Is it impossible to get out of Panda? Matt Cutts says if you fix the problem you "pop back" but if so why are their so few examples?
-
In this video matt cutts says: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IzUuhTyvJk about 15
"once we re-run our data (every few weeks) if we determine your site is of higher quality you would pop back out of being affected"
Panda has effected thousands of sites and a lot of smart people have been working on the problem for about 2 years since the first panda was launched, but I can only find 1 site that has "popped back" to their original rankings. e.g. http://searchengineland.com/google-panda-two-years-later-losers-still-losing-one-real-recovery-149491
Apart from Motortrend.com I can't find any sites (of reasonable size) / case studies of sites that have solved the panda problem, and were definitely hit by panda. Which doesn't feel right, some people have deleted a ton of pages, redesigned their site, improved their content, etc with no success. Therefore is it a pointless exercise? Therefore, is it better to simply give up and start a new site?
-
Yeah, I noticed the graph was cut pretty short after they gained traffic back. They must have forgotten to knock on wood before they posted about their recovery.
-
Hi Chris,
Daniweb did recovery for a short period, but then lost their traffic again, there is more here: http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/webmasters/HiGVM9h2ioE%5B1-25-false%5D
I know google is planning to soften panda, and about time too.
thanks,
julian.
-
Julian,
There are a few more listed here on screamingfrog's blog and daniweb said they recovered. Seerinteractive also wrote about a client they helped to recover. But you're right, there are very few examples of big sites who have recovered.
-
Hi Jason,
Yes I've heard a lot more stories like that too. Which is how it should be, you fix the problem and google then gives you your rankings, traffic and revenue back. But with Panda it doesn't seem to work that way, even though Matt Cutts says it does, which is frustrating, annoying and unfair.
The lack of response to this question seems to confirm my fear that its impossible to get out of panda.
Julian.
-
I have not seen it with Panda but I have seen it with Penguin. We removed the bad links and the site popped back up with 2-3 days. It was actually a couple of spammy link edu pyramid pointed at the website with exact match anchor text all the way up. We removed the few links that were actually pointing to the site and problem solved. Very Strange...
Wish I could be more helpful with Panda... We have never had any issues there.
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
-
Tracking down rel="canonical" on Wordpress site
A rel="canonical" is being added to every page and post on my Wordpress site - not tag results, not category results. Not a major problem, right? Except that I don't know where it's coming from. I've tried tracking it down - change the theme back to a default one, turn off all the plugins - it's still there. Is it coming from .htaccess perhaps? The only issue it is causing is that it has causes me to have to turn off the canonical option in Platinum SEO as that was resulting in two identical rel=canon on each page. It doesn't seem to be causing problem but I'd like to get a better understanding of what it going on.
On-Page Optimization | | robandsarahgillespie0 -
Problem with internal links.
Hello,I am trying to do an audit of the internal links of my site at zenplugs.com. I am having great difficulty simply trying to establish how many internal links there are on the home page. Off the top of my head I think there are probably 20-25 but Screaming Frog tells me there are 574, the MozBar is listing zero and Open Site Explorer is telling me my site hasn't been indexed yet. I have tried several web based services but most of them don't work. Can anyone recommend a tool which has given them a number they trust? My second query is that one of the tools told me that there are 4 links on the home page with no anchor text, linking to http://zenplugs.com/#. Is this a problem? Many thanks, in advance. Toby
On-Page Optimization | | T0BY0 -
What Next after Weekly Crawl Errors Fixed?
Hi MoZ Community! Moz weekly crawl used to report following errors : I have fixed them all over the time. Can somebody give an idea what to do next with the help of Moz or away from Moz to improve my optimization practices. I believe this is just start of the SEO. Or how is it if I focus link building efforts and start fighting for keywords. Also any suggestions about the web? Tanveer | Duplicate Page Content 4XX (Client Error) Title Missing or Empty 5XX (Server Error) Missing Meta Description Tag Duplicate Page Title Title Element Too Long (> 70 Characters) Title Element Too Short Meta Refresh Temporary Redirect |
On-Page Optimization | | Sequelmed0 -
SEOmoz Says 530 - Google Webmaster Tools Says 16
A SEOmoz crawl report on 1/20/2013 says we have 530 duplicate page titles most of which are pages like this these two: http://www.audiobooksonline.com/reviews/review.php/details/38 http://www.audiobooksonline.com/reviews/review.php/details/104 These pages are the result of allowing visitors to post their opinions and ratings about specific audio books. Google Webmaster Tools reports we have 16 duplicate page titles none of which are a review page. Why is SEOmoz reporting duplicate page titles? Should SEOmoz be reporting these pages as having duplicate page titles? Why isn't Google Webmaster Tools reporting the review pages as having duplicate titles?
On-Page Optimization | | lbohen0 -
What does this mean on first step up setting up a campaign? "Having two "twin" domains that both resolve forces them to battle for SERP positions, making your SEO efforts less effective. We suggest redirecting one, then entering the other here."
I am BRAND new to this, and setting up my first campaign. I choose subdomain, and entered www.pdsaz.com. This is the message I receive: We have detected that the domain www.pdsaz.com and the domain pdsaz.com both respond to web requests and do not redirect. Having two "twin" domains that both resolve forces them to battle for SERP positions, making your SEO efforts less effective. We suggest redirecting one, then entering the other here.
On-Page Optimization | | cschwartzel0 -
Creating a product per size causing duplicate content problems?
I have an e-commerce site and in order to receive a listing for each size and color in Google Merchant, I've created a new product for each size and color. The problem is that since I did this, the canonical tags aren't correct and there isn't a way to change them manually with the platform I'm on. I feel like this is one of the main reasons I've been dropping in the rankings. Should I delete all duplicate products? The system will take care of canonical tags automatically when creating a new size/color within the system (how it's supposed to be created) but the canonical tags become messy when I duplicate a product and edit the size/color to create a "whole new product". Here is an example of what I'm referring to: http://www.carbonconnection.com/search.php?search_query=nalini+rigel&x=0&y=0 (this problem actually isn't mine, it's a friend's but for the sake of simplicity and gaining a second opinion to be sure before he redoes all of his products, I'm asking as though it were my issue)
On-Page Optimization | | EmdeS0 -
Canonical URL problem
On page analysis wanted me to add a canonical url tag. However I added then re ran the on page analysis and it came up with an error. What is the proper way to add a canonical url tag in the head of an index page? ie. add a canonical tag to www.hompeage.com/index.html would it be ? Or should I ignore this for a home page? Because I add it then run the analysis again and get this? Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Canonical URL</dt> <dd>"http://www.ensoplastics.com/index.html"</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>If the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. Make sure you're targeting the right page (if this isn't it, you can reset the target above) and then change the canonical tag to reference that URL.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>We check to make sure that IF you use canonical URL tags, it points to the right page. If the canonical tag points to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. If you've not made this page the rel=canonical target, change the reference to this URL. NOTE: For pages not employing canonical URL tags, this factor does not apply.</dd> <dd>So do I add it or not? If I don't I get a lower page rating if I take it off I get a higher page rating with room for improvement. </dd> </dl>
On-Page Optimization | | ENSO0
