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
-
Is there proof that disavowing backlinks in GSC help to boost rankings in Google?
Hi Guys Let's say you have a website and you got some questionable back links or lower quality ones. Does anyone have proof that after disavowing back links helped in the rankings or had some positive effects? I am concerned that Google will place our website on their radar and instead possibly demote it or smth. Lastly, if disavowing is the way to go what criteria do you use to disavow backlinks? So if you get questionable back links over time, should you disavow ongoing as well? If so how often? Cheers John
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | whiteboardwiz0 -
Old Press Release sites - Which ones do you Disavow and leave alone
Hi Mozers! I need your help. I'm in the final stages of a huge link audit and press releases are a big concern. As you know, press release distribution sites up until 2012 had "follow" links, giving webmasters a delight of having their keyword anchor texts a big boost in rankings. These are the websites that are troubling me today so i would appreciate your input on my strategy below as most of these websites are asking for money to remove them: 1. Press Release sites that are on the same C-class - Disavow 2. Not so authoritative press release websites that just follow my www domain only (no anchor texts) - I leave it alone 3. Not so authoritative press release websites but have anchor texts that are followed - Disavow 4. Post 2012 press release websites that have "followed" anchor text keywords - Request to remove, then disavow 5. Post 2012 press release websites that just follow my www domain only (no anchor texts) - leave it alone #2 and #5 are my biggest concern. Now more than ever I would appreciate your follow ups. I will respond quickly and apply "good answers" to the one's that make the most sense as my appreciation to you. God bless you all.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Shawn1240 -
Change domains and start over?
We have a fairly new client who has taken part in many questionable SEO technique over the past few years (mainly buying links and directory web pages). In an effort to fix this they hired three separate SEO’s – we are the fourth. Over the past 3 months we have spent lots of time following best practice techniques to clean up and improve their rankings (including link removal requests but not yet disavow), and after some initially positive results, things are looking down again. Given Google’s apparent rolling algorithm updates and the mess we have found, we are wondering if the best option is to change domains and start over (downside is that they are in a highly competitive industry)? My other question pertains to a domain change and if we were to change from a plural to a singular, would that be enough for Google? (e.g from www.domains.com to www.domain.com). The idea is that we start the link building process again – but keep their brand intact. Really appreciate any feedback.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | E2E0 -
Using competitor brand names. How far is too far?
We are a small company competing for traffic in an industry with more or less one other very large brand. I'm noticing we are getting a descent amount of organic traffic for the competitor's brand name however I haven't done any on-page inclusion or link building for the term. We are using their brand as a keyword in our paid campaigns and seeing potential. I firmly believe we have a superior product. I'm tempted to start going after our competitor's brand as a keyword to skim some of their traffic. My question is how far it too far? Do I actively try to obtain a few anchor text specific backlinks? Dare I use their brand name as a term on our page? Maybe just a simple blog post comparing our two products is more appropriate? Any suggestions are appreciated.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | CaliB0 -
How do you remove unwanted links, built by your previous SEO company?
We dropped significantly (from page 1 for 4 keywords...to ranking over 75 for all) after the Penguin update. I understand trustworthy content and links (along with site structure) are the big reasons for staying strong through the update...and those sites that did these things wrong were penalized. In efforts to gain Google's trust again, we are checking into our site structure and making sure to produce fresh and relevant content on our site and social media channels on a weekly basis. But how do we remove links that were built by our SEO company, those of which could be untrustworthy/irrelevant sites with low site rankings? Try to email the webmaster of that site (using data from Open Site Explorer)?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | clairerichards0 -
Does anyone have any suggestions on removing spammy links?
I have some clients that recently got hit by "Penguin" they have several less than desireable backlinks that could be the issue? Does anyone have any suggestions on getting these removed? What are the odds that a webmaster on these spammy sites are going to remove them, and is it worth the time and effort?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | RonMedlin3 -
Penguin Update or URL Error - Rankings Tank
I just redid my site from Godaddy Quick Shopping Cart to Drupal. The site is much cleaner now. I transferred all the content. Now my site dropped from being in the top ten on almost every key word we were targeting to 35+. I "aliased" the urls so that they were the same as the Godaddy site. However when I look at our search results I notice that our URLs have extra wording at the end like this: ?categoryid=1 or some other number. Could this be the reason that our rankings tanked? Previously on the godaddy site the results didnt show this.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | chronicle0 -
Is OSE data reliable and removal of malicious inbound links?
I ran a report on my site (www.rentscouter.com) using OSE and it is reporting some very strange inbound links like: anchor text = Megan http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/mmnr/smr/Paul_Henderson_Interview_Full_Clip_REVISED.f4v?m=pc&a=bookmarkList.view&target_user_id=1&search_type=tag&keyword=蒲田・大森・羽田周辺 http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/mmnr/smr/Paul_Henderson_Interview_Full_Clip_REVISED.f4v?m=pc&a=bookmarkList.view&target_user_id=1&search_type=tag&keyword=熱闘!甲子園%2F高校野球ゲーム http://www.hawkeyesports.com/photos/schools/stan/sport/m-baskbl/04-05action/Thumbs.db?pages10=10&size=9?pk=1 anchor text = Alexa's Mom http://www.lg.com/it/products/documents/LE8800.epk?action=view&pageId=214&start=69164 http://www.michigan.gov/documents/techtalk/SEM-0601_191695_7.dot?blogname=mahdid&sub=5&tpl=0 anchor text = http://fansofdavid.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/4v5sh3k1.htm?seccion=busqarag_s&busq=Huesos&?seccion=basearag_c&id=3&?seccion=busqarag_s&busq=Huesos&?seccion=basearag_c&id=3&_pagi_pg=596 However, none of these seem to show up in my Google Webmaster account. And generally when I go to some of these links I can't find any reference to my site - is the OSE data bad or are these really shady links someone is building to knock down my site? What is showing up in GWT are a bunch of growing crappy links that redirect to some advertising site - does anyone know of a way to get these removed by Google as I doubt I'm going have any luck trying to contact the owner(s) of these sites: | http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/252213-best_penis_enlargement_methods.htm |
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BoulderJoe
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/252426-plumbers_and_gasfitters_needed_urgently.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/252451-the_importance_of_plumbers_and_more.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/253039-football_betting_systems_can_they_be_profitable.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/253131-my_teen_wants_to_know_how_sex_was_and_is_for_me_what_do_i_say.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/254364-why_marriage_counseling_is_good_for_you.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/254449-herpes_dating_service_what_is_it.htm | Yes, I know Google will theoretically and maybe eventually "ignore" such links, but that will be on Google time 4 weeks or 4 years - who knows. Plus, with a younger site with a thinner link profile - anything like the links above can't be helping me...... I'm trying to figure out why my site keeps bouncing between #5 and #255 for specific keywords and determining if I have a google penalty which is being discussed in this thread: http://www.seomoz.org/q/help-with-diagnosing-google-penalty0