More than one site in same industry
-
A client wants to have 3 sites in the same industry with a lot of overlapping keywords. Is that white hat? Will Google mind?
-
Hi Bob,
You are getting some very thoughtful answers here. I thought I'd pop in as we've chatted so much about Local SEO. Thought I would add...if this client is Local, remember that he must NOT duplicate the address or phone number on these websites. In other words, if his legal business name is Bob's Appliance Repair and his main website uses his NAP, no part of it should be replicated at Bob Fixes Heaters or Bob Fixes Washing Machines. He would need to obtain completely different addresses and local area code phone numbers for the other businesses. I do not recommend getting suite numbers in a situation like this, because the services rendered are the same or similar and Google would likely catch on that something was odd.
I will also add, I have seen local businesses make an absolute mess of this concept of multi-sites or micro-sites. The end up with a bunch of neglected, thin or duplicate content sites. It would be so much better if they put their money/effort into building one really strong website to which new elements are being added on a regular basis. In my experience, local business owners who want a multi-site approach have either come across bad advice somewhere or have an excess amount of energy. If you can step in with great advice and funnel that great energy toward them building a killer on-site blog, you may be able to save them from being spread too thin and assist them in becoming an authority resource in their field.
-
I agree with a lot of the other answers but let me give you some backstory on what we did.
When I had a photo studio, we had 4 distinct websites. They offered something unique - each photographer's portfolio and the opportunity to book exactly who you want.
So we had:
- Studio
- Owners
- Associate 1
- Associate 2
So our main studio had our branding. It showcased everyone, was very "newsy" about the studio, etc.
Our owner site was an overlapping brand but you could only see the owners work, owners about page, owners everything. Even the contact came directly to me, not our sales@ address.
Associate 1 and Associate 2 had completely different branding. They were based on the personalities of our photographers, not our main business. If someone was more interested in a fashion photographer, they wouldn't want us, they'd want our associate1. If they wanted more of that rockstar grungyness, book associate2.
So the plan was simple - dominate the SERPs on our main keywords and then sell to those who wanted each brand. It worked beautifully. We were one of the most booked studios in my area (maybe shot the most weddings between 2009-2010.) Associate1 grew past our business and now has her own studio. It was a tremendously successful plan.
If you offer something unique per site or at least some reason to get backlinks to more than one "business" it can work. I've MADE it work. But if you're just going to double up to hedge bets, it won't work. You'd be better off ranking #1 for your main than #8 and #10 no matter which study you believe:
http://searchengineland.com/organic-click-thru-rates-tumbling-study-97338
Of course, position 1 + 3 beats 8 alone. So it just depends on the situation.
-
Does this person currently have any respectable rankings in this industry?
If that answer is an honest "no" then it is a joke to attack with three sites when this person does not have what it takes to make an appearance even with one... because nobody yet has shown that they know what they are doing or have any ability to do it.
-
If your client wants to maximize their SEO dollar, they need dig deep and divine what really, really makes them unique in their market in order that they're able to present a worthwhile value proposition to visitors (prospective customers). For many, if not most small companies that's not an easy task in itself. If they're really working hard to network and provide sharable content based on their brand, their value proposition, and their prospect's needs, they're not going to have the time or resources to do if for multiple sites--and they won't need to.
If you let them think short term and only about content based on keywords, your value to them is going to be minimized, the value they get out of their domian(s) is going to be minimized and in a year from now, neither of you are going to be able to look back with pride at the SEO work that was done on this project. [end proselytizing]
-
Why? Is this just a tactic to dominate the SERPs or do they have 3 distinct offerings?
-
Hi Bob, I can't see why this could not be white hat, the main issue I see is not on the bots side but on your own.
Having many sites in the same niche may be difficult to manage because you want to differentiate them enough to get the most of them, also it's hard and time/money consuming to build strong brands in a particular niche, branding nowadays is an seo factor too (not directly but it affects).
You're saying you're overlapping keywords, you can do that but consider that you'll have hard time to choose sites where build links for one and not to another, you then need three unique ips, and if you'll achieve results your client will complain due to one site cannibalizing the other, so actually the growth of one would be the loss of another.
Be wise, and try to understand the real needs of your clients and why he wants to build 3 similar sites at once in the same niche.
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
-
Infinite Scrolling on Publisher Sites - is VentureBeat's implementation really SEO-friendly?
I've just begun a new project auditing the site of a news publisher. In order to increase pageviews and thus increase advertising revenue, at some point in the past they implemented something so that as many as 5 different articles load per article page. All articles are loaded at the same time and from looking in Google's cache and the errors flagged up in Search Console, Google treats it as one big mass of content, not separate pages. Another thing to note is that when a user scrolls down, the URL does in fact change when you get to the next article. My initial thought was to remove this functionality and just load one article per page. However I happened to notice that VentureBeat.com uses something similar. They use infinite scrolling so that the other articles on the page (in a 'feed' style) only load when a user scrolls to the bottom of the first article. I checked Google's cached versions of the pages and it seems that Google also only reads the first article which seems like an ideal solution. This obviously has the benefit of additionally speeding up loading time of the page too. My question is, is VentureBeat's implementation actually that SEO-friendly or not. VentureBeat have 'sort of' followed Google's guidelines with regards to how to implement infinite scrolling https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2014/02/infinite-scroll-search-friendly.html by using prev and next tags for pagination https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1663744?hl=en. However isn't the point of pagination to list multiple pages in a series (i.e. page 2, page 3, page 4 etc.) rather than just other related articles? Here's an example - http://venturebeat.com/2016/11/11/facebooks-cto-explains-social-networks-10-year-mission-global-connectivity-ai-vr/ Would be interesting to know if someone has dealt with this first-hand or just has an opinion. Thanks in advance! Daniel
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Daniel_Morgan1 -
Site Footer Links Used for Keyword Spam
I was on the phone with a proposed web relaunch firm for one of my clients listening to them talk about their deep SEO knowledge. I cannot believe that this wouldn’t be considered black-hat or at least very Spammy in which case a client could be in trouble. On this vendor’s site I notice that they stack the footer site map with about 50 links that are basically keywords they are trying to rank for. But here’s the kicker shown by way of example from one of the themes in the footer: 9 footer links:
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | RosemaryB
Top PR Firms
Best PR Firms
Leading PR Firms
CyberSecurity PR Firms
Cyber Security PR Firms
Technology PR Firms
PR Firm
Government PR Firms
Public Sector PR Firms Each link goes to a unique URL that is basically a knock-off of the homepage with a few words or at the most one sentences swapped out to include this footer link keyword phrase, sometimes there is a different title attribute but generally they are a close match to each other. The canonical for each page links back to itself. I simply can’t believe Google doesn’t consider this Spammy. Interested in your view.
Rosemary0 -
Malicious links on our site indexed by Google but only visible to bots
We've been suffering from some very nasty black hat seo. In Google's index, our pages show external links to various pharmaceutical websites, but our actual live pages don't show them. It seems as though only certain user-agents see the malicious links. Setting up Screaming Frog SEO crawler using the Googlebot user agent also sees the malicious links. Any idea what could have caused this or how this can be stopped? We scanned all files on our webserver and couldn't find any of malicious links. We've changed our FTP and CMS passwords, is there anything else we can do? Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SEO-Bas0 -
Strange referral site: www.cyberonlineclicking.com would like some insights from the community
Hello Mozzers! I've noticed that our site has been receiving a significant amount of referral traffic from a rather suspect looking site: www.cyberonlineclicking.com Can anyone shed any light on this beast. Stopped receiving traffic around 11th November, but was getting 20K sessions over a 4 week period. The traffic was of poor quality, but would be good to know how or why they were linking to my site (fejobs dot com). Looks very suspicious. Thanks Justin
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Eteach_Marketing0 -
Someone has built low quality links to my site - what should I do?
Hey guys, I was wondering whether you could offer me some help on something. One of the site's I'm working on has a blog attached to it and we sometimes accept guest posts from authors. A month or so back we published a blog that has been attracting a number of low-quality backlinks. Having looked into the matter further, it turned out that the client who had created the guest post was doing something called "tiered link building" and was building crappy links to their guest post content on other websites. I have subsequently deleted the blog post in question - will this devalue/cancel out the inbound links pointing to the original URL? Or do I need to do something extra? Disavow even? Comments appreciated!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Webrevolve0 -
Partial Match Penalty Site - Move Portion & Redirect To New Site
So I have a site that currently has a partial match penalty from google, I have been working to get it removed...Bad SEO basically my site was submitted to a bunch of bad blog networks..Hopefully it gets lifted soon as we remove and disavow links. That said I was planning on moving a portion of my site to a new site since its not really the focus of the site anymore however still pays the bills. I have also have been building it more of a network of sites..So If I do that and 301 redirect the pages I moved, will the penalty carry? On the current site I planned on using Rel no follow to any links that I may change in the header/menus etc.. Some of these pages I believe have the penalty while others dont. I really just dont want to screw anything else up more then it is? My biggest fear is that its perceived as a blackhat method or something like that? Any thoughts?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | dueces0 -
Disavow tool for blocking 4 to 5 sites for Article Republishing
Am finding some very low authority sites (recently picked our articles from ezine and other article sites - written over a year back) and pasted on to there site. The number of articles copies are not 1 or 2, but more than 10-12 in all these domains This has also led to our anchor based url - backlink to us from them (a part of article). Have Wrote down to remove my author profile and articles - but there has been no response from webmaster of these sites. Is Disavow a right approach. The number of such sites are 4 or 5 in nature !!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Modi0 -
Opinions Wanted: Links Can Get Your Site Penalized?
I'm sure by now a lot of you have had a chance to read the Let's Kill the "Bad Inbound Links Can Get Your Site Penalized" Myth over at SearchEngineJournal. When I initially read this article, I was happy. It was confirming something that I believed, and supporting a stance that SEOmoz has taken time and time again. The idea that bad links can only hurt via loss of link juice when they get devalued, but not from any sort of penalization, is indeed located in many articles across SEOmoz. Then I perused the comments section, and I was shocked and unsettled to see some industry names that I recognized were taking the opposite side of the issue. There seems to be a few different opinions: The SEOmoz opinion that bad links can't hurt except for when they get devalued. The idea that you wouldn't be penalized algorithmically, but a manual penalty is within the realm of possibility. The idea that both manual and algorithmic penalties were a factor. Now, I know that SEOmoz preaches a link building strategy that targets high quality back links, and so if you completely prescribe to the Moz method, you've got nothing to worry about. I don't want to hear those answers here - they're right, but they're missing the point. It would still be prudent to have a correct stance on this issue, and I'm wondering if we have that. What do you guys think? Does anybody have an opinion one way or the other? Does anyone have evidence of it being one way or another? Can we setup some kind of test, rank a keyword for an arbitrary term, and go to town blasting low quality links at it as a proof of concept? I'm curious to hear your responses.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AnthonyMangia0