How to make second site in same niche and do white hat SEO
-
Hello,
As much as we would like, there's a possibility that our site will never recover from it's Google penalties.
Our team has decided to launch a new site in the same niche.
What do we need to do so that Google will not mind us having 2 sites in the same niche? (Menu differences, coding differences, content differences, etc.)
We won't have duplicate content, but it's hard to make the sites not similar.
Thanks
-
I'm sorry to hear that I would recommend requesting the people linking to your existing site that are using high quality powerful links to update the back link to point to your new site.
the advantages of dealing with people with legitimate sites are they are much easier to find and will actually help you with these types of things. It's not the nightmare that it is trying to get a hold of a blackhat webmaster.
Outside of creating a 100% legitimate website with a slightly different niche may be content, inbound marketing whatever buzzword you want to use for the very short time I hope it takes you to get your most powerful white hat links to point to your new website.
Removeem.com It is a wonderful tool for finding the names and contact info of webmasters you can use it to make a polite request saying that you have a new domain and you would appreciate if they would please update the link pointing at your site.
After you have taken the best Backlinks away from your existing site I would move to your new site.
I would also be upfront about moving place text saying you are changing domain names in a conspicuous location on your site.
If you feel that your livelihood is being jeopardized by this I definitely can understand I would then really put 110% into creating some top-notch content and user friendly/mobile design on your new brand. When you go live you want to really have something better than what you had before.
I'm sorry I don't know any methods that would be instant but I would consider using pay per click to soften the blow.
I hope this is of help,
Thomas
-
Tom,
I appreciate the responses and they make sense. I don't see a solution. I don't see our current site ever pulling out of penalty no matter what I do and we've got an income off of it.
Any ideas?
-
this is older but
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2010/11/best-practices-for-running-multiple.html
https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4557285.htm
and this discussion of tactics used to do what are considered now black hat
http://www.nichepursuits.com/should-you-host-all-your-niche-sites-on-the-same-hosting-account/
it is no ok in Google ad words either
sorry for all the posts,
Tom
-
with all that said I think if you go after a slightly new niche or offer things from a different angle you're obviously doing twice the work.
Are you concerned that if you 301 redirect you will be bringing the penalty over?
sincerely,
Tom
-
talking about taking the new site and building it using white hat tactics that were implemented after the penalty in which the original site has yet to return from. I know that creating sites that are essentially going to be the same but contain unique content just to get better rankings is against the rules.
if you remove the first site after building the first site using white hat methods currently employed on the existing site
( I should say domain because that's what's coming down to right?)
it would be in your best interest to remove the first site when the second website goes live.
I know this is not the ideal situation because you probably have some good Backlinks on the original but having two sites that are competing for the same niche owned by the same person/company would be competing for the same place in the SERPS I believe would be considered a method of rigging the system.
if you have one site that is completely fine if you have one that is going to go after different niche that is completely fine.
I am basing this on an e-commerce client of mine who had competitor selling the exact same product with unique content across three domains.
The client reported this to Google and the spam team acted or there was an incredible coincidence because two months later sites reported could not be found in Google's index.
I that is of help,
Tom will
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
-
What sort of knowledge differentiates a good SEO from a great SEO?
This is definitely more of a discussion than a clear cut answer.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Edward_Sturm0 -
Are 2 sites in same niche from same company white hat?
Hello, We want to open a second eCommerce store. Our first one is doing well. It would be different code, different graphics, a different category/menu system, but many of the products will be the same. Will that be safe and white hat now and into the future to have 2? Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
Site Scraping and Canonical Tags
Hi, So I recently found a site (actually just one page) that has scraped my homepage. All the links to my site have been removed except the canonical tag, should this be disavowed through WMT or reported through WMT's Spam Report? Thanks in advance for any feedback.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | APFM0 -
Suspicious external links to site have 302 redirects
Hi, I have been asked to look at a site where I suspect some questionable SEO work, particularly link building. The site does seem to be performing very poorly in Google since January 2014, although there are no messages in WMT. Using WMT, OPenSiteExplorer, Majestic & NetPeak, I have analysed inbound links and found a group of links which although are listed in WMT, etc appear to 302 redirect to a directory in China (therefore the actual linking domain is not visible). It looks like a crude type of link farm, but I cant understand why they would use 302s not 301s. The domains are not visible due to redirects. Should I request a disavow or ignore? The linking domains are listed below: http://www.basalts.cn/
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | crescentdigital
http://www.chinamarbles.com.cn/
http://www.china-slate.com.cn/
http://www.granitecountertop.com.cn/
http://www.granite-exporter.com/
http://www.sandstones.biz/
http://www.stone-2.com/
http://www.stonebuild.cn/
http://www.stonecompany.com.cn/
http://www.stonecontact.cn/
http://www.stonecrate.com/
http://www.stonedesk.com/
http://www.stonedvd.com/
http://www.stonepark.cn/
http://www.stonetool.com.cn/
http://www.stonewebsite.com/ Thanks Steve0 -
Negative SEO from Spammers Killing Client Rankings
Hi - I have identified a client website which was; a ) hacked and had several fraudulent pages added e.g. www.xxx.com/images/uggaustralia.html added which have 301 redirect links to another fraudulent websites. b) had an auto generated back link campaign (over 12k back links at present) with targeted anchor text at cheap ugg boots, ugg sale etc. I've removed the dodgy redirect web pages and also undertook a link audit using Google WMT, OSE and Seo Majestic and have disavowed all the spammy links at domain level. Consequently my client has dropped from top three for the key phrase to #9. Google WMT now sees ugg boots uk, ugg boots sale etc. as some of the most popular anchor text for the site even though it's blatantly obvious that the site has nothing to do with Ugg boots. No manual webspam penalties are in place however the auto generated anchor text campaign is still ongoing and is generating more spammy links back to non existent web pages - which still Google appears to be picking up. Question is - how long do you reckon it will take for the links to disappear and is there anything I can speed Google along as this issue if not of my making? p.s. For the record I've found at least 500 sites that have been targeted by this same campaign as well.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Door4seo0 -
Press Releases and SEO in 2013
Mozers, A few questions for the community: Distributing a press release through a service like 24-7pressrelease.com - is it a serious duplicate content issue when an identical press release is distributed to multiple sites with no canonical markup (as far as I can tell)? All of the backlinks in the press release are either nofollow or redirects. If there IS a duplicate content issue, will the website be affected negatively given the numerous Panda and Penguin refreshes? Why SHOULDN'T a company issue a press release to multiple sites if it actually has something legitimate to announce and the readership of a given site is the target demographic? For example, why shouldn't a company that manufactures nutritional health supplements issue the same press release to Healthy Living, Lifestyle, Health News, etc _with a link to the site?_I understand it's a method that can be exploited for SEO purposes, but can't all SEO methods be taken to an extreme? Seems to me that if this press release scenario triggers the duplicate content and/or link spam penalty(ies), I'd consider it a slight deficiency of Google's search algorithm. Any insight would be much appreciated. Thanks.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | b40040400 -
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