City and state link stuffing in footer

[nkolson]

A competitor has links to every state in the U.S., every county in our state and nearby states, and every city in those nearby states. All with corresponding link text and titles that lead to pages with thin, duplicate content. They consistently rank high in the SERPS and have for years. What gives--I mean, isn't this something that should get you penalized?

[nkolson]

Thanks for your response, Will. It's small business (maybe 10 or 12 employees) at a single location. While they don't really impact me directly, it's particularly bothersome because they are in the advertising and marketing business. We tell clients not to do these things, but all around there are agencies that succeed using these tactics.

[MiriamEllis]

Hi There!

Unfortunately, as both Ben and Pau are mentioning, this absurd practice is still hanging around the web. While it's very unlikely the stuffed footer is actually helping this competitor to achieve high rankings, it is aggravating to think it isn't preventing them, either.

Your post doesn't mention whether this is actually a business model with physical local offices or is fully virtual, but what I have seen in cases like these is that big brands tend to get away with a great deal of stuff I would never recommend to a smaller brand. It begs the question: how can we explain this phenomenon?

In the past, I've seen folks asserting that Google is soft on big brands. There could be some truth in this, but we've all seen Google take a massive whack at big brand practices with various updates, so that really makes this an unsatisfying assertion.

Another guess is that big brands have built enough supporting authority to make them appear immune to the consequences of bad practices. In other words, they've achieved a level of power in the SERPs (via thousands of links, mentions, reviews, reams of content, etc.) that enables them to overcome minor penalties from bad practices. This could be closer to the truth, but again, isn't fully satisfactory.

And, finally, there's the concept of Google being somewhat asleep at the wheel when it comes to enforcing guidelines and standards, and whether or not that's kind of excusable given the size of the Internet. They can't catch everything. I can see this in this light, but at the same time, don't consider Google to have taken a proactive stance on accepting public reporting of bad practices. Rather, they take the approach of releasing periodic updates which are supposed to algorithmically detect foul play and penalize or filter it. Google is very tied to the ideas of big data and machine intelligence. So far, it's been an interesting journey with Google on this, but it is what has lead to cases exactly like the one you're seeing - with something egregiously unhelpful to human users being allowed to sit apparently unpunished on a website that outranks you, even when you are trying to play a fairer game by the rules.

In cases like this, your only real option is to hang onto the hope that your competitor will be the subject of an update, at some point in the future, that will lessen the rewards they are receiving in the face of bad practices. Until then, it's heads down, working hard on what you can do, with a rigorous focus on what you can control.

[paupastorlopez]

I've seen a lot of websites that do similar things and rank high on SERP's...

Sometimes this can be explained in some part by a good backlink profile, old domain / website, high amount of content (if the content is relatively original and varied), or because the niche is more receptive to this type of content (when it's something relatively common on your niche)... and other times simply makes no sense why things like this are working in Google for years without getting automatically or manual penalyzed.

Iv'e seen webs with so big keyword stuffing repeating a keyword about 500 times in the homepage, and being ranked in the top of Google for that keyword without seeing nothing internal or external of that website appart of this that can explain that awesome ranking. It's so frustrating knowing that this is penalized by Google and some of your competitors are doing it with impunity while you can't or at least you shouldn't...

[Davey_Tree]

Hi!

Yes, this absolutely should get them penalized. Unfortunately, I have also seen this work very well for different competitors in various niches. Regardless of what Google says, some old black-hat tactics still work wonders and these sites often fly under the radar. For how long is the question though. It still carries a heavy risk. If they are discovered, they can get a serious penalty slapped on them or at the very least get pushed pretty far down the SERPS. It's really just risk vs. reward. If you are like me, I work for a company that has a ton of revenue at stake, so I think of it like this.

It is much easier for me to explain to them why these thin, low-quality sites are ranking because of a loophole than it would be for me to explain why I got our #1 lead generating channel penalized and blasted into purgatory.

Usually, these sites that use these exact-match anchors on local terms look like garbage. So even if they are driving traffic, I often wonder how much of it is actually converting since the majority of their site looks like a collection of crappy doorway pages. It is still very frustrating to watch them succeed in serps though. I have the same issue.

You could always "try" to report them to Google directly. I do not know if this really works or if anchor-text spam would fall under one of their official categories to file it under, but you could try submitting a spam report here: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport.

I have no idea if this works or not though. Also as a side note, I would run their site through a tool like Majestic SEO or AHREFS and really dig on their backlink profile. I have seen a couple of instances where some spammy sites pulled off some nice links, so their success could also be attributed to those as well.

Hopefully, this helps, I know your pain.

-Ben