Why is this spammy tactic working?
-
We've recently taken over this account and are baffled how the previous SEO company has been attaining rankings. Why in the world is this spammy tactic still working in this day and age?
This is one of many landing pages on the website consisting of an iframe of the home page and a hidden article. The page had a ton of spammy incoming links with spammy anchor text from horribly spammy blog posts.
-
Thanks Christy!
Glad i'm becoming a useful part of the group. It's tough questions every day. I love that.
-
I second what EGOL said, Ed! high-fives
-
I guess it will remain a mystery. I'm just surprised to see people using this tactic right now when so many websites have been wiped off the net doing this stuff.
-
There's just too many things it could be and I'd also be scratching my head. Maybe I'm getting paranoid listening to conspiracy theorists but sometimes things seem to be intentionally obscured so there is always ambiguity about the workings of the system.
It's enough to drive you insane but whenever in doubt just turn to thinking up a great new topic and writing a great new article that people will want to read and engage with and that might earn some decent backlinks. I swear if I spent as much time doing that as I do trying to reverse-engineer the algorithm then I'd be lots happier and more successful
There was a person last night from a major price comparison site here in the UK with a very good reputation. She told me that they had been engaging in successful black hat tactics until very recently. Like April 17th 2018 or around the time of 'Fred'
She said she was terrified to move because it felt like a house of cards about to collapse. I just didn't know what to tell her. It's the same here. What is your clients view of it? Do they accept responsibility for the shaky foundations? Have you discussed the position they're in? I'd get them to agree a strategy and make sure it involves the risk of losing rankings in the name of clearing the decks for future development and nail the financial risks associated with a drop in traffic.
-
The SEO company definitely did the client a favor by taking the links down; I'm just scratching my head that these pages were ever able to rank, given the recency of their creation.
-
Yikes.
Check this out. It's a poll on Barry Schwartz' site. They have some more grey and black hat peeps over there (especially in the comments) and they are saying that huge numbers of dodgy backlinks aren't affecting them at all. I really believe backlinks are becoming less and less important unless they are really powerful and relevant ones. It's almost like Google is ignoring this whole swathe of bad sites and the algorithm just doesn't take a blind bit of notice. But when a real person does a quality survey then this type of thing:
- Automatically generated content
- Participating in link schemes
- Creating pages with little or no original content
- Cloaking
- Sneaky redirects
- Hidden text or links
- Doorway pages
- Scraped content
- Participating in affiliate programs without adding sufficient value
- Loading pages with irrelevant keywords
- Creating pages with malicious behavior, such as phishing or installing viruses, trojans, or other badware
- Abusing rich snippets markup
- Sending automated queries to Google
is going to get you a penalty. (I pasted them straight over from google)
-
Hey EGOL,
thanks so much. I really enjoy the community. And answering the questions helps me learn more because there's never a right answer and it encourages me to be creative and think about my own site. Also I want the T-shirt lol!!
I just came back from the SEM rush conference in London and was doing a Q&A for in-house users of their product. It's amazing how much has changed really recently. I'd be genuinely afraid that if I stopped engaging I'd miss something! We have 32,000 users to our site now. Pretty much all my learning has been from Whiteboard Fridays and Moz blogs. I love the way this forum is never about gaming google like some others. It's all whiter than white hat. That's the future of SEO. There will be no black hats in a few years. It's going to be impossible to compete.
Thanks for the vote of confidence. I must have read about 100 of your responses on here. You're prolific. Are you from the UK? It's Brighton SEO tomorrow?
-
Thank you for your thoughtful feedback. The ironic thing is this website is actually relatively new - I believe it was created in fall of 2017. The previous seo company took down all the back links to these pages, but here is a sample to give you an idea what kind of junk was linking in. (All the backlinks looked like this). http://wadoptc.com/?How-To-Create-A-Business-By-Selling-Socks-Online-1068914.html
-
Hi Ed,
You have been giving a lot of great responses in Q&A. They are very generous and high quality.
I just want to thank you for the help that you are providing and encourage you to keep up the great work!
Cheers!
-
I've just come back from a forum where we were discussing this exact thing. It was suggested that older sites can have a multitude of sins and google will overlook them or ignore them until a big event (such as an https switchover) where google take a closer and more comprehensive look at the site and it's pages and backlinks.
A few people said that they were not immediately hit by panda and penguin type issues until they did some big event on the site and it came under scrutiny from google.
This was only anecdotal stuff but I see tons of sites with legacy black hat and grey hat SEO that are still ranking and seem to be doing ok. It was also suggested that links are just less important these days and so long as the page is getting good implicit user feedback signals like time on page, users clicking around and engaging with content then things hold out for longer.
Just like it takes time to get a pages authority and position up it also takes time for it to diminish. So in the long term you need to correct these issues or you'll gradually (or sometimes quickly) get either a penalty or an algorithmic suppression of your page.
Newer pages will never get ranked with this type of profile and the standards for indexing newer pages are much higher now. So just because it's not causing problems now doesn't mean you don't need to get it fixed or at least start adding pages that are in line with the latest stricter quality guidelines.
Hope this helps. I know it's not really an 'answer' because it's a very tricky issue. I can see how these ideas make sense though. If you were doing things that used to be ok and now are not ok, google is going to be less likely to hammer you like if you tried to launch a brand new site using clearly banned practices.
-
Well, it works. According to the spam spam analysis, they are at level 3 of 17. You can see it yourself here:
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
-
Star snippet not work
Hi I write a json+ld script for star snippet in my website but not work in my first page. you can see it in this URL https://liliome.ir when I googled my keyword"عطر"my competitor show with star snippet in SERP but my site doesn't show.
On-Page Optimization | | renorenotoodanes3330 -
I still don't understand how rel=canonical works. Help?
So here's the deal. I write for many different outlets. I also have many different pages on my blog that have duplicates (authorized, of course). On my blog, I have many different pages that redirect to "the original" content. I've only recently discovered the existence of rel=canonical. However I don't understand how it works. I have very specific questions. Can anyone help? If, on my blog, I have a blog post that's the original. And another website has the same content, used with authorization. If I want to tell search engines that the original content is on MY blog, what can I do? Is the only solution to ask the owner of the other blog to add a rel=canonical in the header of the specific post? If, on my blog, I have a blog post that's NOT the original. Do I simply add rel=canonical to the header, then add a link to the original in the body? If, on my blog, I have THE FIRST 300 WORDS of a blog post, then add a link saying "to read the whole article, click here" with a link pointing to the original, do I need to have a rel=canonical tag somewhere? Does it HAVE to be in the header? Can rel=canonical be used in the - What penalties are included with having duplicate content of my work everywhere on the web? I've been trying to find specifics, but can't. Thanks for the help. I'm quite confused, as you can see.
On-Page Optimization | | cedriklizotte0 -
What's the best SEO tactics when you have a dedicated web address pointing to a page on a different site?
Hope someone can help with a question I've got about sorting out some duplicate content issues. To simplify the question, imagine there is a website a.com which has a page a.com/newslettersignup. In addition to the a.com domain, there is also a different web address, ashortcut.com, which points to a.com/newslettersignup. ashortcut.com is the web address that is advertised in marketing material etc. So what is the best way then to tell Google etc. that ashortcut.com is the preferred URL for the page which sits at a.com/newslettersignup? The advice I've read about the canonical tag, for example, doesn't cover this exact scenario so although it can support cross-domain information, I'm not sure if that's the best route to follow. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | Nobody15755058948220 -
Can any one give some advise on how to work out which back links are bad
we are trying to clean up our site and believe we have bad back links can any one tell me how to work out which ones to disavow
On-Page Optimization | | CostumeD0 -
Does hreflang work on TLDs?
What is your opinion regarding hreflang? We have a .company.com site and franchised other English sites, like company. co.uk, company.com.au etc - and we share one database. Our other English sites don't want to have to change on-page content by the rough 30% for Google and wanted to know if including the hreflang would mean they would not have to change any content anymore - only the metatags? I don't think that's possible on TLDs, and we can't have our .com content being duplicated.
On-Page Optimization | | GraphicMail0 -
Reverse 301 redirect - how will that work?
Hi We have done some testing where we have changed our URL to a new name and 301 redirected the old to the new. It has now been decided to go back to the old url again but is there an seo risk to this? Will all the inbound links that as redirected in the first change be lost or?
On-Page Optimization | | AndersDK0 -
20 x '400' errors in site but URLs work fine in browser...
Hi, I have a new client set-up in SEOmoz and the crawl completed this morning... I am picking up 20 x '400' errors, but the pages listed in the crawl report load fine... any ideas? example - http://www.morethansport.co.uk/products?sortDirection=descending&sortField=Title&category=women-sports clothing
On-Page Optimization | | Switch_Digital0 -
Do images work as a H1
Is a h1 tag wrapped image with a optimized alt tag as effective as text wrapped in a h1 tag?
On-Page Optimization | | EAOM0