17 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
17 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Google Warns about New Doorway Page Algo Update and Penalties

by Catalyst eMarketing
14 replies
  • SEO
    • |
An update on doorway pages (Google)

Over time, we've seen sites try to maximize their “search footprint” without adding clear, unique value. These doorway campaigns manifest themselves as pages on a site, as a number of domains, or a combination thereof. To improve the quality of search results for our users, we’ll soon launch a ranking adjustment to better address these types of pages. Sites with large and well-established doorway campaigns might see a broad impact from this change.


To help webmasters better understand our guidelines, we've added clarifying examples and freshened our definition of doorway pages in our Quality Guidelines.
The doc goes into a variety of examples and issues including affiliate pages and more.

Since I specialize in local now, I'm concerned with all the SMB sites like plumbers and others that have lots of city landing pages. I think these could get hit hard of they are just spammy KW pages and don't have added value for that location.

What do you guys think?
#algo #doorway #google #local #page #penalties #update #warns
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    Originally Posted by Catalyst eMarketing View Post

    The doc goes into a variety of examples and issues including affiliate pages and more.

    Since I specialize in local now, I'm concerned with all the SMB sites like plumbers and others that have lots of city landing pages. I think these could get hit hard of they are just spammy KW pages and don't have added value for that location.

    What do you guys think?
    Personally, I'm hoping those kind of sites do get hit hard. I hate the practice of creating separate landing pages for 20 different towns that pretty much all say the same thing.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9945388].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
      Google's had a policy against doorway pages for seemingly forever. Seems to me if this is still a problem for Google it is due to a self-created algorithm defect. But at least there is now a more specific roadmap to ensure your doorway pages do not get penalized for being doorway pages.

      .

      .
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9945445].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author savidge4
        Doorway pages were first hit as I recall November 16th 2003 with the Florida update. Since then I would say that not much has changed other than the use of them has I think increased overwhelmingly.

        The question becomes what exactly do we think they are going got target. I personally think that due to the fact that you can list a squeeze page in the top 10 of the SERPSs in low competition terms this will without question be a target.

        There are a couple of real world examples that could get hit with this as well. Silo structure immediately comes to mind. Many low content based pages pointing to a single page.

        Local content IE "city profession" and the site is filled with multiples and multiples of these pages again pointing to a single page on the site.

        Commerce ( affiliate ) sites that have a review page a product page a comparison page a specs page etc. and all of these point to a single page.

        a small micro site that is selling one product and all of the pages on the site point to one specific page - the sales page.

        The statement out of all of this that brings the most concern for me is: "For example, searchers might get a list of results that all go to the same site. So if a user clicks on one result, doesn't like it, and then tries the next result in the search results page and is taken to that same site that they didn't like, that's a really frustrating experience." Multiple pages listed in a SERP is now going to be a bad thing? ( if this is the case I am in BIG trouble )

        So how is the above determined? I will presume some amount of bounce rate vs time on page? but even still the best method for Google would be to limit 1 entry per SERP page per URL no?
        Signature
        Success is an ACT not an idea
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9945503].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
          Google's reference to affiliate sites is also troubling.

          Take an Acme Toaster sold on Amazon.

          Amazon affiliate websites sending traffic to Amazon now appear to be doorway pages. It could be from having the same or similar content. It could be due to sending traffic to the same destination which causes the serps to essentially be just about the one Amazon page.

          The 20 different towns example Mike gives is obvious, but this statement from Google goes well beyond that into tagging pages one may not intuitively consider a doorway page.

          .
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9945592].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author yukon
          Banned
          Originally Posted by savidge4 View Post

          There are a couple of real world examples that could get hit with this as well. Silo structure immediately comes to mind. Many low content based pages pointing to a single page.
          I don't think silos will get hit. It's like any other SEO technique it can be done with common sense or butchered by a rookie.

          There's a lot of authority sites that use silos, Amazon, Walmart, Ebay, etc... It would be a horrible user experience to include chainsaws in a toy category (example). When done correctly a silo is positive for both traffic & SEO.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9954053].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author savidge4
            Originally Posted by yukon View Post

            I don't think silos will get hit. It's like any other SEO technique it can be done with common sense or butchered by a rookie.

            There's a lot of authority sites that use silos, Amazon, Walmart, Ebay, etc... It would be a horrible user experience to include chainsaws in a toy category (example). When done correctly a silo is positive for both traffic & SEO.
            Not disagreeing at all here. gybo.com is a twisted but classic example of silo. they basically have replicated mini sites within the silo structure. /west-virgina/ and all of its pages are exactly duplicates in /virginia/ and I am sure the other 48 states and DC.

            I think its the one and 2 link Silo structures with content stacked on content that all link to the silo cap that may get in trouble. basically isolated content or as Google is referring to them as "Island Pages"

            I think that is what is so strange about this most recent warning about doorway pages. As much as they went in and better defined the terms, they in my mind opened up many many more questions. They are usually pretty pointed into the advice they give. do this, not this.

            This however is so convoluted that I am not sure anyone really knows what they are talking about. You read around the net a bit and people are saying Ahh this wont affect local SEO ( like local SEO uses some separate algorithm or something ) Ive read they are targeting thin content.. ( they have updates for that already ) or they are targeting black hat only ( I can see that here... but I see it being much broader in scope )

            The update due to hit here any hour now - the Mobile update. very clear in the intent of the update, and what needs to be done so that it does not effect your site. Doorway pages... not so precise. Time will tell. for all we know it is just another shot over the bow, and nothing more.
            Signature
            Success is an ACT not an idea
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9954152].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AffiliateBeast
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9945634].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulgl
      You people are mixing up apples and oranges. As always.

      Every update like this is just tightening a notch in the idiot belt.

      Nothing is really new, just trying (without much success in the past) to
      try and get people to stop being idiots.

      For example, people went gaga over some anchor text BS. There was no
      anchor text BS, but people thought, hey, I'll just vary the anchor text!
      No, silly. It was about spam links.

      Like what we have here.

      Read what the frick it says. Google did not like doorway pages. So the same idiots
      above thought, hey! I'll just get more domains!
      No, silly. It was about doorway pages, period, same same domain or not.

      Funneling people from a landing page on different domains was something these
      idiots thought up.

      It's not about having product pages like amazon. How silly can you people be?

      If you have some domain that redirects or funnels people to your money site,
      via doorway pages, that has ALWAYS been bad. But, now they have to tell
      the idiots that having a doorway page on a different domain does solve your
      shmoozing.

      Gasbuddy has many domains for tons of places. But they are not doorway
      pages, nor do they funnel you.

      Maybe this will stop all the lunacy about buying up stupid domains to
      funnel traffic to one domain.

      But I bet it won't.

      And google will have to spell it out for you even more clearer.

      Some of you will get this:

      Can you read between the lines? No? Well let me clear it up for you.

      Anyone who got that joke, knows exactly how google thinks.

      Paul
      Signature

      If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9945762].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Originally Posted by Google Webmasters via Google+

    We'll soon launch a ranking change to better address doorway pages...
    Originally Posted by Google Webmasters

    Do these pages exist as an “island?” Are they difficult or impossible to navigate to from other parts of your site? Are links to such pages from other pages within the site or network of sites created just for search engines?
    This will be interesting because I know of a .edu that has their site setup like a hardcore SEO silo where the entire category of pages (about 10 pages) is completely orphaned from the rest of the site, zero internal links outside of the silo. That same setup has Mega Sitelinks on the SERPs.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9945857].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author savidge4
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      This will be interesting because I know of a .edu that has their site setup like a hardcore SEO silo where the entire category of pages (about 10 pages) is completely orphaned from the rest of the site, zero internal links outside of the silo. That same setup has Mega Sitelinks on the SERPs.
      Silo and local SEO pages were the first things that came to mind when reading this.

      Like paulgl said this isn't anything new. I said above, that this has been a "known issue" since 2003. I KNOW I do this stuff.... commented on the fact pretty recently as a matter of fact, that landers are basically black hat LOL.
      Signature
      Success is an ACT not an idea
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9946005].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
    I put up a blog post about my take on it earlier tonight: Google's New Algorithm Update To Destroy Doorway Pages

    I really don't see this being a huge deal. I do see issues with ecommerce sites, and possibly citation sources / local directories. As for local SEO, I don't think city specific landing pages are going to be hit but I could be wrong.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9946042].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DABK
      I see local pages that I think should be hit and local pages that should not be hit.

      The first type:

      Home insurance for suburb 1, where they have 2 parts: the sales letter (that's identical across different locations (except homeowner is sometimes home owner and sometimes home owners or homeowners) and a 2nd part that's a re-writing or (worse) spinning of the article Wikipedia has on that suburb.

      The 2nd type is more creative, they have offers specific to the suburb or some other content that's useful that appears on that page only, or is better developed or looked at from another angle.

      I hope the 1st kind gets hit. I hate it when I look for something and I get one of those. I also hope directories get hit. I prefer they start with Yelp.

      I was doing some testing for a local keyword I want to use. The 1st 15 results are directories. If you're someone looking for a local business, you have to go through the extra step of going through some directories.

      Yelp, though I don't like them, sometimes, for some keywords, have reviews, but a lot of them have nothing but business name, address, phone number and website url.

      Like you, I don't think most local businesses will be affected.

      Originally Posted by iAmNameLess View Post

      I put up a blog post about my take on it earlier tonight: Google's New Algorithm Update To Destroy Doorway Pages

      I really don't see this being a huge deal. I do see issues with ecommerce sites, and possibly citation sources / local directories. As for local SEO, I don't think city specific landing pages are going to be hit but I could be wrong.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9953266].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author savidge4
        I think the big thing that gets missed when we talk about algorithm changes... we are talking math here - nothing more, nothing less. If a piece of content is spun enough does google know its spun? the answer is no. If the content is duplicated 40 times across 40 pages of a site does google know the answer is yes.

        Google can see structure. 40 pages that have duplicate content "Contractor city" "Contractor Suburb" "Contractor Suburb" "Contractor Suburb" "Contractor Suburb" over and over... all probably pointing to a single page.. no question google will see it.

        EVEN if the above scenario is filled with Unique content... the structure remains the same. and is this what Google considers and "Island of pages" we will at some point find out. - I am working my tailend off right know hoping I don't find out at the expense of my clients sites.

        No offense to Linda ( greatly respected ) here but the haha look at GYBO.com they are NOT doing the same thing... look at the structure of that page. NOT EVEN close to the examples above. Again... NOT EVEN CLOSE.

        there is a difference between siteurl.com/city followed up with siteurl.com/suburb siteurl.com/suburb2 siteurl.com/suburb3 siteurl.com/suburb4 vs what Google does gybo.com/west-virginia/ gybo.com/virginia/ and then gybo.com/west-Virginia/resources and gybo.com/virginia/resources

        Granted the content is 100% replicated and duplicated we can assume 51+ times, but the content is separated by folder structure...

        but here is the thing. goto "gybo.com" anyone get there? not gybo.com/yourstate/, but gybo.com. I am going to guess you cant. they are geo directing the traffic. The chances of YOU seeing duplicate content is 100% zero.. unless you type in another state in the URL.

        Welcome to the world of schema tagging, of dynamic body ID tags, of probably pure beauty in Java script code. The general world at large can not play the same games that are being played here.. we can try, but execution is generally poor. The Google site programmers are at the top of the food chain, and the people running around trying to not get hit by this update are the fools they feed on! ( I am included in that pool )

        Google in essence with gybo.com is showing the preferred method of location separation. doing this at a community level I believe might be a bit difficult. - but honestly not impossible.

        I know There are words from Google that are saying the mobile update will impact a lot of sites.. more than any other update to date ( I think the florida impact would be hard to beat ) but if and when they drop the hammer on doorways... oh lord have mercy!
        Signature
        Success is an ACT not an idea
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9953863].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bymarcot
    Google will never be able to detect correctly organized and created doorway pages. It only can detect doorway pages done by amateurs who create those with same content and only replacing certain keywords (like location - plumbers in {New York|Chicago}). But doorway pages created with complete unique content (it doesn`t even have to be readable content) and cloaked will be ranking forever. You can still fire up your scripts and generate hundreds of thousands of pages per hour have 0 bounce rate back to search results.


    Cheers
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9946162].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Catalyst eMarketing
      We just did a big InsideLocal webinar this week focused on multi-location Local SEO. So we added this doorway update to the agenda and discussed the potential impact for local sites.

      I don't think legit location landing pages have anything to worry about. Heck in the thread at my forum, someone posted a screenshot of all the location landers Google has for their Get Your Business Online site: GYBO.com

      Again I just think possibly the really spammy local sites are at risk. Like plumbers for instance that have pages for 50 city+KW combos. But I think most of those should be nuked anyway.
      Signature

      Linda Buquet :: Google+ Local Specialist and Google Top Contributor
      ADVANCED Google+ Local Training :: Also offering White Label Local SEO
      Latest Google Local News, Tips & Tricks

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9953178].message }}

Trending Topics