How to Explain The Danger of Link Networks
-
A client of mine has been approached by a company that sets up one-off private link networks like this:
Main site: http://www.klausparking.com/
Network sites:
http://www.carparkingtechnology.com/
http://www.carparkingsystem.com/
http://www.victoriaparking.net/
http://www.reginaparking.com/
http://www.torontoparking.net/
http://www.multicarparkingsystem.com/
http://www.carparkingsolutions.com/The company doing this actually promotes this as a patent-pending feature they call "silos". How do I explain the real danger to my client?
-
ouch that's going to be hard unless the client is really open to talking to you and actually wants to trust you.
They usually are guaranteed something when it comes to "services" like that vs traditional seo where you offer audits, "long term", "outreach" and words that tell them that it's going to **"take time" **
What I would do is just tell them that it is their decision if they want to go with them and you as a friend, would like to ask him to check out these (then name articles about it penguin or penalties)
Ask them if they are willing to change their domain in the future once they get dropped by google.
And if their site gets destroyed by google, then they will have to pay you 4 times the amount to help them recover which isn't always guaranteed.
Worked for me, should work for you.
-
Link networks have been slammed time and time again. Here's one I wrote specifically about one of the larger private blog networks:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/unnatural-link-warnings-blog-networks-advice
The problem with these sites is the either don't have any link equity - and thus their links count for nothing - or they get link equity from spammy sites. It only takes one site to get the entire web of sites caught. Google might move slowly on link spam, but they have shown they take strong and unforgiving action, as witnessed by Penguin and similar updates.
Just think about the opportunity cost of using these link networks rather than pursuing a legitimate means of promotion. If you get caught, all your work is gone. Worse, you're in a far worse position than when you started.
I have personally been approached by large brands using link networks who were then penalized. One online company people know came to us having invested heavily into link networks. They lost all that work, they were losing hundreds of thousands each week in sales due to penalty, and it cost them tens of thousands to fix.
I would only try link networks for brand new sites in certain highly-competitive industries - casinos, adult, etc. For anyone else, it's not worth the risk and opportunity cost.
-
Wayne,
I am a small business owner. I have done my own SEO, hired consultants, and worked with SEO firms - the whole gamut. I have a lot of personal experience in this area and bottom line it just isn't worth the resources involved, mainly the money, in my opinion.
I can guess who this company is based on what you said at the end...sort of rings a bell.
Any gains that are made will be short term and typically won't last. Google WILL eventually sniff these sites out. No matter how crafty they are, not matter what they tell you, Google will find it and a) deindex the site or 2) devalue the link from the site. The footprint and/or quality and content will get you. In your examples, almost all these sites are set up the exact same way. Google can smell that a mile away.
I have done this myself as well as paid different companies to do it for me. I have gone through hurdles (and I guarantee you more than they company they are paying will do) to ensure I have virtually zero footprint and to keep good content. I have over 70 now and very few are worthwhile.
At the end of the day, to continue to be worthwhile these sites will need QUALITY content. The amount of content and effort it will take for these sites to provide any sort of SEO boost for them would be better served on their own site's content, viral marketing, social signals, etc.
I am not trying to be pessimistic or paint too broad of a brush stroke but think of it this way. In the above example there are 7 network sites. The cost will really start piling up. Registration fees, hosting, the content (and it won't be quality all the time) and the ongoing cost to maintain these sites get big. So your client has piled all this money into a short term solution that can literally be snatched away overnight.
Spend the money on substance, quality of quantity. I am sitting on 70 worthless sites that I have spend thousands on.
-
It sounds like you are talking about "doorway pages". This practice can get their website penalized, or even de-indexed from Google’s search results.
You can send them to this link on Google Webmaster Central, which explains it all:
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2721311
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
-
SEO Links in Footer?
Hi, One of my clients uses a pretty powerful SEO tool, won't mention the name. They now have a "link equity" tool, which they are using on a lot of their client's sites, which include tons of fortune 500 companies. It involves add footer links to your site that change based on the content of the page they are on. The machine learning tries to figure out the most related pages and links to them with the heading tag of that page as the anchor text. Initially this sounds very spammy to me. But then, it seems a lot like "related products" tools that many companies use. The goal for this tool is to build up internal linking, especially for deeper pages on their site. They have over 10,000 currently. What are everyone's thoughts on this strategy?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vetofunk2 -
Regular links may still
Good day: I understand guest articles are a good way to pass linkjuice and some authors have a link to their website on the "Author Bio" section of the article. These links are usually regular links. However, I noticed that some of these sites (using wordpress) have several SEO plugins with the following settings: Nofollow: Tell search engines not to spider links on this webpage. My question is: If the setting above was activated, I would assume the author's website link would look like a regular link but some other code could still be present in the page (ex, header) that would prevent this regular link from being followed. Therefore, the guest writer would not experience any linkjuice. Any idea if there's a way of being able to see if this scenario is happening? What code would we look for?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Audreythenurse0 -
Competitor link profile shocking - yet still out ranking!
Howdy fellow Mozzer's,
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TimHolmes
I have been doing some background seo checking on a competitor in my small "insurance niche" to try and see why they have recently shot up the listings and are now consistently out ranking us.
We have quality content on our site and have always taken an approach of trying to be whiter than white when it comes to developing out SEO plans. The site in question has recently moved ahead of us (along with some aggregators e.g. confused.com) possibly due to shifting patterns from possible algorithm changes favouring brand or could it be a case that Google has dropped a ball when it comes to checking back links as the competitors site is 99% linked to link farms, link submission sites, directories and lots of other spammy/poor quality sites. We do not feel they are doing anything from a content stand to justify their sudden propulsion up the ranks. I am reluctant to pursue dodgy tactics to help get out site back in position as I feel it could then contribute and hurt us down the line. Does anyone know how I can combat against their poor QUANTITY over QUALITY banklink profile that is surely helping them at the minute? At a bit of a loss so any help would be greatly appreciated. aRTu4cT0 -
Link Espionage?
Can anyone tell why pages like this are linking to our site? http://iga.edu/facebooktabs/images/inscribirse/formulario/en/noclosingcost.html This .edu page looks benign, however if you read it, it wont take long to see what appears to be machine generated content related to finance. It has ONLY ONE outgoing link and it to my site. To me it seems to be an attempt to make us look like a link buyer. We aren't! There are dozens of these type of pages linking to us. Here's the text around the link to our site, ERATE.com Apr the origination fee alone will cost you at closing however what your broker isn t should you pay a loan origination fee or get a no fee mortgage when refinancing refinancing mortgage rates scandal could cost you a year arkansas california colorado connecticut delaware. Any insight and opinions are welcome. Jeff Howard
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | corlin0 -
Can you disavow a spamy link that is not pointing to your website?
We have submitted several really spammy websites to the Google spam team. We noticed they take a very long time to react to submissions. Do you know if it is possible to disavow a link that is not pointing to your website but rather to a very spammy website? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Carla_Dawson0 -
Unnatural Link Notification - Third Go Round, specific questions
Hi all, I'm posting what is sure to be a common question, but I can't seem to find much information by searching Q&A over the last month so thought I'd throw this out there. There's a lot of 'what do I do??' questions about 'unnatural link notification', but most of them are from first timers. We're pretty far along in the process and it feels like we're going nowhere, so I was hoping to pick the brains of anyone else who's 'been there'. We have a client that we inherited with an unnatural link profile; they were warned shortly after we took them on (around March was the first warning). We compiled an apologetic letter, specifically identified a previous agency who >was< doing bad things, mentioned things would be different from now on, and provided a list of links we were working on to remove based on WMT and OSE and some other sources. This was submitted in early June. Traffic on the main keyword plummeted; ranking went from top 5 to about mid-page 4. We got hit with that same rash of Unnatural Link warnings on July 23 that everyone else did and after looking around I decided not to respond to those. We got a response to the reinclusion request submitted in June above, saying the site was still violating guidelines. This time I went all out, and provided a Google docs spreadsheet of the over 1,500 links we had removed, listed the other links that had no contact info (not even in WHOIS), listed the links we had emailed/contact formed but got no response, everything. So they responded to that recently, simply saying 'site still violates guidelines' with no other details, and I'm not sure what else I can do. The campaign above was quite an investment of resources and time, but I'm not sure how to most efficiently continue. I promised specific questions, so here they are: Are the link removal services (rmoov, removeem, linkdelete, et al) worth investigating? To remove the 1,500 links I mentioned above I had a full time (low paid) person working for a week. Does Google even reconsider after long engagements like this? Most of what I've read has said that inclusion gets cleared up on the first/second request, and we're at bat for the third now. Due to the lack of feedback I don't know if their opinion is "nope, you just missed some" or "you are so blackhat you shouldn't even bother asking anymore". One of the main link holders is this shady guy who runs literally thousands of directories the client appears in thanks to previous SEO agency, and wants $5 per link he removes. Should I mention this to Google, do they even care? Or is it solely our responsibility? Thanks in advance for any advice;
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | icecarats0 -
External links without unnatural without my control
What should I do with links that Google considers link unnatural, but I have no control over them?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | soulmktpro0 -
Why is Google not punishing paid links as it says it will?
I've recently started working with a travel company - and finding the general link building side of the business quite difficult. I had a call from an SEO firm the other day offering their services, and stating that they had worked with a competitor of ours and delivered some very good results. I checked the competitors rankings, PR, link profile, and indeed, the results were quite impressive. However, the link profile pointed to one thing, that was incredibly obvious. They had purchased a large amount of sidebar text links from powerful blogs in the travel sector. Its painfully obvious what has happened, yet they still rank very highly for a lot of key terms. Why don't Google do something about this? They aren't the only company in this sector doing this, but it just seems pointless for white hats trying to do things properly, then those with the dollar in their pockets just buy success in the SERPS. Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | neilpage1230