A while back there was a strategy presented about developing games or widgets and then using them for link bait. Is this still a viable strategy to improve ranking?
-
We are developing a game (might be an app or a widget or both) and are looking for the latest advice about how to leverage it for seo benefit. Can anyone share their recent experience with this? I know it was a strategy used in the past, but what considerations should we be looking at (technically and strategically) as we begin developing. Thanks in advance for any advice.
-
We are trying to use the game to indirectly promote products, not to get traffic to the game itself. We would like to increase our brand awareness and generate any of the signals that Google would smile upon.
-
To be clear, are you trying to get organic traffic to promote the game itself, or are you trying to use the game to promote a product/service? If you're thinking about the game itself, I'd worry more about making a game people like and getting good reviews to it in the app stores - SEO is among the last things I'd consider to help a game succeed.
If you're trying to use the game to promote something else there are some things you can do. Without more details (your industry, the target market, etc.), though, I'm limited to general advice. Put it on your site; make it easy to share the game on other sites and the results on social media; try to tie it in more closely with your offerings; give people a reason to link to your site naturally, e.g. scoreboards or additional features.
Happy to provide more thoughts with a little more info
-
Thank you for your insight. The idea of this would to house the "game" or "informational app" on our site and have other sites that might partner with us to link to the game also.
-
Lara, this has been an issue that has been debated recently, and it's kind of a grey area. If you're going to build the app or widget in a way to take advantage of its SEO value, then that's really not a good plan. It's logical that you include a link back to your site since you're developer of the widget or app, so that's fine. But if you really just want to include a keyword rich anchor text link to your site then I would take a different approach.
Your best bet is to consider the traffic that the widget or app will bring your site, and the notoriety your company will get by providing a widget or app. If you include a link, then it should be a branded link and not a keyword rich anchor text link.
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
-
Ranking in other countries.
Hi, To rank in Dubai and UK is it just a matter of mentioning it in a blog post or more technical things need to be setup? we have two sites one empty which i have 301 to the main site would you use the other site for dubia? Regards
Technical SEO | | ReSEOlve0 -
Using rel=canonical
I have a set of static pages which were created with the purpose of targeting long tail keywords. That has resulted in Domain Authority dilution to some extent. I am now in the process of creating one page which will serve the same results but only after user selects the fields in the drop-down. I am planning to use rel=cannonical on the multiple pages pointing back to the new page. Will it serve the purpose?
Technical SEO | | glitterbug0 -
Links below linking (not sitelinks)
Hi All, Please can you let me know the name and / or point me at an article / blog / directory on how best to achieve additional links under a search engine listing (I don't mean site links) e.g. I do a search for 'home insurance' on Google.co.uk and under the listing for Compare the Market it has - home insurance, building insurance and landlords insurance. Thanks for your help!
Technical SEO | | Joseph-Vodafone0 -
What hosting companies do you use & do you use dedicated servers
I am hoping the community of semoz will help me in deciding what hosting company i should use as there are hundreds of them. I have asked previously about dedicated servers but was shocked to have only received one responce. Recently i have been having nothing but problems with my hosting company so now i am trying to find a UK hosting company that can offer a dedicated server. I would be grateful if people could let me know what companies they use for their sites and if they use managed hosting companies.
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Are site wide links bad for web developers?
Like many web dev companies, we put an anchor text credit (varying the anchor text) in the footer of clients' sites. As it's a footer link, it's site wide. This strategy's been troubling me for a while and I've been anticipating a drop in our rankings ... especially in light of Penguin. But it hasn't happened. Any other developers our there taken a hit by having site wide links? anyone have any views on this? Anyone want to comment on the spurious and unlikely scenario that Google may recognise that web dev companies have always used site wide credits and may therefore be overlooking / not penalising them?
Technical SEO | | 2Stroke0 -
Why am I ranking for this
In need of some second opinions here. I have a domain softboxsystems.co.uk which ranks for the keyword sofrigam. It is not meant to! Have posted previously on this but to cut long story short, the clients .com started to rank for this term and then they lost the contract to supply the services so got a legal request to stop ranking for it (it had been seoed so was ranking 100% on off page issues). The client is a UK company so they decided that they would block the .com from google and use the co.uk domain for a period of time instead while they worked on deranking the domain. The .com domain was therefore blocked from the index, the .co.uk homepage would not rank for anything then it turned out that they had placed a canonical tag link from the .co.uk to the blocked .com!!! On my suggestion this was removed and the homepage of the .co.uk appeared in google in a matter of a couple of days (other pages on the site were indexed but not the home). Now, somehow the co.uk domain homepage is ranking for the banned term. I have checked open link and there are not any links pointing to the domain with the anchor of sofigram, nor is the term mentioned onsite. I now have the client panicking on the phone to get the page out of google again asap before the competitors legal people get wind of it. I am still trying to deindex the .co.uk homepage in the short term. I have readded the canonical back to the .com as that worked at not getting that page indexed previously. The main issue I have is how on earth I am ranking for this term in the first place and more importantly how do I stop from ranking for this term! The only terms I can find as anchor text in the moz tools are the keywords I have been seoing for help hehe thanks
Technical SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0 -
Is a 302 useful here?
We have a site that had one super successful viral video a couple of years back and basically the site needs a ton of work to even be functional. We don't have the time or the resources to even touch it. Our video is still getting tons of views today and I'm fairly certain it's the only reason the site still gets traffic. Most of the views come from youtube which prompts them to check out the site. We plan on going back to the site at a later date, but for now wanted to redirect it to another site of ours. In this case is it best practice to 302? or is a 301 still the proper solution?
Technical SEO | | ClaytonKendall0 -
Value of Twitter Links
Let's ignore the "social metric" value of Twitter links and mentions and look at it from the pure link juice point of view. Twitter accounts such as http://twitter.com/randfish used to have their own PageRank and were treated as separate URLs. Twitter changed that to http://twitter.com/#!/randfish consolidating all their content to a single URL. When I search for "randfish" in Google, however, the result is the first URL version. Some clarification on this matter would be much appreciated.
Technical SEO | | Dan-Petrovic0