Retailers Issue
-
Hi there,
We have 20 retailers who are about to launch websites and are going to be selling our products on their websites, however with they have no content for these products they are wanting to take our content we have for our product pages on place the content on their websites, is this going to cause an issue for me? We are ranking well for competitive keywords in this niche and do not want to do anything to harm it.
What I would say is the retailers in question of no intention short term anyway of doing anything with SEO.
Thanks for any help
-
At the very least, I would write a new unique set of copy for the product. Let them all share this new copy and compete against each other. Your original copy will be unique and likely keep you high in the rankings. Also, perhaps see if they will link their pages back to your site 'for more information.'
*small edit for clarification
-
If they republish your content verbatim then all of these websites will compete against each other (and against you) in the SERPs. Google will slowly realize that these sites are duplicate and will begin to filter some of them out of the search results. The ones filtered will generally be the weakest domains (not who published last).
Some people think.... "I'll get 20 retailers to sell my stuff on their websites and I'll get rich." That can happen if these websites pull traffic from other sources, however, if they pull most of their traffic from search your income might not be significantly higher.
To keep these sites from damaging your rankings you could ask them to include the rel=canonical on their pages to point to your site as the source of the content. This would work fine for you if you can get them to do it... and eventually one of them will realize what the canonical does and they will not like it.
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
-
Issues with the apperance of cross country sitelinks
Hi Moz community, My questions is related to the international SEO, esepecially sitelinks. The problem is that the users from US see in the search results the sitelinks which comes from different countries, e.g. users from US see the sitelinks from Australia or the sitelinks from our international website, which has obviously no specification. I must say, that we've done everything to be in accordance with Google interantional SEO recommendations, hraflang & lang attributes, properly set location in GSC. All of these were tripplechecked. I also need to say, that it happens only to the websites that include content written in English nad French. All other branches show proper sitelinks. It think Google can't properly locate the content, if the language is the same regardless country. Previously it could be solved with disavow tool, but today's I don't know about any manual action that could deal with the issue. I also noticed that some other pages are affected with the same issue. To better understand the issue, please see the image link. The image shows the results from US. Despite the location, it shows sitelinks form UK or International website. Do you have similar experience? I will be thankful for any help. 1NNtJ
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eset0 -
Increase in duplicate page titles due to canonical tag issue
Implemented canonical tag (months back) in product pages to avoid duplicate content issue. But Google picks up the URL variations and increases duplicate page title errors in Search Console. Original URL: www.example.com/first-product-name-123456 Canonical tag: Variation 1: www.example.com/first-product--name-123456 Canonical tag: Variation 2: www.example.com/first-product-name-sync-123456 Canonical tag: Kindly advice the right solution to fix the issue.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SDdigital0 -
Client has moved to secured https webpages but non secured http pages are still being indexed in Google. Is this an issue
We are currently working with a client that relaunched their website two months ago to have hypertext transfer protocol secure pages (https) across their entire site architecture. The problem is that their non secure (http) pages are still accessible and being indexed in Google. Here are our concerns: 1. Are co-existing non secure and secure webpages (http and https) considered duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | VanguardCommunications
2. If these pages are duplicate content should we use 301 redirects or rel canonicals?
3. If we go with rel canonicals, is it okay for a non secure page to have rel canonical to the secure version? Thanks for the advice.0 -
Rankings disappeared on main 2 keywords - are links the issue?
Hi, I asked a question around 6 months ago about our rankings steadily declining since April of 2013. I did originally reply to that topic a few days ago, but as it's so old I don't think it's been noticed. I'm posting again here, if that's an issue I'm happy to delete. Here it is for reference: http://moz.com/community/q/site-rankings-steadily-decreasing-do-i-need-to-remove-links Since the original post, I have done nothing linkbuilding-wise except posting blog posts and sharing them on Facebook, G+ and Twitter. There are some links in there which don't look great (ie spammy seo directories, which I'm sending removal requests to) although quite a lot of others are relevant. Here's my link profile: <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/links?site=www.thomassmithfasteners.com</a> I've tried to make the site more accessible - we now have a simple, responsive design and I've tried to make the content clear and concise. In short, written for humans rather than search engines. As of the end of November, 'nuts and bolts' has now disappeared completely, and 'bolts and nuts' is page 8. There are many pages much higher which are not as relevant and have no links. We still rank highly for more specialised terms - ie 'bsw bolts' and 'imperial bolts' are still page 1, but not as high as before. We get an 'A' grade on the on-page grader for 'nuts and bolts, and most above us get F. I was cautious about removing links as our profile doesn't seem too bad but it does seem as if it's that. There are a fair few questionable directories in there, no doubt about that, but our overall practice in recent years has been natural building and link earning. So - I've created a spreadsheet and identified the bad links - ie directories with any SEO connotations. I am about to submit removal requests, I thought two polite requests a couple of weeks apart prior to disavowing with Google. But am I safe to disavow straight away? I say this as I don't think I'll get too many responses from those directories. I am also gradually beefing up the content on the shop pages in case of any 'thin content' issues after advice on the previous post. I noticed 100s of broken links in webmaster tools last week due to 2 broken links on our blog that repeated on every page and have fixed those. I have also been fixing errors W3C compliance-wise. Am I right to do all this? Can anyone offer any suggestions? I'm still not 100% sure if this is Panda, Penguin or something else. My guess is Penguin, but the decline started in March 2013, which correlates with Panda. Best Regards and thanks for any help, Stephen
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | stephenshone0 -
Am I missing an issue on my website?
Are there any glaring issues that I am missing with my site? I am building links, and growing the profile but had seen a drop in rankings a couple of months ago. Is this do to a site issue or am I just missing something? www.wallybuysell.com Any help would be great.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CKerr0 -
Entire site code copied - potential SEO issues?
Hi folks, We have noticed that our site has been directly duplicated by another site. They have copied the entire code, including the JS, CSS and most of the HTML and have simply switched their own text and images onto the template. (We discovered it because they even copied over our analytics tracking and were appearing in our reports - duh!) Does anyone know if there are potential SEO issues in copying the code like that, or do duplicate content issues only apply to indexable HTML content? Thanks! Matthew (I didn't want to out them by sharing their URL because it could have been an external contractor that built the site and they probably had no idea.)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MattBarker0 -
Multi Language Redirect Issues
Hello everyone, this is my first post and as so let me first say, Thank you! The SEO Moz community and SeoMozPro have been giving a great help in making my workflow simpler and richer. Lately I've been reading and learning a lot about indexation, in the process I have been making several improvements to some websites, but there is one particular that I am not able to understand. I am writing this post to ask for your help on an issue related to this website: www.dengun.com We are a Web Agency based in Portugal and most our clients are from Portugal. We have an English version and a Portuguese version of the website. It is setup like this: www.dengun.com/en www.dengun.com/pt When the user hits www.dengun.com it redirects to /en or /pt acording to the browser language. The HTTP status code is 302, i was reading in SEOMoz that this is bad because it's not passing rank to the other pages. Will a 301 redirecting to /en and /pt according to the browsers language? What is the best solution? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PedroSaiote0 -
Issues with Load Balancers?
Has anyone ran into SEO issues with sites utilizing load balancing systems? We're running into some other technical complications (for using 3rd party tracking services), but I'm concerned now that the setup could have a not-so-good impact from an SEO standpoint.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BMGSEO0