Phantom Update?
-
Hi All,
I know this is a long while back but I think we started to lose our organic traffic after the Phantom update back in May 2013.
We have two websites, one offering serviced apartments in London only and one website offering serviced apartments across the world.
The apartments we feature in London are the same on both sites - although they have different product descriptions, meta data etc.
I read that the Phantom update hit websites which were owned by the same company.
Do you think we are still being penalised for this?
Any thoughts at all would be greatly appreciated !
Thanks,
Laura
-
Hi Matt,
Thank you for your response.
I'm not sure what duplicate content you are referring to?
We are in the process of cleaning up our link profile.
-
-
Duplicate content on most every page of your site. Basically nothing unique = why would Google rank you?
-
56% anchor on your main keyword in Ahrefs. This seems quite high.
-
Majestic shows 50,000 backlinks from 3200 referring domains from only 1600 subnets (usually a sign of buying links & spam).
Backlinks from:
And other spam/porn sites. You also have a ton of EDU & GOV links - more than seems normal. Definitely needs a disavow.
I don't think you have an owner problem. That's way too meta for this. Your content isn't unique and you have tons of link spam.
-
-
That's really difficult to say without looking at more precise details, although my hunch is that other marketing efforts should have been able to overcome an algorithmic change like ownership tags. More than ownership though Google has been moving towards offering a diversity of results so if the two websites are on the same domain that could be at play. Also increasing during that period of time are localization and personalization with the results so global competition could be gaining on your sites while yours remains unchanged.
To really break it down you'll want a professional looking at:
- Analytics - What referral trends have been at play, what wins have not been replicated recently
- Webmaster Tools - Any warnings that have gone addressed? Are we responsive? Mobile?
- Diversity of results - Are some of our big past traffic generating results no longer showing up? Maps? Images? Video? etc.
And many more. I think really having success with just a couple of those aspects would get you plenty of organic results.
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
-
Updated Title Tag preference
Hi, This was a topic a couple years ago https://moz.com/community/q/title-tag-use-comma-pipe-or-colon I was wondering if there was any update on this as the consensus on this thread seemed to say using a pipe as a separator is best, but in Moz's title tag recommendations it has hyphen and pipe Primary Keyword - Secondary Keyword | Brand Name Does anyone know if using a pipe | between the primary keyword and secondary has adverse effects? Also, does removing the brand name for the sake of length hurt you in any way? Thanks for the help!
Technical SEO | | AliMac260 -
What was the Google 'update' on 31st March?
Hi all. I looked back and saw that there was an update shown in 'Search Analytics' in Webmaster Tools a few weeks before the Mobile algorithm update. Not been able to find any mention of it and what it did so thought I'd check in here. ps. Also, this is a 90 day stretch and shows that our rankings have taken a hit since the mobile algorithm update. Interesting stuff (see image below) 4rJMU9e.jpg?1
Technical SEO | | RobFD0 -
Site hit by algorthithmic update in October 2014 - filters and thin content queries.
Back in October 2014 last year, a site we are working with had a significant drop in organic traffic. This coincided with Google's algorithmic update. The side in question uses filters extensively and at the time did not have any canonical tags in place. The lions share of these filter pages had little or no written content just products. The website now has canonical tags throughout and content has started to be added to the top level categories and we will continue to add more, however there is still a large amount of pages with little or no content. Webmaster tools shows that there are large amounts of internal links (for instance 42,000+ to the homepage) which must be due to the filtered pages. I am looking for advice on what is the best way to proceed. Do I edit robots.txt, start adding no follow tags or something else entirely?
Technical SEO | | bfinternet0 -
January 2013 Google update affected my projects ?
I am running 400+ projects. Mostly all projects keyword rank has been effected recently. IS there any new update from google between 10-19 January 2013 ?
Technical SEO | | deepakwadhwa0 -
Drupal Updates = errors
We have worked diligently to correct our SEO Moz crawl diagnostic errors to below 20. However, at least twice now, our coder updates the drupal security warnings and BINGO- every time - our errors go sky high again. Any thoughts?
Technical SEO | | Stevej240 -
Google Fresh Update
Here's a question, if you put the date in your url (often a wordpress format) would that be seen by Google now as 'fresh' content? - part of their new update.
Technical SEO | | pauledwards0 -
Best practise for updating software guide
Heya! I write a guide for a specific piece of Internet-based software which is about to undergo a major patch release. No-one's going to be using the old version, so my old-version articles are essentially going to be useless, as are keywords related to the old version number. Given that, I'm intending to update all my guides to be current with the new version. However, obviously I want to keep the Google juice for the old guides, as they rank pretty well. The three options I'm considering: Simply retitle the old guides to the latest version number - "How to use Blue Widget 2.0" becomes "How to use Blue Widget 3.0". Disadvantage - my URLs still include the old version number, 2.0. Write updated guides as seperate articles and 301 redirect the old articles to them. I've done this before with some success. So, I'd 301 the URL for "How to use Blue Widget 2.0" to the url for "How to use Blue Widget 3.0", my new article. Disadvantages - possible loss of link juice? Also, I believe redirects can be kinda tricksy. Just leave both the old and new versions up there, with a link from the old version saying "outdated, check the new version". My belief is that this would be the worst idea. Should I do one of them, or something else? And why?
Technical SEO | | Cairmen0 -
Google Quality Algorithm Update
I'm curious what correlations or impacting variables SEO professionals have found that have increased or decreased ranking with the most recent algorithm change. It appears that many innocent sites have fallen victim, especially larger sites. It also appears that Google is maintaining that specific sites were not targeted... Meaning there must be proven characteristics.
Technical SEO | | douglaskarr0