Preparing for Penguin: Remove, Disavow, or change to branded
-
For someone that has 80 root domains pointing to their domain and 10 of them are sitewide backlinks from 10 PR4+ sites. All paid for. All with the same main keyword anchor text
Should I advise him to remove the links, dissavow the links, dissavow then remove or just change to branded anchor text for the 10 sitewide links. Another option is to just keep one link (preferrably editorial) from each site.
The only reason not to pull them off right away is that the client could not sustain his business with a drop in sales. These are by far the strongest 10 root domains. Eventually, when he has enough good backlinks these are all coming off.
There was a huge drop in sales for this site last fall, but it recovered almost completely by changing keyword stuffing and adding ecommerce content.
Looking to keep his sales and also prepare for this years updates.
-
Hey Bob, if those links are topic-related and aren't delivering you any traffic I agree with Thom in his huge and detailed answer. Swap it to an editorial article to an improtant page of your site would be my pick.
-
You're exactly right on what I meant when I referred to relevancy, Bob. Doesn't need to be exactly the same niche, but a reader would immediately understand why these two sites might be talking about each other.
So yea, I'd say trying to replace the sitewide with an editorial link to a relevant page on your site (same criteria) is probably the best/safest way to try to hold onto some of that ranking juice.
Glad you found it helpful - appreciate you letting me know.
Paul
-
I spoke to the owner. There's only 4 in question and one nofollow now
On the 4, I looked and they're not generating traffic. I'm unclear what you mean by relevant in this case. They are generally related to our niche as, for example, an informational clothing site (backlink provider) is related to a store that sells socks (our site)
We have 81 linking root domains and one nice piece of content if that helps.
What do you recommend for these 4? I'm guessing swapping for an editorial link is your recommendation, but due to not exact niche relevancy, I'm wondering if you'll suggest removal.
Thanks for the awesome advice, btw
-
You're in a delicate spot, Bob. I'd say your plan should be to "hope for the best, but plan for the worst".
Obviously, as you indicated, you're going to need to do something about those links as that link profile is just begging to get hammered.
You could clean them all at once, take the traffic hit, and then try to build back as quick as possible, but if the site is doing well now, it seems a shame to take such a hit.
I'd suggest putting a clear, well-prioritized, well-funded plan in place to start building link-worthy content and promoting it in ways that earn those backlinks as quickly as possible. (This work is going to have to be done regardless, so not like it's a temporary expense).
Then, for every 6 or 8 new quality incoming links, clean up one of the 10 problematic links. This will look natural to the SEs (as it is natural) and hopefully won't attract the attention of the slappers while you're working through the process.
Best case scenario, you'll get through offsetting all the problem links without getting hurt by a penalty or algo update.
In order to be ready in case of the worst-case scenario, (Google slaps the site with a penalty a week from now), you should also immediately build a confirmed contact list of the webmasters in control of the problematic links. (I mean an email or phone number that you've confirmed actually gets a response from a human). That way if you get hit before you can clean up naturally, you can get those problem links dealt with immediately and can show Google what you've done in a quick reconsideration request.
Also, document the process as you work through attracting the new links, so you can be specific about what you've been doing in that direction, should a reconsideration request become necessary
As far as how to deal with the problem links - do not submit a disavow!! That is a last-ditch process if there's no other way to get links removed, which is not your case. (Plus the disavow process could attract unwanted attention. Yea, I'm cynical like that
I'd actually suggest a mix of tactics for those 10 sites, depending on different circumstances:
- If a site's links are generating quality traffic, just ask that they be no-followed.
- If using the no-follow approach on a number of the sites, also see if they can mix up the anchor text, making sure to include at least some branded (as you hinted)
- If the main value of the links is for juice, and the site is relevant to your own, ask that they be swapped for a legit editorial link or two. A couple of the strong, new, link-worthy content resources you've just built will help here. (And will probably be stronger than a sitewide anyway)
- If the links aren't generating quality traffic and aren't relevant to your niche, just get them removed.
Does that approach sound like it might work?
Paul
-
Hi Bob, normally I would advice to remove clearly paid links or limit them to the homepage but your case seems quite different.
You said that those links are not only helping this site for their SEO purposes but that those links are driving him sales. In that case I imagine that those links are receiving clicks so they're actually highly related. I think that google will (or maybe it's actually) look at CTR of your backlinks. If they're trafficked they're high value also for the users so I will maintain them. However if you've generated them quicker than the normal you may consider use them as nofollowed links driving traffic to their site and ask those sites to write a post speaking about your company's services. In that sense you may push in a branded or url based link and still have the traffic from those links. I f you are able to get value and traffic from those links I woul dnot remove them, and for sure I won't ever disavow anything if you haven't received any warning from google.
Maybe you may consider to point them in a spreadsheet so if you receive a warning you'll always be able to disavow them and ask for a reconsideration.
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
-
By changing the wordpress theme what need to take for seo consideration?
Hi guys! we have a site that been using a theme for a year now and we decided to change to a new one, the question here is, does it affect seo? or it is possible to remain 100% for the seo? What caution tips that you guys can share for changing the theme? Does just remaining the same URL works?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | andrewwatson922 -
Dump Penguin Hit Domain
Just wanting to get some feedback from others dealing with Penguin hits on client's websites. We've got one particularly client that has been hit badly because of a high proportion of link toxicity. After running the Cemper Detox Tool we found that only about 25 links are healthy. We're actually thinking of dumping the domain and moving the website to a new domain and starting again with link building (manually grabbing as many of the existing healthy links as possible on the way). Has anyone out there used this strategy? What do you think of the potential of the Sandbox of the new site vs. the Penguin hit on the old site. Do you think the 'drag' of Penguin is higher than the 'drag' of the Sandbox on rankings? Thanks guys, look forward to your insight!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | mavster0 -
Vetting Link Opportunties that are Penguin Safe
I am looking to go after sites that are, and will never be, affected by Penguin/Panda updates. Is there a tool or a general rule of thumb on how to avoid such sites? Is there a method anyone is currently using to get good natural links post Penguin 2.0?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | dsinger0 -
I think competitors are trying to remove my links! Have you ever seen this?
Here is the email my sales rep received today (what can we do to combat this?): From: Jaqueline carol [mailto:jaqueline-carol@hotmail.com]
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | pbhatt
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 12:57 AM
To:
Subject: I NEED your help - PLEASE Hi, Due to the latest GoogIe update we are working on cleaning up the links to our website . There fore we would like to kindly ask you to remove our link from your page. link details: URL: We believe that it would help both sides to rank up higher in Google and not get penalized during the future Google updates.
Please remove my link at the earliest and notify me about the same. Thank you for your cooperation. Best Regards, Jaquelinecarol1 -
Removing Poison Links w/o Disavow
Okay so I've been working at resolving former black-hat SEO tactics for this domain for many many months. Finally our main keyword is falling down the rankings like crazy no matter how many relevant, quality links I bring to the domain. So I'm ready to take action today. There is one inner-page which is titled exactly as the keyword we are trying to match. Let's call it "inner-page.html" This page has nothing but poison links with exact match anchor phrases pointing at it. The good links I've built are all pointed at the domain itself. So what I want to do is change the url of this page and let all of the current poison links 404. I don't trust the disavow tool and feel like this will be a better option. So I'm going to change the page's url to "inner_page.html" or in otherwords, simply changed to an underscore instead of a hyphen. How effective do you think this will be as far as 404ing the bad links and does anybody out there have experience using this method? And of course, as always, I'll keep you all posted on what happens with this. Should be an interesting experiment at least. One thing I'm worried about is the traffic sources. We seem to have a ton of direct traffic coming to that page. I don't really understand where or why this is taking place... Anybody have any insight into direct traffic sources to inner-pages? There's no reason for current clients to visit and potentials shouldn't be returning so often... I don't know what the deal is there but "direct" is like our number 2 or 3 traffic source. Am I shooting myself in the foot here? Here we go!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jesse-landry0 -
Changes to SEO with disavow?
Has the game changed a lot with the disavow tool I can see people still saying check out what our competitors are doing but with just going through a disavow myself how do you actually know what the correct link diversity is as 0 - 100% of the links could be disavowed. Also could a competitor not just buy a load of spammy links and disavow them to mask there real links. (I know in my backlinks on 150 are good and the rest is disavowed crap)
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobAnderson0 -
Penguin Maybe? Ranking low for main term: Trying to find cause and correct
Hello, For nlpca(dot)com one of our main keywords is the term "NLP" We are ranking 25th for that term.Possible causes: 1. keyword stuffing on home page, though we need to use the term over and over again to describe ourselves. Also, competitors like nlpco(dot)com and nlpu(dot)com also mention "NLP" a lot 2. Backlink profile: see this spreadsheet. We have a lot of sites from other countries and many sitewides but all natural and almost all branded. Ou company names are NLP Institute of California, NLP California, and NLP and Coaching Institute. 3. nlpcacoach(dot)org is a sitewide footer link. So is iepdoc.nl. We're going to ask the first site to take our link down. 4. No "What is NLP" article. I think that might help. 5. Most of our 60 articles are posted on other sites. We author about 30 of them. I'm working on authorship via rel="author" and rel="me" links. There's usually 2 authors 6. Most of the title tags used to be 4 keywords separated by pipes -"|" I changed them all after the updates took the keyword "NLP" down. That's about all I can think of. What do we do or clean up?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
Penguin destroys 1 of my sites! Any ideas why the other was spared?
I have 2 main sites for my business. One is a creaky homestead site about 4 years old Another is a much more sophisticated wordpress site now almost 2 years old. That site's traffic steadily increased until May of 2011 when it suffereed a 25 to 30% decline probably due to Panda. I did all of the recommended fixes with little effect until about 3 months ago when its traffic started going up again and had almost a complete recovery until last week when my traffic is down about 95%. I strongly suspecct the penguin. Interestingly, my old site has been virtually unaffectted even though bost sites are fairly similar, on both sites I started with a lot of directory links including DMOZ, Yahoo, BOTW, some strong lawyer sites like NOLO.COM, Lawyers.com, and others not so strong but I tried to get the best directories I could find. Then I started getting a lot of natural links but some of these aee pretty junky sites and scraper type sites. I am curious if anyone has any thoughts on why www.uncontesteddivorce-nyc.com was hit so hard while www.affordable-uncontested-divorce.com is unscathed. The newer site has, accoring to majestic seo and market samurai, around 35, 000 backlinks, while the older site has around 3500. Thanks, Paul
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | diogenes0