Different Hosting Accounts for Linking?
-
I have several different sites which link to each other (for valid reasons...sister companies etc). Would it be better if these were hosted from different web hosting firms? And if they are hosted by the same hosting company would it be better if they had different accounts and different IP addresses?
Not sure I understand C blocks etc. Any tutorial on here about that?
I wouls assume it would look better to Google if the links were not from the same IP address.
Thanks.
-
I fully agree about the links warpath. My point is that in my opinion you are at far greater risk from trying to hide the nature of the interconnected sites with machinations on hosting, IP addresses etc, than to simply legitimately link them.
Any attempt to artificially pass significant ranking influence between these related sites is bound to be caught by Google eventually because there are just too many signals available for Google to spot.
While I'm unwilling to say "never" where Google's algorithm is concerned, I would say a legitimate, natural interlinking between these sites is BY FAR the safest approach, compared to the alternatives. The only safer way would be not to interlink at all.
I do feel your pain. Google is playing with people's livelihoods with these inaccurately applied penalties, whether algorithmic or manual.
Paul
-
Paul,
I appreciate your input and agree with your sentiment. However, as we know, Google is on the warpath regarding links. We are dealing with an algorithm that is applied very broadly. My fear is that perfectly innocent and resonable links between companies gets caught in a new tweak by Google.
I have seen many "good" quality sites get hurt by Panda and Penguin. Sometimes the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. I've seen it enough times. Google is not perfect. If I can try and protect a site from potential harm then I would do it. The cost of multiple hosting accounts pales in comparison the getting penalized by the big G.
-
In my experience, Ebtec, worrying about this kind of thing is a waste of time. These are exactly the kinds of attempted manipulations that have gotten so many sites into trouble in the recent past as search engines clamp down.
The question you'd need to ask yourself, is (and I mean no disrespect) "am I smarter than Google's engineers?" Because the only reason to try to run these sites from different address to appear unconnected is to try to fool Google into passing more ranking value between them. And that's manipulation in Google's eyes,so they're gonna want to catch you and penalize you for it.
The reality to this is that you'd not only have to run the sites from different hosts and totally unrelated IP addresses, you'd also need to have totally separate Google Analytics accounts registered with totally unrelated email addresses. And totally unrelated domain registrations. And unrelated Adwords/Adsense accounts. Plus any other "fingerprinting" techniques Google might be using now or come up with in the future.
There's no harm in linking between these sites legitimately to show they are "sister sites". But trying to fake Google into treating them as totally unrelated is a fool's errand in my opinion. Use the time & money you would have to invest in all that extra hosting and multiple accounts, and instead work up some really useful content for your users and spend some time getting others to help promote it through social sharing etc. It'll end up bringing way more long-term value than trying to trick Google for a little while. (Not to mention way less dangerous if were to get caught!)
Does that help?
Paul
-
How many links are you talking about? I think that if you naturally link your sister companies sites in your company sites... you don't have to worry about having a separate hosting. Google wont go after you if have a few links from the same ip.
Now if you have 40 sites all linking for your main site. Google might see that as manipulation so you can try to hide that you own all the sites. however the host is only thing, they can also check for who owns the domain etc...
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
-
Should we optimise our internal links?
Hi again, We recently had a technical search audit done by a specialist agency and they discovered a number of internal links that caused redirects to happen. The agency has recommended we update all of these links to link directly to the destination so we don't lose out on link equity. We'd just like to know if you think this would be a worthwhile use of our time. Our web team seem to think that returning a 301 to a crawler means that the crawler will stop indexing the original URL and instead index the redirected destination? Thanks all. Clair
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iescape2 -
Which links to disavow?
I've got a new client that just fired their former SEO company, which was building spammy links like crazy! Using GSC and Majestic, I've identified 341 linking domains. I'm only a quarter of the way through the list, but it is clear that the overwhelming majority are from directories, article directories and comment spam. So far less than 20% are definitely links I want to keep. At what point do I keep directory links? I see one with a DA of 61 and a Moz spam score of 0. I realize this is a judgement call that will vary, but I'd love to hear some folks give DA and spam numbers. FWIW, the client's DA is 37.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rich.owings0 -
301 Externally Linked, But Non-Producing Pages, To Productive Pages Needing Links?
I'm working on a site that has some non-productive pages without much of an upside potential, but that are linked-to externally. The site also has some productive pages, light in external links, in a somewhat related topic. What do you think of 301ing the non-productive pages with links to the productive pages without links in order to give them more external link love? Would it make much of a difference? Thanks... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Spam Links? -115 Domains Sharing the Same IP Address, to Remove or Not Remove Links
Out of 250 domains that link to my site about 115 are from low quality directories that are published by the same company and hosted on the same ip address. Examples of these directories are: -www.keydirectory.net -www.linkwind.com -www.sitepassage.com -www.ubdaily.com -www.linkyard.org A recent site audit from a reputable SEO firm identified 125 toxic links. I assume these are those toxic links. They also identified about another 80 suspicious domains linking to my site. They audit concluded that my site is suffering a partial Penguin penalty due to low quality links. My question is whether it is safe to remove these 125 links from the low quality directories. I am concerned that removing this quantity of links all at once will cause a drop in ranking because the link profile will be thin with only about 125 domains remaining that point to the site. Granted those 125 domains should be of somewhat better quality. I am playing with fire by having these removed. I URGENTLY NEED ADVICE AS THE WEBMASTER HAS INITIATED STEPS TO REMOVE THE 125 LINKS. Thanks everyone!!! Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
Real impact of canonical links?
I am responsible for 2 e-commerce websites. SEO Moz and Google Web Master tools both inform me regularly that on both sites there are many instances of duplicate titles, headings, decriptions and page content. Obviously from an SEO point of view I am more than a little concerned about this! Out product pages struggle to perform strongly despite the fact that our website is of a decent quality and we are leaders in our field. Our competitors rank above us when they add a product page, whereas we normal flit in between 8-10 or on the 2nd SERP. I know it is hard without viewing the site, but is duplicate content likely to be a strong, leading factor in this? I think it is, but want to put together a business case to spend the cash to sort it out....just need someone confirmation that this is worth sorting as a priority. Here are 2 examples of what I mean: 1) Category pages www.exampledomain.co.uk/category1.aspx We have filters on our category page (so the customer can sort products based on their price, colour, size etc.). When filters are used a new URL is generared. www.exampledomain.co.uk/category1.aspx?prices=0||10 www.exampledomain.co.uk/category1.aspx?prices=10||20 The content, titles, description is the same although the links are different. Do I need to set up a canonical tag on the page that reads: 2) Product pages Product pages on the websites have different URLs depending on how to arrive on them. You get 1 URL if you navigated to the page via the website navigation, but you get another different URL if you used the website search functionality to find the page. Example: Search link: www.exampledomain.co.uk/category1/Product1.aspx Navigation link: www.exampledomain.co.uk/12345/category1/Product1.aspx Again, do I need to set up a canonical tag for 1 of these link types so that the link benefit is not shared over 2 pages? Any feedback would be welcome! At the moment the ability to add canonical tags is locked down by our CMS (I know, rubbish!)...so website development would be needed - hence the need for a business case!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DHS_SH0 -
Advertising links hurt SEO?
I'm working with a publisher who said that having DFA links on his site will hurt his SEO. He is taking my link and pointing it back to his site and then to mine. Does that sound right to you?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GFTMarketer0 -
Flow of internal link equity
I've recently come across this: A site changes the URL of one internal page to something more search friendly, and 301's the old to the new as you would expect. They don't change the link on the homepage in the navigation. Instead they keep it to the old URL so they go through the 301 to get to the page even though it's internal. They say if they change the URL it will reset the internal flow of link equity to that page. I've not come across this before and so am not sure what to think. I mean I can see what they're saying but I would have though that it being internal would mean it's different and that the flow to internal pages would just kind of resume as-was quite soon afterwards. Any views?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SteveOllington0 -
Optimising My Website Link Containers
Hi, I'm looking at my links containers and trying to optimise them. I would be greatful if anyone can give me some feedback on my plan for perfect optimaisation. My links are constructed as follows: I have a two states:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James77
1/. A Non Hover state which contains an Image and Text
2/. A Hover state which contains a bit more text - I do this as containing full text on the non hover state would not be good for users and would look ugly as well. Here's an example block of the HTML - as you can see from the URL, its quite a deep page level. From the URL and Alt / Titles the Page I am Linking to is about: "The Royal Hotel Accommodation New York Holidays". I Just a bit confused on how I should apply ALT and Title (Titles in particular) attributes given the nested DiV's etc - I can apply these to parent level, or apply all levels, or apply them to a mix. Also is there any obvious thinks you can think of I am missing that may help onsite SEO? Thanks in Advance CURRENT UNOPTIMISED CODE:
The Royal Hotel
New York Holidays Accommodation
The Royal Hotel
MY OPTIMISED CODE (Adding Title and Alt attributes):
The Royal Hotel
New York Holidays Accommodation
The Royal Hotel
0