Still not Recovered from Caffeine
-
In June of 2010, we lost rankings for four of our best key terms for our website http://tinyurl.com/6e73q52. No other terms were majorly impacted, so our assumption was that is was either due to Caffeine or a filter on those terms.
We have worked with several companies using various strategies since then with little or no success. We later found that their linking strategies were less than white hat (I'm being polite) The best advice I was given recently is that we were over-optimized for those four terms (life insurance, life insurance quotes, term life insurance, term life insurance quotes) and we need to balance that out by linking with other terms. I know this will not be a fast process.
My problem is I see many of my competitors in this extremely competitive space using black hat (grey at best) techniques and rising quickly to the first page of Google. Some of the SEO companies working with my competitors offered help to us, which I consider ethically questionable. These four terms convert the best, as you would imagine, so it has become very cut-throat in this competitive environment.
We want to keep our hats white, as we are interested in longevity, not a quick hit and run (our site has been live and working for 8-plus years, by the way). I have become extremely gun-shy and generally suspicious of working with a new SEO company, so my question (finally) is:
I would like some recommendations and success stories you have had with working with SEO companies (white hat only). Thank you for listening to my rant.
-
Too bad I don't have your link profile before the drop... maybe the previous company had some heavy-duty paid links holding you up. I'll check back later.
-
Thanks, I'd appreciate anything you could find. We were working with an SEO company when we dropped. We had just switched companies when it happened, so my guess is the previous company was the culprit.
-
You do have a slew of spammy links, but it doesn't justify the drop that you're seeing. I'll look a little deeper over the next couple of days and let you know if anything else jumps out at me.
Were you working with an SEO company when you noticed the drop?
-
Thanks RDK. Love your profile picture, by the way. I am definitely playing it safe, but I might be suffering from a bit of paralysis as a result of my past experiences. However, doing nothing is probably not going to get me back on page 1, so I am considering hiring a consultant, Thank you for that suggestion.
-
I like your approach! You are doing what most will probably recommend- play it safe. As it has been said, markets fall faster than they rise... and you may be the victim of this. You have a much better profile than most 1st pagers, so my initial thoughts are that you have some black magic to rinse from your site.
I'll stick my neck out for the SEOMozzers to wring and suggest that you do some due diligence on your own before hiring another SEO. I've worked with companies that have used SEOs on both sides of the coin and am usually hesitant to pick up a project after significant "black-hat" work has been done. The first place I'd look is at your link profile... where have they spattered your link? If this turns out to look similar to your better ranking competitor's, the issue is probably something to get an SEO involved in. SEO consultation might be another option to consider. Better yet, this forum is a perfect first step!
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
-
Why My Website's Rank still in Millions
I am getting enough Traffic on my website on best weed killer on affiliate but Moz still showing its Rank in millions. What would be the best strategy to improve the rankings.???
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | sarahelen0 -
Are businesses still hiring SEO that use strategies that could lead to a Google penalty?
Is anyone worried that businesses know so little about SEO that they are continuing to hire SEO consultants that use strategies that could land the website with a Google penalty? I ask because we did some research with businesses and found the results worrying: blog farms, over optimised anchor text. We will be releasing the data later this week, but wondered if it something for the SEO community to worry about and what can be done about it.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | williamgoodseoagency.com0 -
Recovering from an algorithmic bodyslam
Hi there. We inherited a client who didn't receive a manual penalty, but holy cow they have a good sized algorithmic penalty on their site. Here is what we have done since receiving the client: Client arrived with a bad backlink profile and an algorithmic penalty. We knew this, but underestimated the effort in removing it. We researched great forum posts like http://moz.com/community/q/google-penguin-2-0-how-to-recover http://moz.com/community/q/penguin-2-1-how-to-recover The researched great blog posts like http://moz.com/ugc/what-a-penguin-recovery-looks-like http://moz.com/ugc/recovery-from-google-penguin-tips-from-the-trenches http://moz.com/ugc/a-theory-for-preventing-recovering-from-a-google-penguin-penalty Outside of Moz, we researched a lot as well. We felt armed that we needed to do 3 major things. Remove all of the bad backlinks Create good content within the site Fix any unnatural on page SEO tactics (keyword stuffing, etc) Here is how we tackled it step by step Step 1: For step 1, we contacted over 100 of the bad backlinks. Many of them wanted a fee for removing the backlinks. They were from sites that were literally like "freeseobacklinks.org". Crazy bad ones. But we only got a few removed. The rest either ignored us or wanted some money. Hence our round(s) of disavow. Our SEO manager at the time of the first disavow only did 50 domains on the disavow. She was extremely thorough, followed the guidelines to a T, and performed it. We actually fell back in ranking afterward, even though I didn't think it was possible. With nothing to lose, besides lots of time and budget, we went through thousands of links and manually compiled an extravagant spreadsheet for our next round of disavow. Again, limited to no response from site owners. So we went ahead and pushed forth with nearly 300 domains for the disavow. By this time, the site was in the abyss, so it couldn't hurt anymore. We kept all of the great links, which surprisingly there were a fair amount. Step 2:
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Boogily
Our SEO manager and our content writer began to write for the website. Our graphic design created an awesome infographic, and a good slideshare too. We've been putting 3-4 articles / posts on the site monthly. Typical word range is 750+ Step 3:
We did a full site analysis and removed all unnatural location based keywords. There wasn't a ton of unnatural on page SEO going on. The bulk of the damage must have came from the bad backlinks. Summary:
On top of this we have been doing this for at least 6 months. All of the pages that are hit by the penalty are just gone. Nowhere to be found on Google, unless you search with the site operator or search for that exact page. We seem to make zero headway with all of this. I'm not sure what else we can be doing. We even optimized for conversions and longer time on site, as well as page speed. We've confirmed that there is no manual penalty. I'm starting to feel as if the site is permanently deemed bad or something. I also don't want to keep wasting our writers and manager's time on this one. Any ideas on next steps? Can anyone restore my confidence in this site? Thanks for the long read and any response, Have a great day,1 -
Why does expired domains still work for SEO?
Hi everyone I’ve been doing an experiment during more than 1 year to try to see if its possible to buy expired domains. I know its considered black hat, but like I said, I wanted to experiment, that is what SEO is about. What I did was to buy domains that just expired, immediately added content on a WP setup, filled it with relevant content to the expired domain and then started building links to other relevant sites from these domains.( Here is a pretty good post on how to do, and I did it in a similar way. http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2297718/How-to-Build-Links-Using-Expired-Domains ) This is nothing new and SEO:s has been doing it for along time. There is a lot of rumors around the SEO world that the domains becomes worthless after they expire. But after trying it out during more than 1 year and with about 50 different expired domains I can conclude that it DOES work, 100% of the time. Some of the domains are of course better than others, but I cannot see any signs of the expired domains or the sites i link to has been punished by Google. The sites im liking to ranks great ONLY with those links 🙂 So to the question: WHY does Google allow this? They should be able to see that a domain has been expired right? And if its expired, why dont they just “delete” all the links to that domain after the expiry date? Google is well aware of this problem so what is stopping them? Is there any one here that know how this works technically?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Sir0 -
Are directory listings still appropriate in 2013? Aren't they old-style SEO and Penguin-worthy?
We have been reviewing our off-page SEO strategy for clients and as part of that process, we are looking at a number of superb info-graphics on the subject. I see that some of current ones still list "Directories" as being part of their off-page strategy. Aren't these directories mainly there for link-building purposes and provide Users no real benefit? I don't think I've ever seen a directory that I would use, apart for SEO research. Surely Google's Penguin algorithm would see directories in the same way and give them less value, or even penalise websites that use them to try to boost page rank? If I were to list my websites on directories it wouldn't be to share my lovely content with people that use directories to find great sites, it would be to sneakily build page rank. Am I missing the point? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Crumpled_Dog
Scott0 -
Exact Match Domains - Why are they still dominating?
Fantastic day! I am seeing exact match domains still dominating. SEOmoz has some insight: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/exact-match-domains-are-far-too-powerful-is-their-time-limited But that's from two years ago. Is Google ever going to target the manipulators that buy up all the exact match domains? One of our partners is getting the itch, and I am running out of explanations on why we don't manipulate. But if these practices are dominating their industry, what to do? I have to get paid to feed the family so just telling the client buh-bye isn't going to work. At least not in this stage of agency building. Their root domain doesn't do much for them, however, you know we well optimize those subdomains and rank those fine. But if my client can just buy an exact match domain, and it will take less SEO work to get it ranked then why not? He has the SEO expert in his back pocket to clean up the mess IF they would even get a penalty or drop in rank. Is all SEO really is find algo hole, manipulate, penalty, fix, find algo hole, manipulate, penalty, fix. Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Please share your experiences and insight! Thanks, Ben
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | cyberlicious0 -
How to Not Scrap Content, but still Being a Hub
Hello Seomoz members. I'm relatively new to SEO, so please forgive me if my questions are a little basic. One of the sites I manage is GoldSilver.com. We sell gold and silver coins and bars, but we also have a very important news aspect to our site. For about 2-3 years now we have been a major hub as a gold and silver news aggregator. At 1.5 years ago (before we knew much about SEO), we switched from linking to the original news site to scraping their content and putting it on our site. The chief reason for this was users would click outbound to read an article, see an ad for a competitor, then buy elsewhere. We were trying to avoid this (a relatively stupid decision with hindsight). We have realized that the Search Engines are penalizing us, which I don't blame them for, for having this scraped content on our site. So I'm trying to figure out how to move forward from here. We would like to remain a hub for news related to Gold and Silver and not be penalized by SEs, but we also need to sell bullion and would like to avoid loosing clients to competitors through ads on the news articles. One of the solutions we are thinking about is perhaps using an iFrame to display the original url, but within our experience. An example is how trap.it does this (see attached picture). This way we can still control the experience some what, but are still remaining a hub. Thoughts? Thank you, nick 3dLVv
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | nwright0 -
Why Does Massive Reciprocal Linking Still Work?
It seems pretty well-settled that massive reciprocal linking is not a very effective strategy, and in fact, may even lead to a penatly. However, I still see massive reciprocal linking (blog roll linking even massive resource page linking) still working all the time. I'm not looking to cast aspersion on any individual or company, but I work with legal websites and I see these strategies working almost universally. My question is why is this still working? Is it because most of the reciprocally linking sites are all legally relevant? Has Google just not "gotten around" to the legal sector (doubtful considering the money and volume of online legal segment)? I have posed this question at SEOmoz in the past and it was opined that massively linking blogs through blog rolls probably wouldn't send any flags to Google. So why is that it seems that everywhere I look, this strategy is basically dismissed as a complete waste of time if not harmful? How can there be such a discrepency between what leading SEOs agree to be "bad" and the simple fact that these strategies are working en masse over the period of at least 3 years?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Gyi0