, you can have a legal letter drafted and send it to the site owners and again detail this in your spreadsheet.
Reconsideration Request
Once you have cleaned up everything as best as possible you can then submit a reconsideration request. You will want to link to your spreadsheet and detail everything you have done to remove the dodgy links. Remember you seemingly have a penguin penalty and a manual penalty so you will want to ensure you have done a thorough job that will solve the anchor and footer links problem and resolve any problems that human eyes will spot on a review.
--
Best of luck, your site is in a hole and has picked up every link penalty going so... as the old song says, things can only get better! I would certainly indicate to your client just how bad the situation is and that your job, before you can do any 'SEO' and improve his traffic, is to remove his problems.
All the best
Marcus -
Zach this is something I have already dealt with...
- OSE will never show you all the links I would highly recommend you using Open Site Explorer as it will give you the detail link of back links...
- Using Network of site is a BIG no... Try to remove as many links as possible and submit the reconsideration request to Google.
- Build quality links to the website... as many as possible
- I have witnessed the limited penalty due to unnatural links because you are overlooking the links that are not shown in OSE.
Try the suggestions above and you will be get some traffic back and this is the time when you should submit your reconsideration request again!
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
-
Base href + relative link href for canonical link
I have a site that in the head section we specify a base href being the domain with a trailing slash and a canonical link href being the relative link to the domain. <base <="" span="">href="http://www.domain.com/" /> href="link-to-page.html" rel="canonical" /> I know that Google recommends using an absolute path as a canonical link but is specifying a base href with a relative canonical link the same thing or is it still seen as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16116990439410 -
Google Penalties not in Webmaster tools?
Hi everybody, I have a client that used to rank very well in 2014. They launched an updated URL structure early January 2015, and since they rank very low on most of the keywords (except the brand keywords). I started working with them early this year, tried to understand what happened, but they have no access to their old website and I cant really compare. I tried the started optimisation methods but nothing seems to work. I have a feeling they have been penalised by Google, probably a Panda penalty, but their Webmaster tools account does not show any penalties under manual actions. Do people impose penalties that are not added to Webmaster tools? If so, is there away I can find out what penalties and what is wrong exactly so we can start fixing it? The website is for a recruitment agency and they have around 400 jobs listed on it. I would love to share the link to the website but I don't believe the client will be happy with that. Thank you in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iQi0 -
Link Spring Clean
Hey, Based on the most up to date thinking - what's the best way to approach a link spring clean? We've got a site with a large amount of links (a few of which look a bit spammy - SEO directories etc) Also, the brand changed it's name and URL a while back so there are directory/web citations using the old URL and sometimes the old name. The old URL is 301'd but I'm thinking (especially in terms of local SEO) these citations with differnt business names/numbers/web addresses could be particularly harmful? Cheers!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wearehappymedia1 -
WhoIs penalty
Does anyone know if it's possible to get a penalty on WHOIS data and a shared IP address? We had some bad SEO done (And at ranking demolished) on one of our company websites which has the same WHOIS data and is on the same IP address as another side which is just seems to have taken a knock. Is it possible Google could have associated both and penalised accordingly?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman100 -
What Are Latest Internal Linking Strategies?
I have been doing a little research, but all the articles are really old. Even the Moz site page is pretty old. So I am wondering, has the strategy changed? Is it OK to still use internal links with your keywords in them? Do you have multiple links on a page? What about a blog post? Do you no follow? What are the thoughts out there on this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | netviper0 -
Google Manual Penalty - Unnatural Links FROM My Site - Where?
Hi Mozzers, I've just received a manual penalty for one of my websites. The penalty is for 'unnatural links from my site which I find disturbing because I can't see that anything really wrong with it. The website is www.lighting-tips.co.uk - its a pretty new blog (only 6-7 posts) and whilst I've allowed guest posting I'm being very careful that the content is relevant and good quality. I'm only allowing 1 - 2 links and very few with proper anchor text so I'm wondering what has been done so wrong that I'm getting this manual penalty? Am I missing something here? Thanks in advance. Aaron
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AaronGro0 -
If google ignores links from "spammy" link directories ...
Then why does SEO moz have this list: http://www.seomoz.org/dp/seo-directory ?? Included in that list are some pretty spammy looking sites such as: <colgroup><col width="345"></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | adriandg
| http://www.site-sift.com/ |
| http://www.2yi.net/ |
| http://www.sevenseek.com/ |
| http://greenstalk.com/ |
| http://anthonyparsons.com/ |
| http://www.rakcha.com/ |
| http://www.goguides.org/ |
| http://gosearchbusiness.com/ |
| http://funender.com/free_link_directory/ |
| http://www.joeant.com/ |
| http://www.browse8.com/ |
| http://linkopedia.com/ |
| http://kwika.org/ |
| http://tygo.com/ |
| http://netzoning.com/ |
| http://goongee.com/ |
| http://bigall.com/ |
| http://www.incrawler.com/ |
| http://rubberstamped.org/ |
| http://lookforth.com/ |
| http://worldsiteindex.com/ |
| http://linksgiving.com/ |
| http://azoos.com/ |
| http://www.uncoverthenet.com/ |
| http://ewilla.com/ |0 -
Outgoing affiliate links and link juice
I have some affiliate websites which have loads of outgoing affiliate links. I've discussed this with a SEO friend and talked about the effect of the link juice going out to the affiliate sites. To minimize this I've put "no follows" on the affiliate links but my friend says that even if you have no follow Google still then diminishes the amount of juice that goes to internal pages, for example if the page has 10 links, 9 are affiliate with no follow - Google will only give 10% of the juice to the 1 internal page. Does anyone know if this is the case? and whether there are any good techniques to keep as much link juice on the site as possible without transferring to affiliate links? Appreciate any thoughts on this! Cheers
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ventura0