Big Rank Drop - Is My Site Spammy?
-
Like many others one of our niche sites - aluminumeyewear.com got slammed in the recent algo updates (4/18). All of our pages dropped at least 40/50 places which seems like a penalty to me. The site still ranks for its name thankfully.
I'm trying to figure out if this is an over-optimization penalty, or a devaluing of back links or both.
I would be grateful if I could get some feedback as to whether you feel the site is over optimized and how I could check if sources of back links have been penalized which in turn has effected us?
Thanks in advance!
-
waiting to see if they can be removed.
otherwise I'm kinda stuck as to how best acquire those elusive high-quality links.
-
You have 101 unique root domains, and 95 of them are all the same spun article? Yeah, that's not good. If you can get the network to drop the article, I'd do it now. If you can't, build up some higher-quality, diverse links as fast as you can. If those numbers are accurate, you are in danger.
-
GWT shows 101 domains linking in - probably 95 of those are all domains that are listing an article which points to the homepage and a product page. The two domains I mentioned earlier have 40 links each because of the way the article was tagged, all of the other domains a providing two links each.
-
If you got the warning, you need to pay attention to it. 4/18 wasn't the over-optimization drop (not to say you aren't over-optimized, but that hit this week). There was a 4/19-ish Panda update (3.5), but that seems relatively minor. You more likely got caught up in some of the new link culling.
Having 40+ links per site doesn't make them the culprit. I'd be much more inclined to see what the 3rd party did and if they did something massive scale. Get a list from them, if you can (since it takes us a while to update the data, and we don't see all low-value links).
-
I'm trying to find out if the guy who submitted those articles is able to pull them - seems like the easiest and cleanest thing to do.
Remember we're not Gatorz the company, just a very good dealer for them. I've found it very difficult in the past to get interaction with customers when your not the actual brand, with this particular product there isn't any dealer loyalty, customers just look for the best price.
-
those articles as northstarheadgasket and 4homebuilder look like they were written for search engines (as in, nobody would normally post an article there for any other reason than to get links - because nobody actually goes to those sites to find articles on sunglasses).
I don't have any idea if the Search Engines do it, but they ought to value a link from how much real traffic the source page has. Therefore, a page that has a lot of traffic, is likely to only put on only good quality links relevant to the market - and real users might actually use those links. Or perhaps they could value a link based on how often it is used. Of course perhaps this could be manipulated by bots, but it would be another step in the right direction (instead of just knowing how to insert links, spammers would have to know how to program bots to click on certain links, or they would have to do it manually).
You have a cool product, and could probably get (and perhaps have) lots of interaction on facebook, and could have a cool blog, with videos, product demos, and with weird subject like "10 coolest celebrities wearing Gatorz" and "Gatorz Guys are Girl Magnets" or for the girls: "Gucci is old and busted - Go Gatorz Girlz!" or the other side of that "Every Gucci needs a Gatorz"
-
I should also mention we did receive an 'un-natural links' message in GWT right at the time of the drop.
The top 3 entries are:
bbb.org - 103
4homebuilder.info - 43
At first I thought Google was referring to the bbb links as there should only be one inbound from them for our business listing. However the reason there is more is due to the way the BBB display results for each city. For example we are located in Tigard OR but will still come up for businesses in Boring OR - its because by default they return results for any distance from that particular location - if you use the pages distance filter then we'll disappear!
The other two are article directories I believe. A third party was doing link building for us and spinning some articles.
Is it possible this is the more likely cause?
-
At first glance content may appear thin but it isn't. All of our copy is unique and there are other useful interior pages such as this and this. In addition our product shots are unique and we produced custom videos (see attached). Every other dealer use stock copy and photos.
I've been selling sunglasses online for 7 years and as a product there is only so much you can write about them unless they have standout features which in our case is something we have already covered in our copy.
I would love inbound links from both brands, however neither offer an online dealer list on their site.
-
I agree I can tone down keyword usage - up until the algo change we ranked #1 for aluminum sunglasses and always top 3-5 for the two brand names.
We are the leading online account for Gatorz, so really it was people looking at us for ideas rather than the other way around.
-
Hi,
I agree you have overoptimized. I also think you may have a different problem, or at least you did.
Your redirect of gatorzwarehouse is working today, but did not work yesterday for me.
Maybe a fluke, but something to look into.
-
Hi,
Agree with Alan. On the homepage, you try too hard to rank for 'Aluminum Sunglasses' - it's mentioned 6 times just in that short group of text. Except for the Gatorz and Liquid Eyewear pages, there is very little content on the site overall (even these pages still have very little content). I'd develop some more content; be it a blog, a series of 'how-to' type posts (how to clean your sunglasses, how to take proper care of your sunglasses, what types of sunglasses are best for certain situations/environments etc) or more information on product types, brands etc.
According to OSE, your site has very low inbound links as well. I'd work on getting some links from some really good sources (official brand websites as an official retailer for instance).
Hope that helps!
-
Hello Mac. Nice looking site Spelling error in sentence 3 You really have overdone your keywords on the front page On the interior pages you did the same and the content is thin. Get advice from people who are doing well in ecommerce Look at your competitors for ideas
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
-
My compatitors destroy my website with huge spammy links!
Hi
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | amirooo.sh123
My competitors destroy my website with huge spam links! Its more than 400 high spam (80-100% spam score) unique domain, link to us sitewide!!! I disavow on search console. But its not enough! All pages ranks down and we lost everything we had....
What should we do now? If you can, please help me
Darookhaneonline.com Capture.jpg0 -
Something is strange, should be ranking fairly well - no visibility.
Hi Guys, This one is freakin' me out a little. We built my site and optimised it fairly well, especially on this page: http://snowdog.se/dogsledding/ where I am trying to rank for search term "dog sledding in lapland" now I receive a 95 rating for optimisation, I cant see anything wrong with it. We have a sitemap all seems well enough in the Google search console data but heck!!, we have submitted it to major engines but I have zero percent visibility. Can anyone see what's going on here? Free Sleddog Trip to the winner. Hahahaha. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. It must be something simple or weird! Kind Regards, Sno.....
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | sno3330 -
What would you say is hurting this site, Penguin or Panda?
Would you say this is both Penguin and Panda and no penalty has ever been lifted? What would be your general recommendations for this site? seWnoQm
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
Competitors with duplicate sites for backlinks
Hello all, In the last few months, my company has seen some keywords we historically rank well for fall off the first page, and there are a couple competitors that have appeared that use backlinks from seemingly the same site. For fairness, our site has slow page load speeds that we are working on changing, as well as not being mobile friendly yet. The sites that are ranking are mobile friendly and load fast, but we have heaps of other words still ranking well, and I'm more curious about this methodology. For example, these two pages: http://whiteboards.com.au/
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | JustinBSLW
http://www.glasswhiteboards.com.au/ In OSE, glasswhiteboards has the majority of links from whiteboards, and the content between the sites is the same. My page has higher domain authority & page authority, but less backlinks. However, if you take away the backlinks from the duplicate site, they are the same. Isn't this type of content supposed to be flagged? My question is about whether this kind of similar site on different domains is a good idea to build links, as all my research shows that it's poor in the long run, but it seems to be working with these guys. Another group of sites that has been killing us uses this same method, with multiple sites that look the same that all link to each other to build up backlinks. These sites do have different content. It seems instead of building different categories within their own site, they have purchased multiple domains that act as their categories. Here's just a few: http://www.lockablenoticeboards.com.au/
http://www.snapperframes.com/
http://www.snapperdisplay.com.au/
http://www.light-box.com.au/
http://www.a-frame-signs.com.au/
http://www.posterhangers.com.au/0 -
Spam sites with low spam score?
Hello! I have a fair few links on some of the old SEO 'Directory' sites. I've got rid of all the obviously spammy ones - however there are a few that remain which have very low spam scores, and decent page authority, yet they are clearly just SEO directories - I can't believe they service any other purpose. Should we now just be getting rid of all links like this, or is it worth keeping if the domain authority is decent and spam score low? Thanks Sam
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | wearehappymedia0 -
Massive rank drop on one particular keyword
As all other marketeers do I follow closely my keywords, one particular keyword has ranked continually at #2 and has suddenly dropped to +#60, but all others remain the same. We are a fairly large site in terms of numbers 9m views annually, could it be possible that someone has black hatted that particular keyword, and if so how do I find out how and more importantly who?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | sususu0 -
How to re-rank an established website with new content
I can't help but feel this is a somewhat untapped resource with a distinct lack of information.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ChimplyWebGroup
There is a massive amount of information around on how to rank a new website, or techniques in order to increase SEO effectiveness, but to rank a whole new set of pages or indeed to 're-build' a site that may have suffered an algorithmic penalty is a harder nut to crack in terms of information and resources. To start I'll provide my situation; SuperTED is an entertainment directory SEO project.
It seems likely we may have suffered an algorithmic penalty at some point around Penguin 2.0 (May 22nd) as traffic dropped steadily since then, but wasn't too aggressive really. Then to coincide with the newest Panda 27 (According to Moz) in late September this year we decided it was time to re-assess tactics to keep in line with Google's guidelines over the two years. We've slowly built a natural link-profile over this time but it's likely thin content was also an issue. So beginning of September up to end of October we took these steps; Contacted webmasters (and unfortunately there was some 'paid' link-building before I arrived) to remove links 'Disavowed' the rest of the unnatural links that we couldn't have removed manually. Worked on pagespeed as per Google guidelines until we received high-scores in the majority of 'speed testing' tools (e.g WebPageTest) Redesigned the entire site with speed, simplicity and accessibility in mind. Htaccessed 'fancy' URLs to remove file extensions and simplify the link structure. Completely removed two or three pages that were quite clearly just trying to 'trick' Google. Think a large page of links that simply said 'Entertainers in London', 'Entertainers in Scotland', etc. 404'ed, asked for URL removal via WMT, thinking of 410'ing? Added new content and pages that seem to follow Google's guidelines as far as I can tell, e.g;
Main Category Page Sub-category Pages Started to build new links to our now 'content-driven' pages naturally by asking our members to link to us via their personal profiles. We offered a reward system internally for this so we've seen a fairly good turnout. Many other 'possible' ranking factors; such as adding Schema data, optimising for mobile devices as best we can, added a blog and began to blog original content, utilise and expand our social media reach, custom 404 pages, removed duplicate content, utilised Moz and much more. It's been a fairly exhaustive process but we were happy to do so to be within Google guidelines. Unfortunately, some of those link-wheel pages mentioned previously were the only pages driving organic traffic, so once we were rid of these traffic has dropped to not even 10% of what it was previously. Equally with the changes (htaccess) to the link structure and the creation of brand new pages, we've lost many of the pages that previously held Page Authority.
We've 301'ed those pages that have been 'replaced' with much better content and a different URL structure - http://www.superted.com/profiles.php/bands-musicians/wedding-bands to simply http://www.superted.com/profiles.php/wedding-bands, for example. Therefore, with the loss of the 'spammy' pages and the creation of brand new 'content-driven' pages, we've probably lost up to 75% of the old website, including those that were driving any traffic at all (even with potential thin-content algorithmic penalties). Because of the loss of entire pages, the changes of URLs and the rest discussed above, it's likely the site looks very new and probably very updated in a short period of time. What I need to work out is a campaign to drive traffic to the 'new' site.
We're naturally building links through our own customerbase, so they will likely be seen as quality, natural link-building.
Perhaps the sudden occurrence of a large amount of 404's and 'lost' pages are affecting us?
Perhaps we're yet to really be indexed properly, but it has been almost a month since most of the changes are made and we'd often be re-indexed 3 or 4 times a week previous to the changes.
Our events page is the only one without the new design left to update, could this be affecting us? It potentially may look like two sites in one.
Perhaps we need to wait until the next Google 'link' update to feel the benefits of our link audit.
Perhaps simply getting rid of many of the 'spammy' links has done us no favours - I should point out we've never been issued with a manual penalty. Was I perhaps too hasty in following the rules? Would appreciate some professional opinion or from anyone who may have experience with a similar process before. It does seem fairly odd that following guidelines and general white-hat SEO advice could cripple a domain, especially one with age (10 years+ the domain has been established) and relatively good domain authority within the industry. Many, many thanks in advance. Ryan.0 -
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