Should I Even Bother Trying To Recover This Site After Google Penguin?
-
Hello all,
I would like to get your opinion on whether I should invest time and money to improve a website which was hit by Google Penguin in April 2014.
(I know, April 2014 was nearly 2 years ago. However, this site has not been a top priority for us and we have just left until now).
The site is www.salmonrecipes.net
Basically, we aggregated over 700 salmon recipes from major supermarkets, famous chefs, and others (all with their permission) and made them available on this site. It was a good site at the time but it is showing its age now.
For a few years we were occasionally #1 on Google in the US for "salmon recipes", but normally we would be between #2 and #4.
We made money from the site almost entirely through Adsense. We never made a huge amount, but it paid our office rent every month, which was handy.
We also built up an email database of several thousand followers, but we've not really used this much. (Yet).
In the year from 25th April 2011 to 24th April 2012 the site attracted just over 500k visits.
After the rankings dropped due to Google Penguin, traffic dropped by 77% in the year from 25th April 2011 to 24th April 2012. Rankings and traffic have not recovered at all, and are only getting worse.
I am happy to accept that we deserved our rankings to fall during the Google Penguin re-shuffle. I stupidly commissioned an offshore company to build lots of links which, in hindsight, were basically just spam, and totally without any real value. However they assured me it was safe and I trusted them, despite my own nagging reservations.
Anyway, I have full details of all the links they created, and therefore I could remove many of these 'relatively' easily. (Of course, removing hundreds of links would take a lot of time).
My questions ...
1. How can I evaluate the probability of this site 'recovering' from Google Penguin. I am willing to invest time/money on link removal and new (ethical) SEO work if there is a reasonable chance of regaining a position in the top 5 on Google (US) for "salmon recipes" and various long-tail terms. But I am keen to avoid spending time/money on this if it is unlikely we will recover. How can I figure out my chances?
2. Generally, I accept that this model of site is in decline. Relying on Google to drive traffic to a site, and on Google to produce revenue via its Adsense scheme, is risky and not entirely sensible. Also, Google seems to provide more and more 'answers' itself, rather than sending people to e.g. a website listing recipes. Given this, is it worth investing any money in this at all?
3. Can you recommend anyone who specialises in this kind of recovery work. (As I said, I have a comprehensive list of all the links that were built, etc).
OK, that is all for now.
I am really looking forward to whatever opinions you may have about this. I'll provide more info if required.
Huge thanks
David -
If you have the ability to remove the bad links, then this is always the better option. It's a bit of a pain and can take some time but removing is always better than disavowing.
Feel free to send me an email at marie@hiswebmarketing.com and I'll put you in touch with someone who can give you a good idea as to whether or not your site is a good candidate for recovery.
-
Thanks Marie,
I really appreciate you taking the time to provide your thoughts here.
I am sure you are right, and that almost all the links we created over the years are probably now considered unnatural, regardless of whether they were built in a relatively low intensity way several years ago or more high intensity by our Sri Lanakan supplier. Regardless, I fear that once they are all removed / disavowed, then we still won't rank very highly as we won't have enough natural links to provide the rankings we hope for. Of course, if take a long term view of the project then it is definitely better to 'wipe clean' our past mistakes now and start again from a low base, rather than to just leave all the unnatural links in place forever. But it is still a sobering thought to have to spend time/money on cleaning this up now with no real understanding of what to expect once the work is done.
One quick question ... can I simply disavow bad links right away, or would it be better for me to try to remove them manually first?
Finally, I would really appreciate you putting me in touch with your friend who may be able to look into this in a little more detail for me.
Huge thanks again
David -
Hi David,
"At that time we did occasionally do some off-site SEO work such as paying for a batch of articles to be created and submitted, or getting a custom written press release distributed."
Many of these links are likely ones that Google may now consider unnatural. Whether or not your site can recover from Penguin really depends, IMO, on the number of truly naturally earned links that you have. I've worked with companies with manual penalties (a little bit different than Penguin, but still quite similar) where we tried to remove the penalty by just dealing with the most obvious spam links made by a low quality SEO link building company. Google failed us and gave us example links that were from years ago prior to hiring an SEO. They were links that the site owner had made on his own via publishing articles and submitting to directories. My point is that you may find that some of your previous rankings were propped up on the power of links that are now considered unnatural.
Unfortunately though, to know whether you're likely to be able to recover is a tough call. I am not currently taking on clients for consulting jobs like this, but I'm happy to put you in touch with someone who can take a really good look at your site and give you an idea as to whether or not recovery is likely and how hard it would be to do the work.
"I am fairly sure that a high percentage of our inward links are either having no positive effect or, worse, are having a negative effect. What is the simplest/easiest/cheapest way for me to safely and comprehensively get rid of all these dodgy links so that I can start new SEO activity afresh?"
Tough question to answer. If you want to try doing this on your own...and I think it's certainly possible to do it on your own, then get as complete a list of backlinks as you can. This may mean buying a membership for a month on ahrefs.com and majesticseo.com. You can also download your links from Open site explorer, and of course, look at your Webmaster Tools links as well. Put these links all together in a spreadsheet and manually look at one link from each domain linking to you. For every single link, assess whether it was likely one that was made for SEO purposes. If so, then add it to your disavow file and disavow on the domain level. If you're not sure, then it's best to err on the side of caution and disavow. Then, once your done, file your disavow file. The next time Penguin refreshes (or possibly after two refreshes), if you have done a thorough enough job you should see some improvement. If you don't, it means that either you have not disavowed all of your self made links, or that Panda is affecting your site which is a whole other issue.
One other thought - if you were given reports from your link building companies on what links were made, then start off by disavowing all of those.
Good luck!
-
Hi Marie and Andy,
Thanks for your contributions.
Marie, your first post touches upon many very important issues.
We did rank well for e.g. "salmon recipes" on Google US and particularly on Google UK for a couple of years or more, before Penguin. At that time we did occasionally do some off-site SEO work such as paying for a batch of articles to be created and submitted, or getting a custom written press release distributed. This work seemed to make a positive difference at the time, but I can't be totally sure how worthwhile it was in terms of securing our good ranking at that time.
Then, we scaled up the off-site SEO quite a lot, hiring a company from Sri Lanka to do lots of work every month.
I am guessing that the links generated by this later and more intensive period of work are more spammy than those produced in the earlier, low-key efforts. I appreciate that the earlier work wouldn't have generated much in the way of 'quality' links, but my gut feeling is that this earlier work is probably less likely to be seen as definitely spammy.
Anyway, I guess I just don't know where we would have deserved to rank without any of this paid-for SEO work at all, and I have no idea where we'd deserve to be now if the spammy links get removed or disavowed.
I suppose there is not going to be any kind of clear answer to any of this without first doing the work to remove/disavow the links.
Maybe I should be looking at this a different way.
I am fairly sure that a high percentage of our inward links are either having no positive effect or, worse, are having a negative effect. What is the simplest/easiest/cheapest way for me to safely and comprehensively get rid of all these dodgy links so that I can start new SEO activity afresh?
Cheers
David -
Hi Marie,
I am exactly the same as you in those circumstances and certainly no offence was taken to anything that you said. I didn't even think about that
-Andy
-
Hi Andy,
I just wasn't completely clear whether the previous high rankings were obtained before or after hiring a link builder. It sounds like they were there before the bad links were made and if so, that is great news and the site does have some chance at recovery. With that being said, I'd be a little concerned about a possible Panda issue if the site consists primarily of information that is aggregated from other sources.
Please know that my comment about checking references before hiring anyone was not meant to be a slight on your offer to help. If you have success with Penguin recovery then that is fantastic, and David, you should take Andy up on his offer! I'm just always careful to advise site owners to check references because there are a lot of people out there who claim to be able to recover any Penguin hit site but have never actually done so.
-
"Prior to building the spammy links, did you guys rank well?"
As David said above...
"For a few years we were occasionally #1 on Google in the US for "salmon recipes", but normally we would be between #2 and #4."
And
"In the year from 25th April 2011 to 24th April 2012 the site attracted just over 500k visits."
-Andy
-
Prior to building the spammy links, did you guys rank well? Do you have a good number of truly naturally earned links? If so, then yes, you could recover from Penguin. You will need to do an extremely thorough backlink audit and disavow every link that was self made for SEO purposes.
With that being said, there really haven't been many cases of true Penguin recovery reported. There are many people who say that they can help, but if you are going to hire a company, be sure to ask for references from site owners whom they have helped recover. Don't let them hide behind a NDA. Any site owner that has truly recovered from Penguin would be very happy to give a glowing recommendation.
My personal belief as to why there haven't been many recoveries is that most sites that got into Penguin trouble would not have ranked if it were not for the power of unnatural links. They'll never get that link equity back and as such, disavowing links is not going to cause the site to improve because there are no good links there to support rankings. But, if you've truly got good links then it's worth a try!
-
Hi David,
Whilst I can't go into specifics here, it is somewhat messy in there, including a couple that are even flagged as especially dangerous. I can give you more info if you wish to mail me at info@inetseo.co.uk
However, this isn't the worst I have seen, and have had complete recoveries from those, so all is not lost
-Andy
-
Thanks Andy, it is reassuring to know that no site is beyond help!
We have never received any kind of manual penalty or warning for this site. The decline in rankings was purely algorithmic, with a clear and major drop on 24th April 2012.
It you want to run a quick scan for me, that would be fantastic. I would really appreciate that.
I look forward to hearing from you whenever you have had time to do this.
Huge thanks again
David
-
Hi David,
No site is beyond help. I have worked with sites who have been seeing hundreds of thousands of monthly visitors, only to be hit by Penguin / Panda, and seen later recoveries. What it sounds like you need is to disavow lots of the links that are associated with you now. It certainly isn't something that you need to give up on and shouldn't cost the earth to do it.
I would be happy to run a quick scan for you to give you an idea of what sort of state your link profile is in, if you wish?
Have you had a manual penalty from Google at all, or does this appear to just be algorithmic?
-Andy
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
-
Export domain reference full on google search console
Hi all My website is https://simthanglong.vn/ and it have +7000 Referring domains from competitor use tools bad backlink. i want to disavow it but Google Search Console accept export up to 1000 domains. So, What I have to do. Help me Please.67oetuz.jpg
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | simthanglongdotvn0 -
Has our site been attacked?
Hello fellow mozers! I am having a problem you might be able to help me with and any thoughts on the issue will be greatly appreciated. Yesterday, I received an automated monthly report from Quill Engage, a tool that fetches data from Google Analytics and generates reports in a narrative format. Last month's 'referral traffic' section indicates two incredibly spammy websites driving more than 200 sessions to our website. Naturally, I checked out GWT and Open Site Explorer but couldn't find any traces of such activity. Futhermore, all our metrics seem ok. Can this possibly be a negative SEO attack that was only traced by the aforementioned tool? Can you propose any other way to test this and make sure we're not being attacked?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SMD_0 -
Site that's 301 redirected is ranking for brand
We own a number of foreign TLD domains for our brand. They are all 301-redirected to our main .com branded domain. One of them is appearing in our branded search results, outranking out main .com page. To be clear, this is despite there being a 301 redirect from it to the .com page. Any ideas on what is going on here?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ipancake0 -
Multiple Versions of Mobile Site
Hey Guys, We have recently finished the latest version of our mobile site which means currently we have 2 mobile sites. Depending on what device and Os will depend on which site you will be presented with.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seekjobs
e.g.
iPhone 3 or 4 users on iOS4 will get version 1 of our mobile site
iPhone 5 users on iOS5 will get the new version (version 2) of our mobile site. Our old mobile site is currently indexed in Google and performing pretty well.
Since the launch of the second mobile site we have not see any major changes to our visibility in Google and so was curious My main concern here is duplicate content so I am curious can Google detect that we have 2 mobile site that we serve depending on device? And if Google can detect this, why has our sites not been penalized! Thanks, LW I know the first thing that comes to your mind is Duplicate content0 -
Month old site and alreasdy ranks 3 for competitive keyword
I know this individual does this with several sites and then offers them for sale to his competitors. Obviously spammy thru and thru, but how can google reward a site thats not even two months old, with 1900 + links with a ranking of #3 for a highly competitive keyword? Please dont post the actual name or url of the website as we dont want to give him any more credit but this blows my mind as he has done this several times with other sites and never gets penalized. http://tinyurl.com/b9jysa5 Any ideas as to how he can accomplish this besides almost 2000 links in less than 2 months? How is that even remotely natural? I know his other sites have been reported to google but they never did anything about it. Thanks for any feedback.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | anthonytjm0 -
Advice on links after Penguin hit
Firstly we have no warnings or messages in WMT. We have racked up thousands of anchor text urls. Our fault, we didnt nofollow and also some of our many cms sites replicated the links sitewide to the tune of 20,000 links. I`m in the process of removing the code which causes this problem in most of the culprit sites but how long will it take roughly for a crawl to recalculate the links? In my WMT it still shows the links increasing but I think this is retrospective data. However, after this crawl we should see a more relevant link count. We also provide some web software which has been used by many sites. Google may consider our followed anchor text violating spam rules. So I ask, if we were to change the link text to our url only and add nofollow, will this improve the spam issue? We could have as many as 4,000 links per website, as it is a calendar function and list all dates into the future.......and we would like to retain a link to our website of course for marketing purposes. What we dont want is sitewide link spam again. Some of our other links are low quality, some are okay. However, we have lost rankings, probably due to low quality links and overuse of anchor text.. Is this the case the Google has just devalued the links algorythmically or is there an actual penalty to make the rankings drop? As we have no warnings in WMT, I feel there isnt the need to remove the lower quality links and in most cases we havent control over the link placements. We should just rectify that we have a better future linking profile? If we have to remove spam links, then that can only be a good reason to cause negative seo?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | xtopher660 -
Google SEVERE drop as of last week (oct 10) on long standing .org site
Hello Experts Wanted some imput if possible. I own a .org informational site that has been #1 in its category for Google Yahoo and Bing under a major keyword for years. The site is aged back to 2005 and all of the sudden it dropped on August 10 (Google only- Yahoo and Bing still #1)) but remained atop the primary keywords that it is namesaked for .org (xxxxyyyzzz.org) and then Oct 9-10 it dropped from the page 1 top ranking it had for years on that primary keyword to page 13. I dont know where to begin to look. Any ideas how something like this could happen and what "Stones" I should turn. We purchased the website and are not SEO gurus so just not sure. Any help would be appreciated
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TBKO1 -
Opinions Wanted: Links Can Get Your Site Penalized?
I'm sure by now a lot of you have had a chance to read the Let's Kill the "Bad Inbound Links Can Get Your Site Penalized" Myth over at SearchEngineJournal. When I initially read this article, I was happy. It was confirming something that I believed, and supporting a stance that SEOmoz has taken time and time again. The idea that bad links can only hurt via loss of link juice when they get devalued, but not from any sort of penalization, is indeed located in many articles across SEOmoz. Then I perused the comments section, and I was shocked and unsettled to see some industry names that I recognized were taking the opposite side of the issue. There seems to be a few different opinions: The SEOmoz opinion that bad links can't hurt except for when they get devalued. The idea that you wouldn't be penalized algorithmically, but a manual penalty is within the realm of possibility. The idea that both manual and algorithmic penalties were a factor. Now, I know that SEOmoz preaches a link building strategy that targets high quality back links, and so if you completely prescribe to the Moz method, you've got nothing to worry about. I don't want to hear those answers here - they're right, but they're missing the point. It would still be prudent to have a correct stance on this issue, and I'm wondering if we have that. What do you guys think? Does anybody have an opinion one way or the other? Does anyone have evidence of it being one way or another? Can we setup some kind of test, rank a keyword for an arbitrary term, and go to town blasting low quality links at it as a proof of concept? I'm curious to hear your responses.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AnthonyMangia0