How do you handle a site with inherited negative links, but no penalty?
-
I'm trying to rank a new client for various key phrases that contain "it support."
The problem is that about 100 of their 180 total referring domains have links that include "it support" (usually as partial match, or if exact then for uninteresting terms with low traffic), mostly on quite low quality directories.
So, no penalty, and not much exact match I'm worried about, but I'm concerned that there's too high a percentage overall of partial match or simpy "it support"-based links for me to continue building keyword-optimized links to try and rank for the much harder terms we need to rank for...
Despite the large number of low quality directories, a disavowal does not seem like a good idea since there is no penalty, but how does one avoid being handicapped by such bad links that came before one's time?
-
If the links are low quality disavow them, better to be proactive rather than wait for a penalty then having to go through the process anyway.
-
I agree with Vijay. If you know they are low-quality links you should act to have them removed.
We have a client with the exact same issue. They had paid an SEO in the past to do some work and it would appear that the majority of that work was building incredibly poor quality links, including, but not limited to, creating entire sites with links solely back to the client's site.
We've spent the last few weeks clearing up the bad links, and there is still more to be done. We did pre-warn the client that this work was going to be carried out and explained that there was a potential of a drop in rankings due to it. Fortunately in this case, due to the other work being carried out, we didn't see an overall drop.
I would hate to be having a conversation with a client in a few months once they've been hit with a penalty saying "Yes, we knew there was a problem, but we ignored it because it wasn't causing a direct issue at the time"
-
Thanks for the advice, but I don't think disavowing links without a penalty in place sounds like a good practice. Would love to hear from some others on this subject?
-
Hi There,
First of all have you reviewed all the links on link Quality metrics and analyzed it well?
Use this URL to measure the RIGHT link quality first:
https://moz.com/blog/7-link-seoOnce you are convinced these are not so high-quality links which don't provide you right traffic and audience, then you should not take it lightly. If your website is not impacted till now, it doesn't mean that it won't be impacted in future, google and other search engines are getting smarter by the day and don't ever be complacent or over-smart with search engines.
Disavow low-quality links and move on to build a higher quality link profile.
I hope this helps, feel free to respond and ask further questions.
Best Regards,
Vijay
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
-
Links to my site still showing in Webmaster Tools from a non-existent site
We owned 2 sites, with the pages on Site A all linking over to similar pages on Site B. We wanted to remove the links from Site A to Site B, so we redirected all the links on Site A to the homepage on Site A, and took Site A down completely. Unfortunately we are still seeing the links from Site A coming through on Google Webmaster Tools for Site B. Does anybody know what else we can do to remove these links?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pedstores0 -
Disavow Links & Paid Link Removal (discussion)
Hey everyone, We've been talking about this issue a bit over the last week in our office, I wanted to extend the idea out to the Moz community and see if anyone has some additional perspective on the issue. Let me break-down the scenario: We're in the process of cleaning-up the link profile for a new client, which contains many low quality SEO-directory links placed by a previous vendor. Recently, we made a connection to a webmaster who controls a huge directory network. This person found 100+ links to our client's site on their network and wants $5/link to have them removed. Client was not hit with a manual penalty, this clean-up could be considered proactive, but an algorithmic 'penalty' is suspected based on historical keyword rankings. **The Issue: **We can pay this ninja $800+ to have him/her remove the links from his directory network, and hope it does the trick. When talking about scaling this tactic, we run into some ridiculously high numbers when you talk about providing this service to multiple clients. **The Silver Lining: **Disavow Links file. I'm curious what the effectiveness of creating this around the 100+ directory links could be, especially since the client hasn't been slapped with a manual penalty. The Debate: Is putting a disavow file together a better alternative to paying for crappy links to be removed? Are we actually solving the bad link problem by disavowing or just patching it? Would choosing not to pay ridiculous fees and submitting a disavow file for these links be considered a "good faith effort" in Google's eyes (especially considering there has been no manual penalty assessed)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Etna0 -
How hard would it be to take a well-linked site, completely change the subject matter & still retain link authority?
So, this would be taking a domain with a domain authority of 50 (200 root domains, 3500 total links) and, for fictitious example, going from a subject matter like "Online Deals" to "The History Of Dentistry"... just totally unrelated new subject for the old/re-purposed domain. The old content goes away entirely. The domain name itself is a super vague .com name and has no exact match to anything either way. I'm wondering, if the DNS changed to different servers, it went from 1000 pages to a blog, ownership/contacts stayed the same, the missing pages were 301'd to the homepage, how would that fare in Google for the new homepage focus and over what time frame? Assume the new terms are a reasonable match to the old domain authority and compete U.S.-wide... not local or international. Bonus points for answers from folks who have actually done this. Thanks... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Links from random sites: Disavow?
I am looking at the links to my site from GWT. I see a bunch of random sites I've never heard of. I never made an effort to get links from these sites. Sites like | http://www.xlx.pl | Also found one porn site! Should I just ignore these or disavow them?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | inhouseseo0 -
Fading Text Links Look Like Spammy Hidden Links to a g-bot?
Ah, Hello Mozzers, it's been a while since I was here. Wanted to run something by you... I'm looking to incorporate some fading text using Javascript onto a site homepage using the method described here; http://blog.thomascsherman.com/2009/08/text-slideshow-or-any-content-with-fades/ so, my question is; does anyone think that Google might see this text as a possible dark hat SEO anchor text manipulation (similar to hidden links)? The text will contain various links (4 or 5) that will cycle through one another, fading in and out, but to a bot the text may appear initially invisible, like so; style="display: none;"><a href="">Link Here</a> All links will be internal. My gut instinct is that I'm just being stupid here, but I wanted to stay on the side of caution with this one! Thanks for your time 🙂 http://blog.thomascsherman.com/2009/08/text-slideshow-or-any-content-with-fades
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeterAlexLeigh0 -
Handling Customer Accounts When Merging Sites
Anybody have some good advice as to how to handle customer accounts when merging eCommerce sites? These include email accounts and store accounts. We're trying to limit customer concerns when people discover the sites are merging. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AWCthreads0 -
Dynamic Links vs Static Links
There are under 100 pages that we are trying to rank for and we'd like to flatten our site architecture to give them more link juice. One of the methods that is currently in place now is a widget that dynamically links to these pages based on page popularity...the list of links could change day to day. We are thinking of redesigning the page to become more static, as we believe it's better for link juice to flow to those pages reliably than dynamically. Before we do so, we need a second opinion.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RBA0 -
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