ECommerce site being "filtered" by last Panda update, ideas and discussion
-
Hello fellow internet go'ers!
Just as a disclaimer, I have been following a number of discussions, articles, posts, etc. trying to find a solution to this problem, but have yet to get anything conclusive. So I am reaching out to the community for help.
Before I get into the questions I would like to provide some background:
I help a team manage and improve a number of med-large eCommerce websites. Traffic ranges anywhere from 2K - 12K+ (per day) depending on the site. Back in March one of our larger sites was "filtered" from Google's search results. I say "filtered" because we didn't receive any warnings and our domain was/is still listed in the first search position. About 2-3 weeks later another site was "filtered", and then 1-2 weeks after that, a third site.
We have around ten niche sites (in total), about seven of them share an identical code base (about an 80% match). This isn't that uncommon, since we use a CMS platform to manage all of our sites that holds hundreds of thousands of category and product pages. Needless to say, April was definitely a frantic month for us. Many meetings later, we attributed the "filter" to duplicate content that stems from our product data base and written content (shared across all of our sites). We decided we would use rel="canonical" to address the problem. Exactly 30 days from being filtered our first site bounced back (like it was never "filtered"), however, the other two sites remain "under the thumb" of Google.
Now for some questions:
Why would only 3 of our sites be affected by this "filter"/Panda if many of them share the same content?
Is it a coincidence that it was an exact 30 day "filter"?
Why has only one site recovered?
-
Thanks for your responses.
@EGOL - I would agree that merging the sites would be ideal given that they share such a large database. Unfortunately, this isn't an option for our company (at this point-in-time). Acquiring new content for our product pages has been tossed around, but would be a HUGE undertaking, so its on the "back burner" for the moment.
@Ben Fox - We came to the conclusion that it was content because it was the only clear "offender" on the list of potential problems. However, the fact that only 3 of our sites got penalized perplexes me as well. It would have made more sense had all of our sites suffered a penalty (luckily only 3 did). One response I got from another forum was: since google removed enough duplicate content (3 sites in our case) it deemed that the others were "original".
We didn't point canonicals to any one site (like 9 going to 1). We only added the rel=canonical to our manufacturer category pages (a small percentage of pages). Since some of our domains sell products that aren't "niche specific" we told these pages to send preference to their proper niche domain (hope that made sense).
For discussion purposes, here is a response I got from another forum:
Why has only one site recovered?I suspect/assume the other sites will bounce back the same way after their own 30 day penalties expire.>Why would only 3 of our sites be affected by this "filter"/Panda if many of them share the same content????? maybe removing the first site allowed the scoring penalty applied to the other sites to shrink in size. as each site was removed, the penalty applied to the others correspondingly shrunk. ?????>Is it a coincidence that it was an exact 30 day "filter"?No. 30 day is a common penalty.Does anyone agree with these? I've heard of the 30 day penalty before. If this is the case, then a warning from Google would be nice.
-
Why would only 3 of our sites be affected by this "filter"/Panda if many of them share the same content?
Google can be slow to detect duplicate content and sometimes tolerates it.
Is it a coincidence that it was an exact 30 day "filter"?
Only google knows.
Why has only one site recovered?
Only google knows.
Google sees a lot of sites with same content and you say that these are "med-large" sites. If I was google I would say... "these are dupe content, we aren't going to index all of them, our searchers don't want to see ten sites with same stuff".
If these were my sites I would merge all of them into one single site. If the content on that site was unique to me I would probably then put all of my efforts into promotion and informative content for the product lines.
If the content was on other sites that I don't own then my efforts would go mainly into making unique product content and informative content for the product lines.
Google has been squashing duplicate content for years. If you have it and you place links between the sites it is very likely that at least one of your sites will be demoted in google or filtered - probably filtered. They don't want to spend their resources indexing ten duplicate sites. They would rather display unique sites to their searchers.
-
How did you decide that it was content causing the issue if only 3/10 of your sites were affected?
Also when you added the rel=canonical did 9 of your sites point to a primary site and was this the site that recovered?
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 good for SEO update blog post dates after update post content
Hello I am updating some posts of my Blog, adding new and fresh content and rewriting some of the existing. After doing that I am thinking to update de post publishing so that I appears on front page of the blog and user can read ir again. But I don't know if it is good for google to change the publishing date of the post that he had indexed 5 years ago. Also I don't know if google will read it again if it is old and see the new changes in order to improve it in search results
Algorithm Updates | | maestrosonrisas0 -
Best place to employ "branded" related keywords to gain SEO benefits and rank for "non branded" keywords?
Hi all, I want to put this question straight with an example rather than confusing with a scenario. If there is company called "vertigo", a tiles manufacturer. There are many search queries with thousands of searches like "vertigo tiles life", "vertigo tiles for garden", "vertigo tiles dealers", "vertigo tiles for kitchen", etc....These kind of pages will eventually have tendency to rank for non-branded keywords like "tiles for garden", "tiles for kitchen", etc. So where to employ these kind of help/info pages? Main website or sub-domain? Is it Okay to have these pages on sub-domain and traffic getting diverted to sub domain? What if the same pages are on main website? Will main website have ranking improvement for non branded keywords because of employing the landing pages with related topics? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Anyone else noticing "Related Topics" featured snippet? Is this new?
First time I've seen this type of featured snippet and now have seen it twice in the space of a couple hours. Queries on Google UK desktop: surgical instruments Hawking radiation Is this new? It definitely is for the "surgical instruments" search. Google are highlighting related topics/keywords in bold beneath the usual featured snippet. b261ea5b3279991f8549d20127f8fde3.png
Algorithm Updates | | Ria_0 -
Recent Algorithm Update Impact on Rankings
I've read that the most recent algorithm update by Google is targeting dodgy links. I have a client's website who within the last few days has been smashed out of of top positions for the most competitive keywords (and many others). I'm worried that the site has been penalised, however I can't understand why it would be. The site only has 11 domains linking to it (65 links total) and a lot of these links are coming from the same websites that link to all of our other web clients and none of them have experienced this sudden and significant drop in rankings. Does anyone know if Google is targeting a specific type of site, or how I can determine if my client's website has been penalised? I've not made any significant changes recently to the site's content or meta data, however rankings have remained steady for months now. It just seemed to happen overnight that they dropped off everything (eg. middle of page 2 to page 8 of search results for some of the better keywords) Thank you in advance for any assistance!
Algorithm Updates | | JuiceBoxOM0 -
Penguin Update and Long Tail Keywords
Since the Penguin update, organic traffic for our site; oxygenconcentratorstore.com
Algorithm Updates | | chuck-layton
has dropped almost 25%. The thing I cannot figure out is that when I compare April 1<sup>st</sup> to May 15<sup>th</sup> (before the update) and June 1<sup>st</sup> to July 15<sup>th</sup> (after); 8 of our top keywords are up. Our 2 main keywords are up 15% and 11%. Where we lost most of our traffic is from our longtail keywords. We have almost 1000 longtail keyword phrases that we got visits from in the April/May period that we did not get in the June/July period. Is there a reason why our top keywords would continue to improve while we most of the longtail keywords?? If Google penalized us, won’t all of our keywords be dropping and just not the longtail. Any help/info would be awesome. Thanks.0 -
What to do with eCommerce site with color variations of the same product?
On our eCommerce website we sell products that each have about 20 color variations. When the site was built each color variation was added individually instead as a single product with a configurable color option. Would it be best to combine the different variations into a single product with a configurable drop down menu for color or to leave as is? I am worried the search engines see the individual product pages for each color as duplicate content. What are your thoughts on how Zappos handles color variations? On the category page they display each color variation as an individual product but when the product is clicked it goes to a single product page with the different configurable color variations. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | jchosler1 -
Lesser visited, but highly ranked landing paged dropped in rank on Google. Time for a content update?
I noticed that my page one ranked landing pages that don't get a lot of love from me have dropped in rank big time on Google this week. This is a site that has static (meaning, I can't freshen up the content easily) landing pages for products that we sell. The pages that dropped are the ones that have the fewest inbound links, and don't get much attention on the social media side. Our most important landing pages have also dropped, but just a few spots on page one. This is a first for me. Does anyone think that this is a "lack of freshness" penalty? We are still number one on page one for our brand search terms. Would fresh content give me a shot at getting the pages back up? I'm willing to update them slowly, but before I go crazy, I'm reaching out to the pros here.
Algorithm Updates | | Ticket_King0 -
SEO updates and rank changes
We have been updating page titles and meta descriptions for a client (not changing ANY links and the content we are replacing is "fluff," no major keywords or any relevant information) yet in the past few weeks, rankings have plummeted. I used the SEOMoz grader to check and make sure we have the keywords in there, in the right places for the updated page source info, and we're getting A's yet for those same keywords, the website is nowhere to be found. For example for the phrase "organic t shirts," we get an A for this page: http://greenpromotionalitems.com/organic-t-shirts.htm but when searching organic t shirts, no Green Promotional Items... Ideas?
Algorithm Updates | | laidlawseo0