City and state link stuffing in footer
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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...
-
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
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
-
Is it urgent to have fewer than 100 internal links on a webpage?
Hi, Our website is set up so that our top menu is on every page, which means every page is going to have around the same amount of internal links (225-ish). Is this an issue that needs to be fixed for our pages to rank, or is it only a recommendation that doesn't really impact SEO that much? If it is the only issue listed for a particular page, is there another reason that page might not be ranking even though it has a 99 score? Or is because of having 225 internal links? I have many product pages on my website that have a 99 score on the Page Optimization with the only recommendation being an info that says not to have too many internal links. My understanding is that internal links are defined as any URL on a page pointing to another part of the same root domain/site. So, for example, my page: https://www.twowayradiosfor.com/Motorola-CP185-p/cp185-lkp.htm has 225 internal links in the source code for that page: Where do I go to fix this issue if I need to get to below 100 internal links? Do I erase the links, or set up a no-follow tag? I appreciate any help or guidance. Thank you! Austin
On-Page Optimization | | AllChargedUp2 -
We´re in trouble with our on site internal link optimization - please help
Dear Moz community, We have made a great mistake. Looking at keyword search volumes somehow Moz showed volumes for two keywords which only differentiate by an '**s (plural) as same. **Now we optimized our internal links (all links have the keyword) for the singular word. Now looking at other search volume estimations from competitors we see, that the plural has 5 times bigger volume. Our issue: If we change some of the category links now to another keyword, we will loose our ranking with the singular word. Correct? If we do not change any of our internal links, we will never rank in top 6 with the keyword. (currently singular is 6 and plural is 15) What would you reccomend?
On-Page Optimization | | advertisingcloud0 -
Keyword usage in eCommerce Sites - Danger of keyword stuffing?
Hi all, I'm having a little difficulty deciding the best approach for selecting my product titles as I've encountered a few issues. I understand how important it is to try and use the keyword in your product titles, but about the category page that lists all of these products? One of category pages, for example, has 16 products on it. Each has the product title followed by the keyword. I have also used the keyword in the category title, URL, breadcrumbs and two or 3 times (because it was natural) in a paragraph that describes the category etc. Due to the little amount of text on the page, and the sheer amount of times that the keyword is being used, it looks like I am keyword stuffing (By Moz On Page Report Card). I think it came to 23 uses of the same keyword altogether. This is the pretty much teh same throughout every category page on my site, and think I was penalised by Google for this reason. I'm a relatively new site and have done everything by the book as far as I know, so everything is pointing at this to be the cause of the drop/disappearance in ranking. How do I rectify this problem? It's important for the products to have the keyword in, right? As this is one of the SEO practices that is given more weight when considering rankings. I have thought a potential way around this, which is to split the keyword between an exact match, and a variant of the keyword in the titles - only very slightly though. So my product titles would look like 'Product A Exact Match Keyword', 'Product B Variant on Keyword' etc. Could this work? Can anybody advise on the best thing I could try? I have attached an image to give you an idea of the layout of my category pages - Apologies in advance about my embarrassingly rubbish photoshop skills! I wasn't able to upload directly, so I have attached a link. Thanks for reading, John 4iIkmSx
On-Page Optimization | | John_Francis0 -
Linking from Subfolders
Hi, on my new theme there are a bunch of links from subfolders to pages that aren't in a sub folder, these pages also don't have links on the home page. Is there an seo issue when linking from subfolders to pages that aren't. I don't know if I'm wording this properly but what I mean is, mysite/project/project1 linking to mysite/post.
On-Page Optimization | | FPK0 -
Anyone know of a tool to monitor site for outgoing links?
Is there any type of tool that can monitor a large website's outgoing links? I'm dealing with a huge site and was hoping there was something available that could check outgoing links without having to go through each page manually. (I'm looking to remove anything that links to a bad neighborhood). Thanks.
On-Page Optimization | | cakelady0 -
Excessive Internal Linking...But it's a product page. What to do?
A few of our companies sites' product pages have the warning about excessive internal links. But these pages are product pages (for example). Should we be worried about this warning? Are there ways to avoid it? Or is it just the nature of the beast...? Thanks in advance!
On-Page Optimization | | DevonIntl0 -
Social media links/buttons - best practices
Has anyone tested social media buttons, to see which types, styles, and placements get the most clicks? Should they go at the top of an article, or are they OK at the bottom? Should the icons definitely have labels? Display # of tweets and Likes? How big should they be? My preference is for discrete buttons with a smallish, plain icon and a label. I don't display tweets or Likes, unless it's a healthy number. And I still think a "share by email" icon is important. I put them at the bottom of the article, to keep the home page uncluttered and lead the eye into reading the article. I'm also concerned about leaking rank from the homepage, especially for a site that's still establishing itself. But if moving buttons to the top gets more shares, that's probably better. Is there a Wordpress plugin that you really like? (I haven't found one yet - I'm still hardcoding my social media buttons.) Opinions are great, but test results are better! Can anyone share?
On-Page Optimization | | mattotoole1 -
Randomly Generated Links & Passing PageRank
Hi all, If you were to have links that were randomly generated on each refresh, how would they be treated? I would imagine that they are treated normally and isolated to each crawl. So Google would just see the link structure changing from crawl to crawl and therefore give no long term value to these links. Any ideas? Thanks for your responses! Nick
On-Page Optimization | | NickPateman810