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
-
Keep in mind that the goal here is usually not to "punish" the paid link, but instead to ignore it. If Google punished sites for paid links, then that competitor would still buy the links, but would just have them point to your site so you get punished!
Ultimately some links that are instantly obvious to humans as artificial and paid are very hard for computers to algorithmically detect without also throwing out tons of valid links. Over the long haul (years, not months) Google does steadily get better at it.
-
Neil,
In my prediction those black hat techiniques will be punished sooner or later by Google in 2012. Just keep your SEO clean and you will the results that you are looking for.
-
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.
I don't think that I would buy his service because you will be his next demonstration site. Pretty soon he will have a ton of people participating in this link scheme and the bigger it gets the brighter it will be on the Google radar screen. I'd stay away from this salesperson and his methods.
-
I have to say that I know exactly how you feel. I have a new client in the suplement industry, and while I'm doing everything white hat our competition is doing everything black hat, including buying links....a lot of links. I don't know how they're getting away with it, but they are spending a small fortune getting links within blogs on random, low PR, spammy blogs. It's completely black hat through a company called Sponsored Reviews, and while it sounds respectible it's nto so much. So while I work strictly white hat, seeing small movement, they work strictly black hat and remain on the first page. It can be insanely frustrating for the SEO and the client. But, hang in there, eventually your white hat techniques will pay off.
-
One good advice: don't let the frustration make you take decisions
Work hard and you will benefit from it and over rank them.
Good luck!
Istvan
-
Hi Bryan,
Thanks for that. I've just been reading a thread from 2009 on which Rand posted some views on the difference between Paid Links and text Link Ads.
I suppose its hard to distinguish the difference between the two, but its clear in this particular case that the links have been bought, and aren't really for advertising purposes!
Its incredibly frustrating, but I suppose maybe in the long term they'll get punished. Who knows?!
Thanks anyway
-
Hi Neil,
Google fights against paid links as much as they can. The thing is that big companies are working hard to "practice what they preach", but it takes a lot of time, energy and "brain power" to deliver that.
Obviously Google team is constantly working on this.
Gr.,
Istvan
-
Google takes a while to catch these things and believe me, white hat SEO if much harder than black hat so I understand your frustration.
The best thing you can do is locate the site and then submit a paid link report then hope that Google gets around to penalizing them, the competition will soon gain no value from the links and the link-juice may be reversed. The Google part is that a Google Quality Expert will likely follow the trail and treat your competitor according to how much they violated Google's TOS
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
-
Nofollow for reciprocal links?
Hi, We have reciprocal links with our business partners. Their websites have been listed on our website with "nofollow" links and they link to our website with "nofollow" or "dofollow" links. Is this wrong having reciprocal links? And if they are our partners, "nofollow" or "dofollow" is better? I don't think there will be anymore link juice loss with dofollow links from our website?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Does linking older posts help?
Asking a blogger to add an anchor text into their old post that relates to my niche. does that help with backlinks? does the quality of backlinks determine by how new the post is or the page rank determines all? for example a new post with lesser page rank vs a old post with higher page rank which one is better to put your link on?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | andzon0 -
Which links should I remove?
What is your general approach when removing links for a new client? Just taken on some new work and found links that I wouldn't dream of building now (unrelated domain name, blogroll, single word, exact match anchor, dead sites). However some of these are brand anchor links, and some of the pages have decent Page Rank (2/3/4). Obviously I don't want to remove links that might actually be helping the site in a weird way. It would be good to get an idea of other peoples approach to link removal - what goes, what stays etc?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Coolpink0 -
Will my association's network of sites get penalized for link farming?
Before beginning I found these similar topics here: http://www.seomoz.org/q/multiple-domains-on-same-ip-address-same-niche-but-different-locations http://www.seomoz.org/q/multiple-domains-on-1-ip-address We manage over two dozen dental sites that are individually owned through out the US. All these dentists are in a dental association which we also run and are featured on (http://www.acedentalresource.com/). Part of the dental associations core is sharing information to make them better dentists and to help their patients which in addition to their education, is why they are considered to be some of the best dentists in the world. As such, we build links from what we consider to be valuable content between the sites. Some sites are on different IPs and C-Blocks, some are not. Given the fact that each site is only promoting the dentist at that brick and mortar location but also has "follow" links to other dentists' content in the network we fear that we are in the grey area of link building practices. Questions are: Is there an effective way to utilize the power of the network if quality content is being shared? What risks are we facing given our network? Should each site be on a different IP? Would having some of our sites on different servers make our backlinks more valuable than having all of our sites under the same server? If it is decided that having unique IPs is best practice, would it be obvious that we made the switch? Keep in mind that ALL sites are involved in the association, so naturally they would be linking to each other, and the main resource website mentioned above. Thanks for your input!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | DigitalElevator0 -
Is there a way to check if your site has a Google penalty?
Is there a way to find out if your site has an over optimization penalty?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | RonMedlin0 -
Redirecting doesn't rank on google
We are redirecting our artist's official website to copenhagenbeta.dk. We have two artists (Nik & Jay and Burhan G) that top ranks on Google (first on page 1), but one of them (Lukas Graham) doesn't rank at all. We use the same procedure with all artists. http://copenhagenbeta.dk/index.php?option=com_artistdetail&task=biography&type=overview&id=49 Doesn't rank but the old artist page still does. Is it the old page that tricks Google to think that this is the active page for the artist?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Morten_Hjort0 -
Penalized In Google ?
Hello Guy´s. Im terrible sad because we make an amazing SEO job for this client: www.medabcn.com And the website was hacked.. Message from the hosting platform: "It would appear that malicious individuals have found a way to upload spam
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | maty
pages as well as backdoors to your site(s). We
have disabled the page(s) in question (via removing their permissions, e.g..
chmod) until you are able to address this matter." Result: we loose all our SERP Somebody of yours was in a similar situation ? Notes: I was on Google Webmaster an anything seem to be normal. The domain was relative new, maybe a late sandbox efect ? Thanks a lot for your help. Matias0 -
Why Does Massive Reciprocal Linking Still Work?
It seems pretty well-settled that massive reciprocal linking is not a very effective strategy, and in fact, may even lead to a penatly. However, I still see massive reciprocal linking (blog roll linking even massive resource page linking) still working all the time. I'm not looking to cast aspersion on any individual or company, but I work with legal websites and I see these strategies working almost universally. My question is why is this still working? Is it because most of the reciprocally linking sites are all legally relevant? Has Google just not "gotten around" to the legal sector (doubtful considering the money and volume of online legal segment)? I have posed this question at SEOmoz in the past and it was opined that massively linking blogs through blog rolls probably wouldn't send any flags to Google. So why is that it seems that everywhere I look, this strategy is basically dismissed as a complete waste of time if not harmful? How can there be such a discrepency between what leading SEOs agree to be "bad" and the simple fact that these strategies are working en masse over the period of at least 3 years?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Gyi0