Banned From Google! Careful, This May Happen to You

by djbory
287 replies
  • SEO
  • |
Banned From Google! Careful, This May Happen to You

Please any advise...

I had 3 websites in first page of Google, for several keywords... They had been making me a pretty decent amount of money consistently for a while.

Suddenly one site disappeared from Google about 3 months ago; I keep building backlinks to see if it returned but nothing happened.

About 2 months ago, another site disappeared from the listings and about a week the other site went the same way.:confused:

They are still indexed by Google because when I do the search mydomain.com they show up, but after all of them being in the first page of Google for several keywords and suddenly not ranking for any keywords means to me that they were banned.

The only thing I was doing in common to all sites was '3 WAY LINKING' Does anybody have had a similar situation? Or do you guys have heard about this or think this could happen because of the 3 WAY LINKING?

This is the only reason I came come up with since the sites all have original frequently update high quality content. They are SEO in-site optimized as well.

I was building profiles backlinks to them, but I don't really think this is a reason to be banned...

I was thinking to remove myself from the 3 WAY LINKING and resubmit the sites to Google for consideration... Any comments?

Any advice or comment would be appreciated.

Djbory.
#banned #careful #google #happen
  • Profile picture of the author bellabee
    Why do you consider them banned if they're still indexed? Perhaps there isn't adequate SEO work done to keep them ranked highly?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133622].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by bellabee View Post

      Why do you consider them banned if they're still indexed? Perhaps there isn't adequate SEO work done to keep them ranked highly?
      I never stopped building backlinks. And they are not new sites, I have been building backlinks for a year and they moved up slowly to the the first page of Google...

      They are SEO optimized and I have been building all kinds of backlinks: Blogs, Forums, Bookmarks, Profiles, Articles, etc... They all show more than 400 backlinks in yahoo...

      I don't see any other reason they would desapeared...

      And even though they are still indexed, obviously they have been penalized or somethig...

      Thanks for your comment...
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133676].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Hyaku_Man
        Are you using something automated for the content? Or do you write it all yourself?
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133694].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author djbory
          Originally Posted by Hyaku_Man View Post

          Are you using something automated for the content? Or do you write it all yourself?
          No I usually outsource content...but is good quality...
          Signature
          >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

          Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133754].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author David Chung
    How does your site do in Google Caffeine search results? Maybe it will pop back up once they implement their new search engine.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133737].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by david2885 View Post

      How does your site do in Google Caffeine search results? Maybe it will pop back up once they implement their new search engine.
      What is Google caffeine search and how can I use it?

      I use Google PageRank Cheker...
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133761].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TristanPerry
        Originally Posted by djbory View Post

        What is Google caffeine search and how can I use it?

        I use Google PageRank Cheker...
        Google

        Google are working on a new search index (with more accurate search results and all) - codenamed Caffeine.
        Signature
        Plagiarism Guard - Protect Against Content Theft
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133795].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author TristanPerry
          Originally Posted by Franco Mocke View Post

          Any idea when Google will start using their new algorithm? I'm a bit scared because my main money site does not show up in the new Google, but in the old one I'm 4th
          Sorry, I honestly don't know. I couldn't find out either by Googling "When is google caffeine being released?".

          I wouldn't worry too much though; it's still a WIP. I greatly doubt they're going to exclude any good sites with the new one.
          Signature
          Plagiarism Guard - Protect Against Content Theft
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1140972].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author mark135
        Banned
        [DELETED]
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133804].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author djbory
          Originally Posted by mark135 View Post

          I hate it here when people say stuff like

          "if you put mydomain.com in google and you come up you are still indexed therefore you are not banned and everything is fine"

          That is Bull absolute Bull.

          I understand what you are going through, it's never happened to me but i understand.

          what page are you now on for the keywors which previously had you on page one
          Thanks so much for your reply... Now we understad each other....

          The case is I'm not in any page... I'm not ranking for any of my keywords... Not in page 10, or page 200... nowhere to be found. and I use Google PageRank Cheker that is very accurate.

          The same with the 3 sites...
          Signature
          >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

          Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133821].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jimerson Farveez
    Have you followed the following format in your 3 way?
    A--B, B--C, C--A
    If yes, I think google identified that and noted that you are doing that for SEO purpose and may banned you.

    If you do as follows,
    A--B, B--C --- That is fine, I don't think that is an issue,

    Which pattern/format you followed? 1st or 2nd?
    Signature
    Search Engine Optimization Services in Delray Beach, FL
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133797].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by Jimerson Farveez View Post

      Have you followed the following format in your 3 way?
      A--B, B--C, C--A
      If yes, I think google identified that and noted that you are doing that for SEO purpose and may banned you.

      If you do as follows,
      A--B, B--C --- That is fine, I don't think that is an issue,

      Which pattern/format you followed? 1st or 2nd?
      When I mention 3 WAY LINKING I don't mean the way I link my blogs or sites, I mean 3 WAY LINK SYSTEM where hundreds of sites link toghether with the purpouse of getting backlinks.
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1133848].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Amenda Jessera
        Originally Posted by djbory View Post

        When I mention 3 WAY LINKING I don't mean the way I link my blogs or sites, I mean 3 WAY LINK SYSTEM where hundreds of sites link toghether with the purpouse of getting backlinks.
        Yes man, here you have gone. Google identified this. I think it has brought you more links within short time. So, it just given penality to your site.
        It is usual, we have to be very alert specially we are using some automated systems to get backlinks.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1136380].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Fernando Veloso
      Originally Posted by Jimerson Farveez View Post

      Have you followed the following format in your 3 way?
      A--B, B--C, C--A
      If yes, I think google identified that and noted that you are doing that for SEO purpose and may banned you.

      If you do as follows,
      A--B, B--C --- That is fine, I don't think that is an issue,

      Which pattern/format you followed? 1st or 2nd?
      Why sould he interlink his non-related sites when he can create a non-trackable linkwheel and do it way better?

      Just a thought.

      Fernando
      Signature
      People make good money selling to the rich. But the rich got rich selling to the masses.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1135803].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kappa
    Don't get paralyzed, move to a new domain and start over.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134050].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by Kappa View Post

      Don't get paralyzed, move to a new domain and start over.
      It is not that easy. When you have been building links for 6 months and have over 400 quality links pointing to your sites you just don't forget about it.

      And if you do it, you at least need to know what went wrong so it doesn't happen the same thing all over again.
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134341].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author misterkailo
        Originally Posted by djbory View Post

        It is not that easy. When you have been building links for 6 months and have over 400 quality links pointing to your sites you just don't forget about it.

        And if you do it, you at least need to know what went wrong so it doesn't happen the same thing all over again.

        400 quality links? Last time I checked, profile links do not count as quality links lol...

        You're not banned if you are still indexed. If you have never been in the sandbox before, then you can still go into the sandbox even if your site is over a year old.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2454935].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author juggernautbitch
    Sounds like you've been penalised for something.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134299].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jtooder
    Is the 3 Way Linking a service or manual thing you are doing?

    In your 3 way linking, are the sites (any involved) on the same IP, server, etc..?

    It appears you have footprints somewhere in your efforts. PM me if you like me to have a look and make suggestions.

    Lately Google is tinkering with it's algo and many are reporting getting banned lately.

    JT
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134356].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by jtooder View Post

      Is the 3 Way Linking a service or manual thing you are doing?

      In your 3 way linking, are the sites (any involved) on the same IP, server, etc..?

      It appears you have footprints somewhere in your efforts. PM me if you like me to have a look and make suggestions.

      Lately Google is tinkering with it's algo and many are reporting getting banned lately.

      JT
      I'm involved in two diferent 3WAY LINKING Services. And I 3 way link my own sites as well. They are about 20 but I don't think it is against Google policy to link among your sites.

      What do you think?
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134518].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Carl Pruitt
    For most people, the termed "banned" means completely removed from the index. If you come up on a site search, then by most people's definition you are not "banned" you are sandboxed or penalized.

    Either way, of course, it is the same difference to you. You are not making any money from your websites!

    Don't take this personally, because it isn't intended that way, but obviously although you believe that those are quality links and there is quality content, Google must have a different opinion for some unknown reason. It will be very, very difficult for anyone here to give you a valid "diagnosis" without actually knowing the sites so the advice you get here will necessarily be general and most likely frustrating.

    My personal experience is that almost any sort of linking service or SEO trick eventually draws a crowd of webmasters attempting to game the system. Is it possible that Google has caught up with that, recognized a pattern and this is some sort of "Google slap" against it? You might want to go back and do some research on a random sampling of the sites linking to you to see if any of them have been punished in the same manner.
    Signature

    Thanks!
    Carl Pruitt
    http://LongRunPublishing.com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134367].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by Carl Pruitt View Post

      My personal experience is that almost any sort of linking service or SEO trick eventually draws a crowd of webmasters attempting to game the system. Is it possible that Google has caught up with that, recognized a pattern and this is some sort of "Google slap" against it? You might want to go back and do some research on a random sampling of the sites linking to you to see if any of them have been punished in the same manner.
      That makes a lot of sense. All of the links come from pages with similar names like: friends.php or otherresources.php...

      I always wonder if Google wouldn't notice the patern...
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134534].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by Carl Pruitt View Post

      My personal experience is that almost any sort of linking service or SEO trick eventually draws a crowd of webmasters attempting to game the system. Is it possible that Google has caught up with that, recognized a pattern and this is some sort of "Google slap" against it? You might want to go back and do some research on a random sampling of the sites linking to you to see if any of them have been punished in the same manner.
      Yeah. You almost never hear people talk about this. Google obviously has pattern recognitions built in to their filter system. The more widespread a technique becomes the less likely it is going to be effective (unless the technique is natural/organic which is what Google wants). Doesn't take a whole lot to write in code that changes the game. Thats why it pays not to go too heavy on one strategy. You need to mix it up.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134705].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author austinjames
        first thing that popped in my mind are your backlink.
        Your back link may be suffering from something else and you're getting some of its part.

        check it man. Sure you'll figure it out.
        btw, thanks for sharing it.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134753].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author debukur
    I thought 3-way linking is safe. Are you sure that this is the cause?
    Signature
    Dream like you will live forever, live like you will die tomorrow
    NEEDED: virtual assistant (VA)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134728].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author captivereef
    This has happened to me a few times. I have a mortgage site that has 2200 pages indexed and is 5 years old. A few times the site went from 500 google visitors a day to nothing, still indexed but only traffic from yahoo, MSN and article directories.

    I lost all Google traffic for weeks to months then all of the sudden one day BOOM it was back and stronger then before. Its wierd and i will not claim to know what causes it but just keep on doing what you are doing and all should be well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1134795].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SRLee
    Is 3-Way Linking something like this: A-B, B-C, C-D, D-E, E-F, F-G, G-A?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1135399].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dburk
    Hi Djbory,

    There are many possibilities, you could have a hidden exploit on your webserver, or your hosting company may have erroneously blocked Google from crawling your website. It's important to narrow the possibilities to avoid wasting time on fruitless pursuits.

    The very first thing you should do is verify whether or not Google has dropped you from their index. Simply doing a search for your domain is inadequate because it may appear that you are still there but you could be a victim of a 302 Hijack. Use the site: operator with your domain name. This will tell you if your site is still truly indexed.

    Next, if you haven't already done so, you should immediately setup an account at Google's Webmaster Tools and get your website verified. Once your site is verified, the diagnostics section of Webmaster Tools will let you know if the Googlebot is having any issues crawling or indexing your web pages.

    Once you know all is well with the bots you can focus on other issues. Google does not like link schemes that are designed to manipulate PageRank. It's very likely that Google is on to your 3-way link scheme if there is any appearance of Pagerank manipulation then those backlinks have probably been devalued.

    As mark135 suggested you could be linking to "bad neighborhoods" and Google will usually drop you from their index. When you link to a website without using the nofollow attibute you are personally vouching for the site you are linking to, Google will hold you accountable for anything bad they do. Your link partners in the 3-way could have been de-indexed for this very reason and again those links would have been devalued. While this might feel like you have been targeted for punishment it could actually be those other sites that were your link partners that have been banned and now your backlinks from them are worthless.

    There are so many other possibilities, but start with these and report back if you still have not found the problem.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1135612].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Designerplus
    If you are outsourcing content you are probably doing something like selling some kind of text links or pay per post from the sounds of it. If you are on one of those sell to link kind of networks it's very possible you have been hit by the spam stick. Are you sure you're not selling links or linking to some bad neighbourhood? What are your websites? if you don't mention them in your post it sounds like you might be ashamed of them to begin with.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1135638].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author devilishsaint
    Google is penalizing 3 way links so try to make 2 way or 1 way links.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1135660].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nicheminer
      I've seen this before with Google. Sites just disappear and the owner panicks, but most of the time, it is just Google deciding where to rank the site.

      It might be a few weeks or months, but if the site is good with plenty of unique content, then it will pop back up. Usually higher than it was before it disappeared.

      After all, it is not in Google's interest to de-index a useful site.

      I agree that you should use Google webmaster tools and get the sites verified. It's a very easy process.

      In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with 3 way linking.

      Have you watched the current video on Jeff Johnson's blog?
      How To Become A Super Affiliate In 5 Easy Steps | Jeff Johnson Underground Training Lab and Free SEO Blog Software

      One of the points he makes, is to use 3 blogs, all on different servers/hosting that point to your money site. (Or affiliate site)

      Graham
      Signature
      Amazon Discounted Products - Search tool that earns you Amazon commissions on auto pilot.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1135811].message }}
  • have you signed up to google webmaster tools and yahoo site explorer?

    That will tell you what is causing the problem
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1135779].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jtooder
    3 way linking services can get you banned, they do work but more and more people are experiencing a serious drop in rankings. There is no common way to tell why it happens but it does.

    For people who participate in 3 way linking services it is advised not to have all your eggs in one basket for the specific reason that you might get banned. My suggestion is to keep building up your other sites and hope the dropped one comes back.

    GL
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1135958].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    Anything you do over and over again can be tracked. What you have to do is change things up - break the pattern. Thats the problem with going with one technique that a "guru" teaches.

    A) they usually do NOT teach you everything they do to rank their own sites.
    B) Following one strategy develops a pattern that potentially Google can penalize.

    Take three way linking. It happens naturally and theres no way for Google to claim it doesn't but if you overdo it you have created a pattern that is unlikely. What are the odds that every or even most of the sites you link to in turn link to a third site that just happens to link back to you? very unlikely unless you already are an authority site.

    So there you have a red flag and what Google decides to do with the red flag is up to their next update.

    Might not be the case here. In fact you may find tomorrow your site is right back to where it was or even higher. With hundreds of things google looks for you never can be sure and thats the way they want it.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1135993].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Marhelper
    You still have Yahoo, BING ...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1136353].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
    Originally Posted by djbory View Post

    Banned From Google! Careful, This May Happen to You

    Please any advise...

    I had 3 websites in first page of Google, for several keywords... They had been making me a pretty decent amount of money consistently for a while.

    Suddenly one site disappeared from Google about 3 months ago; I keep building backlinks to see if it returned but nothing happened.

    About 2 months ago, another site disappeared from the listings and about a week the other site went the same way.:confused:

    They are still indexed by Google because when I do the search mydomain.com they show up, but after all of them being in the first page of Google for several keywords and suddenly not ranking for any keywords means to me that they were banned.

    The only thing I was doing in common to all sites was '3 WAY LINKING' Does anybody have had a similar situation? Or do you guys have heard about this or think this could happen because of the 3 WAY LINKING?

    This is the only reason I came come up with since the sites all have original frequently update high quality content. They are SEO in-site optimized as well.

    I was building profiles backlinks to them, but I don't really think this is a reason to be banned...

    I was thinking to remove myself from the 3 WAY LINKING and resubmit the sites to Google for consideration... Any comments?

    Any advice or comment would be appreciated.

    Djbory.
    This thread teaches us a number of crucial points...

    (1). The reason why so many people fail at Internet Marketing
    (2). The value of doing your homework prior to engaging in SEO and Link Building
    (3). The critical importance of receiving advice from seasoned IMers

    To be clear, I'm not grilling ANYONE; this is simply an opportunity for all of us to learn including me.

    @ djbory - when you joined that particular "3 WAY LINKING" network, if you recall, you were told you had to, "Upload a PHP file to your site" and then "Link to the PHP file from your home page." I realize you were told in some form or fashion or another that there was NO WAY Google could detect what was going on. Virtually ALL of the link building networks that offer similar services make the same assertions.

    However, in reality, they are GREATLY underestimating Matt Cutts and the entire Google Web Spam team! Theses guys have PhDs, hefty Google expense accounts and get paid SIX FIGURES to spend sun up and sun down figuring out these purportedly undetectable link schemes. Anytime you place a snippet of code on a website for the purposes of building backlinks, Matt Cutts and his crew is going to eventually sniff out that system no matter how elaborate it is; you can bank on that!

    Here are some terms you must become familiar with as an IMer:

    Google Slap
    Google Banned (A.K.A. Google death penalty)
    Google Sandbox
    Google Dance
    Google De-Indexed
    Google Webmaster tools
    Matt Cutts
    Proper backlink building
    Article Drip
    SEO Optimization
    Blackhat
    Whitehat
    Greyhat
    LSI Latent Semantic Indexing
    LSD - Whoops, that slipped in by mistake!!! Hahaha

    If you are going to be a successful IMer, learn these terms, that way you know why Google takes certain actions and most importantly how to avoid coming on their radar... as a target! IMers who know and understand these terms - never panic when they detect changes on their keyword rankings.

    Addressing your question about being banned, "You weren't!" If you had been, you would get the "file not found" message when you searched for your pages. Remember in 2006 when Google banned BMW? That didn't happen to you.

    Also, in the particular three way linking network that you are apart of, if your site had been Banned by Google, that network would have immediately notified you and instantly given you the boot from their network. Because at that point you would become a liability to their entire network.


    For those of you who want to succeed at IM, understand, you will have a hard row to tow taking a stab in the dark guessing at things. That's the prime reason so many people fail at IM. If you are a noobie, you made a brilliant move by being part of the Warrior Forum. BUT, don't make the grave of mistake of dispensing advice JUST to increase your post count. Because in the final analysis, you end misleading yourself and other noobies. You may not know this, but within this community are some of the top IMers on the World Wide Web and they are glad to answer your questions - when you're not a hotshot 1 Poster know it all!

    Take the advice of old hands; the seasoned Warriors who have been there and done that. If you follow that advice, your IM dreams will become a reality and your income will soar! Ans I mean S-O-A-R!


    To answer your question as to what happened in your case; based upon your description of the chain of events and the fact that you stated you are not doing anything Blackhat, you are experiencing the Google Dance, that's all folks!
    Signature
    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137008].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TristanPerry
      Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

      This thread teaches us a number of crucial points...

      (1). The reason why so many people fail at Internet Marketing
      (2). The value of doing your homework prior to engaging in SEO and Link Building
      (3). The critical importance of receiving advice from seasoned IMers

      To be clear, I'm not grilling ANYONE; this is simply an opportunity for all of us to learn including me.

      @ djbory - when you joined that particular "3 WAY LINKING" network, if you recall, you were told you had to, "Upload a PHP file to your site" and then "Link to the PHP file from your home page." I realize you were told in some form or fashion or another that there was NO WAY Google could detect what was going on. Virtually ALL of the link building networks that offer similar services make the same assertions.

      However, in reality, they are GREATLY underestimating Matt Cutts and the entire Google Web Spam team! Theses guys have PhDs, hefty Google expense accounts and get paid SIX FIGURES to spend sun up and sun down figuring out these purportedly undetectable link schemes. Anytime you place a snippet of code on a website for the purposes of building backlinks, Matt Cutts and his crew is going to eventually sniff out that system no matter how elaborate it is; you can bank on that!

      Here are some terms you must become familiar with as an IMer:

      Google Slap
      Google Banned (A.K.A. Google death penalty)
      Google Sandbox
      Google Dance
      Google De-Indexed
      Google Webmaster tools
      Matt Cutts
      Proper backlink building
      Article Drip
      SEO Optimization
      BlueFart
      Whitehat
      Greyhat
      LSI Latent Semantic Indexing
      LSD - Whoops, that slipped in by mistake!!! Hahaha

      If you are going to be a successful IMer, learn these terms, that way you know why Google takes certain actions and most importantly how to avoid coming on their radar... as a target! IMers who know and understand these terms - never panic when they detect changes on their keyword rankings.

      Addressing your question about being banned, "You weren't!" If you had been, you would get the "file not found" message when you searched for your pages. Remember in 2006 when Google banned BMW? That didn't happen to you.

      Also, in the particular three way linking network that you are apart of, if your site had been Banned by Google, that network would have immediately notified you and instantly given you the boot from their network. Because at that point you would become a liability to their entire network.


      For those of you who want to succeed at IM, understand, you will have a hard row to tow taking a stab in the dark guessing at things. That's the prime reason so many people fail at IM. If you are a noobie, you made a brilliant move by being part of the Warrior Forum. BUT, don't make the grave of mistake of dispensing advice JUST to increase your post count. Because in the final analysis, you end misleading yourself and other noobies. You may not know this, but within this community are some of the top IMers on the World Wide Web and they are glad to answer your questions - when you're not a hotshot 1 Poster know it all!

      Take the advice of old hands; the seasoned Warriors who have been there and done that. If you follow that advice, your IM dreams will become a reality and your income will soar! Ans I mean S-O-A-R!


      To answer your question as to what happened in your case; based upon your description of the chain of events and the fact that you stated you are not doing anything BlueFart, you are experiencing the Google Dance, that's all folks!
      Great post, very nice information I knew about 10 of those phrases, so learnt a few new ones

      Still haven't really learnt what BlueFart is - but I'll keep looking
      Signature
      Plagiarism Guard - Protect Against Content Theft
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137651].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author djbory
        Thanks to all of you who have been trying to help...

        Originally Posted by mark135 View Post

        you say your involved in three way linking, presumably you are linking out to sites then, maybe you are linking to what google calls "bad neighborhoods " google is strongly against this
        This is always a possibility but is impossible to tell because when you 3waylink you link back to dozens of sites. You don't have control of it...

        Originally Posted by debukur View Post

        I thought 3-way linking is safe. Are you sure that this is the cause?
        I'm not sure. If I was sure I would've gotten out of it already. I need to be sure before I do that because those links are about 30% of all my links.

        Originally Posted by captivereef View Post

        This has happened to me a few times. I have a mortgage site that has 2200 pages indexed and is 5 years old. A few times the site went from 500 google visitors a day to nothing, still indexed but only traffic from yahoo, MSN and article directories.

        I lost all Google traffic for weeks to months then all of the sudden one day BOOM it was back and stronger then before. Its weird and i will not claim to know what causes it but just keep on doing what you are doing and all should be well.
        I keep doing what I was doing but my first site is now gone for about 4 months, and they keep dropping like flies.

        Originally Posted by SRLee View Post

        Is 3-Way Linking something like this: A-B, B-C, C-D, D-E, E-F, F-G, G-A?
        No, 3way link is a service where all the sites link together in a 3 way scheme. The whole deal is managed automatically through a software.

        Originally Posted by Designerplus View Post

        If you are outsourcing content you are probably doing something like selling some kind of text links or pay per post from the sounds of it. If you are on one of those sell to link kind of networks it's very possible you have been hit by the spam stick. Are you sure you're not selling links or linking to some bad neighborhood? What are your websites? if you don't mention them in your post it sounds like you might be ashamed of them to begin with.
        I don't understand what you mean, but I'll try to answer... I don't sell links. Yes, I could be linking to a bad neighbor, in 3waylink you don't control to whom you are linking to. My websites are normal, common clickbank review pages, nothing out of ordinary. There's nothing to be ashamed of. I don't really get your point.

        Originally Posted by devilishsaint View Post

        Google is penalizing 3 way links so try to make 2 way or 1 way links.
        I understand that 2 way is even worse. Yes I do 1 way link as well, everyday...

        Originally Posted by webpromoterservice View Post

        have you signed up to google webmaster tools and yahoo site explorer?

        That will tell you what is causing the problem
        I have both. There's not answer there...

        Originally Posted by Jimerson Farveez View Post

        Have you followed the following format in your 3 way?
        A--B, B--C, C--A
        If yes, I think google identified that and noted that you are doing that for SEO purpose and may banned you.

        If you do as follows,
        A--B, B--C --- That is fine, I don't think that is an issue,

        Which pattern/format you followed? 1st or 2nd?
        For my sites I do 2nd... But 3WAY LINK is based on number 1

        Originally Posted by nicheminer View Post

        I've seen this before with Google. Sites just disappear and the owner panicks, but most of the time, it is just Google deciding where to rank the site.

        It might be a few weeks or months, but if the site is good with plenty of unique content, then it will pop back up. Usually higher than it was before it disappeared.

        After all, it is not in Google's interest to de-index a useful site.

        I agree that you should use Google webmaster tools and get the sites verified. It's a very easy process.

        In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with 3 way linking.

        Have you watched the current video on Jeff Johnson's blog?
        How To Become A Super Affiliate In 5 Easy Steps | Jeff Johnson Underground Training Lab and Free SEO Blog Software

        One of the points he makes, is to use 3 blogs, all on different servers/hosting that point to your money site. (Or affiliate site)

        Graham
        Remember that 3WAY LINK is not something I'm doing with my own sites or blogs, it is a service where you link to hundreds of sites, those sites links to hundreds more, and those hundreds link back to you in this pattern: A>B B>C C>A

        Originally Posted by jtooder View Post

        3 way linking services can get you banned, they do work but more and more people are experiencing a serious drop in rankings. There is no common way to tell why it happens but it does.

        For people who participate in 3 way linking services it is advised not to have all your eggs in one basket for the specific reason that you might get banned. My suggestion is to keep building up your other sites and hope the dropped one comes back.

        GL
        I agree with you, and they do work. But the question is: Should I get out of the scheme? I added non-follow and a no-index tags in the linking page but nothing happened.

        Originally Posted by Marhelper View Post

        You still have Yahoo, BING ...
        Yes, but not in first page. they never were.


        Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

        This thread teaches us a number of crucial points...

        (1). The reason why so many people fail at Internet Marketing
        (2). The value of doing your homework prior to engaging in SEO and Link Building
        (3). The critical importance of receiving advice from seasoned IMers

        To be clear, I'm not grilling ANYONE; this is simply an opportunity for all of us to learn including me.

        @ djbory - when you joined that particular "3 WAY LINKING" network, if you recall, you were told you had to, "Upload a PHP file to your site" and then "Link to the PHP file from your home page." I realize you were told in some form or fashion or another that there was NO WAY Google could detect what was going on. Virtually ALL of the link building networks that offer similar services make the same assertions.

        However, in reality, they are GREATLY underestimating Matt Cutts and the entire Google Web Spam team! Theses guys have PhDs, hefty Google expense accounts and get paid SIX FIGURES to spend sun up and sun down figuring out these purportedly undetectable link schemes. Anytime you place a snippet of code on a website for the purposes of building backlinks, Matt Cutts and his crew is going to eventually sniff out that system no matter how elaborate it is; you can bank on that!

        To answer your question as to what happened in your case; based upon your description of the chain of events and the fact that you stated you are not doing anything BlueFart, you are experiencing the Google Dance, that's all folks!
        Thanks very much. And yes, of course I had to upload a code to the page and link it to my front page. But you didn't mention if it is appropriated at this time to get out of the 3WAY LINK?

        On the other hand, I haven't heard any case before about a google dance where the pages disappeared for 4 months or more, but obviously you have far more experience than I do... Thanks again.

        Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

        OP: If you don't have GWT, you really should.
        Yes, I do have GWT. But everything seems to be ok there, I'm just not raking for any keywords anymore.

        Originally Posted by LIndaB View Post

        Steven, one thing I've always wondered about webmaster tools is whether it is wise to put all your sites into one account. Is it really wise to let Google know every single site you own? I've heard people say they open an account for every site, but that sounds like an awful lot of work. But on the flip side of that, if one site gets penalized for some reason, do you want Google closely scrutinizing all your other sites as well?
        Very good question Linda.
        Signature
        >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

        Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137721].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author N4PGW
          Originally Posted by djbory View Post

          Yes, but not in first page. they never were.
          Did all your 3 way links target your first page?

          If so, that may have triggered the unnatural look to your linking in your site.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2455441].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

      This thread teaches us a number of crucial points...

      (1). The reason why so many people fail at Internet Marketing
      (2). The value of doing your homework prior to engaging in SEO and Link Building
      (3). The critical importance of receiving advice from seasoned IMers

      To be clear, I'm not grilling ANYONE; this is simply an opportunity for all of us to learn including me.

      @ djbory - when you joined that particular "3 WAY LINKING" network, if you recall, you were told you had to, "Upload a PHP file to your site" and then "Link to the PHP file from your home page." I realize you were told in some form or fashion or another that there was NO WAY Google could detect what was going on. Virtually ALL of the link building networks that offer similar services make the same assertions.

      To answer your question as to what happened in your case; based upon your description of the chain of events and the fact that you stated you are not doing anything BlueFart, you are experiencing the Google Dance, that's all folks!
      Just an update; the website that desapeared from Google rankins 4 months ago for all the keywords, but that I still could find when I did the domain.com search now is completely gone. I can't not find it in Google in any way or form. I guess we're talking about 'banned from Google' As I mentioned before. It's not going to be good if that happens to the rest of my sites...

      So my advise is; stay away fro 3WAY LINK guys...
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137865].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Steven Carl Kelly
    OP: If you don't have GWT, you really should.
    Signature
    Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
    FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137076].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Fernando Veloso
      Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly View Post

      OP: If you don't have GWT, you really should.
      Why is that Steven? Cause of inside tracking and anomalies notifications, etc or there is something else?
      Signature
      People make good money selling to the rich. But the rich got rich selling to the masses.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137307].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Steven Carl Kelly
        Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso View Post

        Why is that Steven? Cause of inside tracking and anomalies notifications, etc or there is something else?
        There's a lot of good information in there, including where you rank for each of the keywords that people are using to find your site, problems that Google may have encountered in trying to crawl your site(s), the last date a site was crawled, etc.

        One of the best things I have found to use it for is as a keyword suggestion tool. Sometimes I'll find a keyword phrase that Google is ranking me for that I never really thought of. So, for example, I had a site that had a particular keyword phrase on it that Google had my page coming up at #18. I spent a small amount of time doing a little SEO on that phrase and ended up ranking #3 or #4 for that term in just a few days.
        Signature
        Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
        FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137325].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Orator
    You said you outsource your content, is there a chance someone has mislead you about the originality of it?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137432].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author LIndaB
    Steven, one thing I've always wondered about webmaster tools is whether it is wise to put all your sites into one account. Is it really wise to let Google know every single site you own? I've heard people say they open an account for every site, but that sounds like an awful lot of work. But on the flip side of that, if one site gets penalized for some reason, do you want Google closely scrutinizing all your other sites as well?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137534].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Steven Carl Kelly
      Originally Posted by LIndaB View Post

      Steven, one thing I've always wondered about webmaster tools is whether it is wise to put all your sites into one account. Is it really wise to let Google know every single site you own? I've heard people say they open an account for every site, but that sounds like an awful lot of work. But on the flip side of that, if one site gets penalized for some reason, do you want Google closely scrutinizing all your other sites as well?
      All of my own sites are all in one big account. If I'm doing things properly, what Google penalty should I fear? If any of my sites get penalized, I probably deserve it.

      I have nothing to hide from Google.
      Signature
      Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
      FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139700].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
    @ djbory

    Let's answer some specific questions so that we may drill down on this issue and determine what's really happening.

    Here are the questions...

    (1). How many websites are being impacted? ____
    (2). How long have these sites lost their rankings approximately? _____
    (3). Are all of these sites with the same web host? ______
    (4). Are all of these sites on the same IP? _____
    (5). Are all of these sites linked to each other ______
    (6). Do you have the snippet of code from three way linking on all of these sites? _____
    (7). Has three way linking kicked you out of their network? _____
    (8). Have you knowingly used any BlueFart tactics? ______
    (9). When you check are all of these sites still indexed in Google? _____
    (10). When you check are all of these sites still indexed in Bing? _____
    (11). When you check are all of these sites still indexed in Yahoo? _____
    (12). When you go in GWT are all of your sites showing verified? ______
    (13). When in GWT and you click on a site and go to the dashboard: answer these questions...


    (a). What is your "Top search queries" showing? Any keywords? ____
    (b). What are your Crawl errors showing? Any errors? _____
    (c). What are your Sitemaps showing? Do you have a "Green" check in the "Status column?
    (d). What are the "Links to your site" Showing? How many links? _______

    Answer those questions in "brief" and we'll get to the bottom line. And by the way, I misread your first posting. Based on the timeframe of your keywords mysteriously disappearing and remaining time on AWOL, that's not the Google Dance.

    Now I've got to get back to w-o-r-k! hahaha

    "Prosperity belongs to those who learn new things the fastest."
    -- Paul Zane Pilzer: Economist, entrepreneur, and author


    Signature
    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137922].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

      @ djbory

      Let's answer some specific questions so that we may drill down on this issue and determine what's really happening.

      Here are the questions...

      (1). How many websites are being impacted? ____
      (2). How long have these sites lost their rankings approximately? _____
      (3). Are all of these sites with the same web host? ______
      (4). Are all of these sites on the same IP? _____
      (5). Are all of these sites linked to each other ______
      (6). Do you have the snippet of code from three way linking on all of these sites? _____
      (7). Has three way linking kicked you out of their network? _____
      (8). Have you knowingly used any BlueFart tactics? ______
      (9). When you check are all of these sites still indexed in Google? _____
      (10). When you check are all of these sites still indexed in Bing? _____
      (11). When you check are all of these sites still indexed in Yahoo? _____
      (12). When you go in GWT are all of your sites showing verified? ______
      (13). When in GWT and you click on a site and go to the dashboard: answer these questions...


      (a). What is your "Top search queries" showing? Any keywords? ____
      (b). What are your Crawl errors showing? Any errors? _____
      (c). What are your Sitemaps showing? Do you have a "Green" check in the "Status column?
      (d). What are the "Links to your site" Showing? How many links? _______

      Answer those questions in "brief" and we'll get to the bottom line. And by the way, I misread your first posting. Based on the timeframe of your keywords mysteriously disappearing and remaining time on AWOL, that's not the Google Dance.

      Now I've got to get back to w-o-r-k! hahaha


      "Prosperity belongs to those who learn new things the fastest."

      -- Paul Zane Pilzer: Economist, entrepreneur, and author



      Thank you 'Crew' so much for taking your time to help out... I really appreciate this.

      Ok, I answered all your questions

      (1). How many websites are being impacted? 3

      (2). How long have these sites lost their rankings approximately? The first one 4 months ago (this one is gone completely, even when I search domain.com), the second one about 2 moths ago, and the third one about a week ago.

      (3). Are all of these sites with the same web host? yes

      (4). Are all of these sites on the same IP? yes

      (5). Are all of these sites linked to each other? yes

      (6). Do you have the snippet of code from three way linking on all of these sites? yes

      (7). Has three way linking kicked you out of their network? no

      (8). Have you knowingly used any BlueFart tactics? no, not at all.

      (9). When you check are all of these sites still indexed in Google? The first one is not. The second and third still show when I search domain.com

      (10). When you check are all of these sites still indexed in Bing? yes, they are

      (11). When you check are all of these sites still indexed in Yahoo? no. (the site that desapeared 2 months ago is ranking #169 in google and #95 in Yahoo for one of the keywords) That's all.

      (12). When you go in GWT are all of your sites showing verified? yes

      (13). When in GWT and you click on a site and go to the dashboard: answer these questions...


      (a). What is your "Top search queries" showing? Any keywords? now they only show 2 or 3 weird keywords that I'm not even optimizing and when I do the search manually, I'm not even ranking for those either.

      (b). What are your Crawl errors showing? Any errors? no errors. This mesagge shows: 'Googlebot has successfully accessed your home page. Pages from your site are included in Google's index'.

      (c). What are your Sitemaps showing? Do you have a "Green" check in the "Status column? yes

      (d). What are the "Links to your site" Showing? How many links? Hundreds
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1138083].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
        Originally Posted by jpieter77 View Post

        Are you using something automated for the content? Or do you write it all yourself?
        Originally Posted by djbory View Post


        (c). What are your Sitemaps showing? Do you have a "Green" check in the "Status column? yes

        (d). What are the "Links to your site" Showing? How many links? Hundreds
        Whew, we're almost there!!!

        Just to clarify, do "ALL" three sites have a "Green" check in the "Status column?

        And do "All" three sites show hundreds of links?

        Answer back please...
        Signature
        Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

        SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1138151].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author djbory
          Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

          Whew, we're almost there!!!

          Just to clarify, do "ALL" three sites have a "Green" check in the "Status column?

          And do "All" three sites show hundreds of links?

          Answer back please...
          Yes to both questions for the last two sites...
          The website that desapeared 4 months ago is not in Webmaster. I didn't have webmaster by that time, so for that site I wouldn't know.

          Let me know if you want to take a look at my sites.
          Signature
          >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

          Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1138164].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
            Originally Posted by djbory View Post

            Yes to both questions.
            You have not been banned...

            You have not been de-indexed...

            You have not experienced the Google dance...

            You are experiencing the Google Sandbox due to your linkbuilding program.

            At this point as captivereef has already pointed out, you have to wait the sandbox out. The great news is, once the Google gods decide its time, you are going to come back stronger than ever!

            The most important lesson to learn from this event is understand what puts you on Google's radar.

            You probably had one site that set things off, but because those sites were on the same Class C IP address, Google erred on the side of caution and pulled all three in the sandbox.

            I advise all IMers to either get a reseller web hosting account so that each website can have a separate IP address. Or, order a separate IP for each domain. Secondly, think your linkbuilding campaign through. If you are just starting out with a backlink building campaign with a site that has little to no links and hasn't been online for any length of time and you sign up for a linkbuilding service - plus, put articles out there for backlinks, plus build your own backlinks, you are most likely going to come under the Google radar.

            The key in this situation would have been to star slowly, (i.e., naturally) building links and once you're site is established, you can open up the backlink building floodgates!

            Hope that helps.
            Signature
            Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

            SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1138221].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author djbory
              Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

              You have not been banned...

              You have not been de-indexed...

              You have not experienced the Google dance...

              You are experiencing the Google Sandbox due to your linkbuilding program.

              At this point as captivereef has already pointed out, you have to wait the sandbox out. The great news is, once the Google gods decide its time, you are going to come back stronger than ever!

              The most important lesson to learn from this event is understand what puts you on Google's radar.

              You probably had one site that set things off, but because those sites were on the same Class C IP address, Google erred on the side of caution and pulled all three in the sandbox.

              I advise all IMers to either get a reseller web hosting account so that each website can have a separate IP address. Or, order a separate IP for each domain. Secondly, think your linkbuilding campaign through. If you are just starting out with a backlink building campaign with a site that has little to no links and hasn't been online for any length of time and you sign up for a linkbuilding service - plus, put articles out there for backlinks, plus build your own backlinks, you are most likely going to come under the Google radar.

              The key in this situation would have been to star slowly, (i.e., naturally) building links and once you're site is established, you can open up the backlink building floodgates!

              Hope that helps.
              Thank you very much! One last question; do you think I should keep building backlinks? and what about the snipped code in my sites?
              Signature
              >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

              Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1138269].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
                Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                Thank you very much! One last question; do you think I should keep building backlinks?
                Yep, but just a notation, you should be using something like SearchStatus | Firefox SEO Toolbar Extension to check your competition's backlinks.

                Let's say you have a keyword phrase and the top four competitors on the SERPs are averaging about 270 backlinks each. If you put out 400 backlinks on that keyword phrase; THAT'S OVERKILL!

                Not to mention a waste of valuable, time, money and resources. Once your sites come out of the sandbox and you notice a drop in the ranking, just ad a FEW more backlinks and you should be OK!

                P.S. If you stick around the Warrior Forum, you could master this stuff by the end of the year or sooner! It's like getting a college education for free!

                Much success to you!!!

                The Crew Chief
                Signature
                Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

                SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1138299].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author djbory
                  Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

                  Yep, but just a notation, you should be using something like SearchStatus | Firefox SEO Toolbar Extension to check your competition's backlinks.

                  Let's say you have a keyword phrase and the top four competitors on the SERPs are averaging about 270 backlinks each. If you put out 400 backlinks on that keyword phrase; THAT'S OVERKILL!

                  Not to mention a waste of valuable, time, money and resources. Once your sites come out of the sandbox and you notice a drop in the ranking, just ad a FEW more backlinks and you should be OK!

                  P.S. If you stick around the Warrior Forum, you could master this stuff by the end of the year or sooner! It's like getting a college education for free!

                  Much success to you!!!

                  The Crew Chief
                  Thanks again for taking te time to help out. This is the reason I love this forum. Experienced guys like you willing to help those in need...

                  Djbory
                  Signature
                  >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                  Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139168].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author djbory
              Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

              You have not been banned...

              You have not been de-indexed...

              You have not experienced the Google dance...

              You are experiencing the Google Sandbox due to your linkbuilding program.

              At this point as captivereef has already pointed out, you have to wait the sandbox out. The great news is, once the Google gods decide its time, you are going to come back stronger than ever!

              The most important lesson to learn from this event is understand what puts you on Google's radar.

              You probably had one site that set things off, but because those sites were on the same Class C IP address, Google erred on the side of caution and pulled all three in the sandbox.

              I advise all IMers to either get a reseller web hosting account so that each website can have a separate IP address. Or, order a separate IP for each domain. Secondly, think your linkbuilding campaign through. If you are just starting out with a backlink building campaign with a site that has little to no links and hasn't been online for any length of time and you sign up for a linkbuilding service - plus, put articles out there for backlinks, plus build your own backlinks, you are most likely going to come under the Google radar.

              The key in this situation would have been to star slowly, (i.e., naturally) building links and once you're site is established, you can open up the backlink building floodgates!

              Hope that helps.
              Hey crew chief, I will insist....

              I appreciate you're taking time from your sure busy schedule to sort out this situation not only for me but for all of us here at this forum, since this may happen to somebody else...

              It is about the conclusion that the sites have been sandboxed. I'm, just not 100% convinced this is the case. Here is why:

              First; about one of your questions: The sites are on a different IP address since I have a reseller account at Hostgator. (sorry, my mistake)

              If you see my sites they are not new. They're about a year old. I started slowly, about a year ago and I have been building backlinks very slowly for about a year now, using different strategies. 3WAYLINKING was just one of them. They have about the same amount of backlinks or less than the sites in the first 5 position on Google.

              I post in blogs, forums, a lot of social bookmarks, article backlinks, profile baklinks, my own blogs, web 2.0 sites, etc... The whole 9 yards...

              And what baffles me the most is that the site that disappeared 4 months ago is not indexed anymore.

              If I search mydomain.com or site:mydomain.com nothing shows.

              Could they have been penalized? I heard, sometimes sites are not banned or de-indexed, but suffer some kind of Google penalty for violating Google guidelines...

              Maybe they were just penalized first and now Google has started to ban them, because one is not indexed anymore, I'm afraid this could happen to the rest of them... Just a thought

              Let me know if you still think they are sandboxed. Thanks for helping out.

              Djbory.
              Signature
              >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

              Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139255].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
            Originally Posted by djbory View Post

            Yes to both questions for the last two sites...
            The website that desapeared 4 months ago is not in Webmaster. I didn't have webmaster by that time, so for that site I wouldn't know.

            Let me know if you want to take a look at my sites.
            If I'm understanding you clearly the site that "disappeared" was not ever in your GWT account?

            Next question, have you put it in your GWT acct and verified it yet?


            I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. Twenty-six times I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.
            - Michael Jordan
            Signature
            Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

            SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139642].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author djbory
              Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

              If I'm understanding you clearly the site that "disappeared" was not ever in your GWT account?

              Next question, have you put it in your GWT acct and verified it yet?


              I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. Twenty-six times I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed. - Michael Jordan

              No I haven't.
              Signature
              >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

              Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139767].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
                Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                No I haven't.
                @ djbory,

                How about putting that site in your GWT acct and verify it and then we'll go from there. Before you do that, do you have a Google approved sitemap?

                If so, let's go! Get in there so we can take a Starbucks brrrreak! My team has been chompin at the bits on this one...
                Signature
                Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

                SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139820].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author djbory
                  Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

                  @ djbory,

                  How about putting that site in your GWT acct and verify it and then we'll go from there. Before you do that, do you have a Google approved sitemap?

                  If so, let's go! Get in there so we can take a Starbucks brrrreak! My team has been chompin at the bits on this one...
                  Ok, Chief, I did it. I'll let you know when google approves the site map and verifies the site, if it ever does it...

                  Thanks again chief...
                  Signature
                  >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                  Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139835].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
                    Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                    Ok, Chief, I did it. I'll let you know when google approves the site map and verifies the site, if it ever does it...

                    Thanks again chief...
                    Good deal, keep me posted.
                    Signature
                    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

                    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139844].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author djbory
                Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                Maybe you should rephrase that because it leaves the impression that duplicate content is never an issue. It very well can be

                "In the rare cases in which Google perceives that duplicate content may be shown with intent to manipulate our rankings and deceive our users, we'll also make appropriate adjustments in the indexing and ranking of the sites involved. As a result, the ranking of the site may suffer, or the site might be removed entirely from the Google index, in which case it will no longer appear in search results."

                We might debate what Google means by "rare" but it seems pretty clear from the way Google operates that they have parameters in place for detection of "suspicious" duplicate content.

                I would agree that generally duplicate content is not quite the problem alot of people make it out to be but it really isn't a complete non issue.
                Originally Posted by Orator View Post

                You said you outsource your content, is there a chance someone has mislead you about the originality of it?
                It appears like duplicate content may be an issue in some cases...

                Orator, I didn't pay attention to you before and maybe I should've....

                I was advised by a very experienced guy from this forum named Don to check the paragraphs from my websites for duplicate content, and guess what? My exactly same paragraphs are in many websites all over the net.

                'Google don't penalize or ban sites with duplicate content, but will filter out all the sites with multiple duplicate paragraphs but one. The rest of the sites will not appear in the search results anymore'.

                I'm not saying this is it! But it may well be. I'll re-write the content from all my sites and I start a very aggressive backlinking campaign and will report to you guys in a few days to see what happen.
                Signature
                >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139826].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
            Originally Posted by djbory View Post

            Just an update; the website that desapeared from Google rankins 4 months ago for all the keywords, but that I still could find when I did the domain.com search now is completely gone. I can't not find it in Google in any way or form. I guess we're talking about 'banned from Google' As I mentioned before. It's not going to be good if that happens to the rest of my sites...

            So my advise is; stay away fro 3WAY LINK guys...
            This advise is not true at all! :rolleyes:

            I've 3 way links on my sites and no problem at all, so definitely not the case.

            Check your Google webmaster tool, it will show you all the on page problems, fix it before going further...

            If your site is not ranking for a particular keyword, check your on page factor, did you over optimize for that keyword? If Google starts to filter you, did you immediately modify / optimize your page (If you do that, you are scr*w!)

            Where did you get the links? Did you try Angela & Paul packet? Did you spin / vary your keyword a bit?

            See this post for more information:
            http://www.warriorforum.com/adsense-...ml#post1084898
            Signature

            Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1145752].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author banker0679
              where in the world are you getting this?

              GWT does NOT show you ALL the ON PAGE issues....you state that they do lol
              If Google starts to filter you..and you immediately modify...the person is now messed up? ...Where in the world did you get this gold nugget? lol

              Is this amateur night at the Apollo?

              Originally Posted by kkchoon View Post

              This advise is not true at all! :rolleyes:

              I've 3 way links on my sites and no problem at all, so definitely not the case.

              Check your Google webmaster tool, it will show you all the on page problems, fix it before going further...

              If your site is not ranking for a particular keyword, check your on page factor, did you over optimize for that keyword? If Google starts to filter you, did you immediately modify / optimize your page (If you do that, you are scr*w!)

              Where did you get the links? Did you try Angela & Paul packet? Did you spin / vary your keyword a bit?

              See this post for more information:
              http://www.warriorforum.com/adsense-...ml#post1084898
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146589].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Stephen Crooks
                (Groan...) Before this thread degenerates into the usual, "My SEO knowledge is bigger than yours.." nonsense or "SEO envy" as it is otherwise known, everyone has put some good points forward here.

                There are no hard and fast answers as Google will always guard that info, there is speculation based on our own experiences of course but that is all it is. The bottom line is, if you feel that your backlinking is trying to manipulate the Google algo then it probably is.. Will you get some success using these backlinking techniques? Yes, of course you can, but just don't be suprised when pages slip from the SERPS as that is also a probability of using link schemes.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146636].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                  Google or find the recent articles that were speaking about Affiliate sites dropping

                  You can add all the backlinks you want.....Google doesn't like duplicate content

                  then read it from the horse's mouth
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146656].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author djbory
                    Originally Posted by banker0679 View Post

                    wow i can't believe how anyone is giving out advice w/out knowing the sites!

                    Here are some general rules....


                    If one site is penalized....and 2 other sites LINK to the penalized site then those 2 sites will be penalized by DEFAULT. Linking to a penalized site WILL hurt your site.
                    'WRONG-WRONG-WRONG'. I have to STRONGLY DISAGREE with this statement.

                    I always heard this before and I was convinced this was true. However, last night I conducted a backward investigation. I checked about 50% from all sites that link to my site that was banned & de-indexed over 4 months ago (in this case this is a very bad neighbor), and guess what? Those sites are ROCKING!!!! Most of the sites that link to me in the 3 WAY LINK SERVICE are on first page of google, impressively, many of them, first page - #1, if that was true, then those sites would've been penalized some way, but obviously this is not the case.

                    I agree with you in everything else.

                    Originally Posted by banker0679 View Post

                    If you have 10 pages...but only link to the homepage......looks spammy. Build links to the homepage AND to every individual content page on your site.
                    Here I may have screwed up! I've been building links to my homepage only... If this is a very big issue then I may have a problem here...

                    Djbory
                    Signature
                    >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                    Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146671].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                      ehhh do you want me to find the video Matt Cutts gave?
                      He specifically stated that if you link OUT to a penalized site then your site will be penalized.

                      I had this issue with a few clients linking out to a bad directory or link farm sites. Removing the links, and filling out a reinclusion request got the rankings back (after a few months being down) within 1 week.

                      Your current sites ARE NOT PENALIZED but filtered out due to duplicate content so it wouldnt apply to your current situation.

                      Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                      'WRONG-WRONG-WRONG'. I have to STRONGLY DISAGREE with this statement.

                      I always heard this before and I was convinced this was true. However, last night I conducted a backward investigation. I checked about 50% from all sites that link to my site that was banned & de-indexed over 4 months ago (in this case this is a very bad neighbor), and guess what? Those sites are ROCKING!!!! Most of the sites that link to me in the 3 WAY LINK SERVICE are on first page of google, impressively, many of them, first page - #1, if that was true, then those sites would've been penalized some way, but obviously this is not the case.

                      I agree with you in everything else.



                      Here I may have screwed up! I've been building links to my homepage only... If this is a very big issue then I may have a problem here...

                      Djbory
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146680].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                        here are some common myths

                        duplicate content is NOT a google penalty

                        going from PR7 to PR2 is NOT a google penalty

                        going from PR2 to Greybar may not be a google penalty


                        Google will ban you or penalize you when you're doing stuff ON YOUR SITE that is bad. Cloaking, doorway pages, hidden content, linking to bad neighborhoods, etc
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146688].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author djbory
                        Originally Posted by banker0679 View Post

                        ehhh do you want me to find the video Matt Cutts gave?
                        He specifically stated that if you link OUT to a penalized site then your site will be penalized.

                        I had this issue with a few clients linking out to a bad directory or link farm sites. Removing the links, and filling out a reinclusion request got the rankings back (after a few months being down) within 1 week.

                        Your current sites ARE NOT PENALIZED but filtered out due to duplicate content so it wouldnt apply to your current situation.
                        Banker, when I said this, I said it because the site is indeed PENALIZED. Is not even indexed any more. GWT shows site is not indexed. It has been gone for about 4 months; however, the sites that link to that site are still doing pretty good in google... Strange isn't it?

                        Djbory
                        Signature
                        >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                        Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146700].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                          why is it gone from the index? does it have duplicate content?

                          I have seen whole sites gone from the index....from affiliate sites to sites that had 1 part of it scraping info. I changed the content on all, and the whole site was back to normal.

                          Another thing is that just because people are doing it, and not being penalized doesnt mean that google wont catch on.
                          I see a few sites that rank on page 1 that has hidden content on the homepage.
                          They have been there a while.....but I bet nobody has reported them.

                          Once somebody reports them...I'm pretty sure Google will take a closer look and slap them



                          Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                          Banker, when I said this, I said it because the site is indeed PENALIZED. Is not even indexed any more. GWT shows site is not indexed. It has been gone for about 4 months; however, the sites that link to that site are still doing pretty good in google... Strange isn't it?

                          Djbory
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146712].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author djbory
                  Originally Posted by Steve Crooks View Post

                  (Groan...) Before this thread degenerates into the usual, "My SEO knowledge is bigger than yours.." nonsense or "SEO envy" as it is otherwise known, everyone has put some good points forward here.

                  There are no hard and fast answers as Google will always guard that info, there is speculation based on our own experiences of course but that is all it is. The bottom line is, if you feel that your backlinking is trying to manipulate the Google algo then it probably is.. Will you get some success using these backlinking techniques? Yes, of course you can, but just don't be suprised when pages slip from the SERPS as that is also a probability of using link schemes.
                  Well said Steve. You're right! However, the rest of the sites liking to me are doing very good on google. Including the ones linking to the site that was banned 4 months ago..:confused::confused::confused:

                  Djbory
                  Signature
                  >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                  Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146687].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                    banned or did it have duplicate content and fell into Google's duplicate content filter?

                    Press Releases or articles with the same content will rank on Google for a few days/weeks...but you will see almost all drop off the index PERIOD.

                    Does this mean that the article link was banned or did it fall into the filter?

                    if the homepage contained duplicate content then Google will do the same thing it does to those extra press releases or articles.....it will take them off the index..

                    that is not a ban or penalty

                    Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                    Well said Steve. You're right! However, the rest of the sites liking to me are doing very good on google. Including the ones linking to the site that was banned 4 months ago..:confused::confused::confused:

                    Djbory
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146699].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Stephen Crooks
                    I don't doubt it Djbory and that success may continue forever but for every story of success using these sorts of linking schemes there are others that will see their rankings disappear in a flash.

                    For those that haven't read it then check out Google's own quality guidelines especially the bit about not participating in link schemes.
                    Webmaster guidelines - Webmasters/Site owners Help

                    I am not being puritanical or anything as I have participated in many link schemes and techniques before. I am just saying, that it is a probability that one day your rankings will drop as a result.

                    Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                    Well said Steve. You're right! However, the rest of the sites liking to me are doing very good on google. Including the ones linking to the site that was banned 4 months ago..:confused::confused::confused:

                    Djbory
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146715].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author djbory
                      Originally Posted by Steve Crooks View Post

                      I don't doubt it Djbory and that success may continue forever but for every story of success using these sorts of linking schemes there are others that will see their rankings disappear in a flash.

                      For those that haven't read it then check out Google's own quality guidelines especially the bit about not participating in link schemes.
                      Webmaster guidelines - Webmasters/Site owners Help

                      I am not being puritanical or anything as I have participated in many link schemes and techniques before. I am just saying, that it is a probability that one day your rankings will drop as a result.
                      Don't get me wrong Steve, I totally agree with you. I know this links schemes are against google guidelines, I've read it myself. I'm just saying, most guys linking to me are doing pretty good. But you're right again when you say, some guys get caught others don't...

                      Djbory
                      Signature
                      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146741].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author djbory
                [QUOTE=banker0679;1146589]where in the world are you getting this?

                GWT does NOT show you ALL the ON PAGE issues....you state that they do lol
                QUOTE]

                I have to agree. I have GWT and google doesn't show me any problems at all, and obviously I have some serious problems.
                Signature
                >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146678].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ruxi
            Google have been penalized you. Google dont like 3 way links so always try to get 2 way or 1 way
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1368390].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author kausarkhan
            Same problem with me. I have two websites related to work from home. Both were ranked high by google at first page and use to get more then 1000 unique visitors per day. Both the websites are running since 2004. Three months back one of the website stopped indexed by google and page rank fall from 3 to 0. With this particular site which stopped indexing, I use all sort of back links. One of it is reciprocal links, I deleted all the reciprocal links from this website thinking that they are useless. After I deleted reciprocal links 2 months before, this thing is happening.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1372940].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
              Originally Posted by kausarkhan View Post

              Same problem with me. I have two websites related to work from home. Both were ranked high by google at first page and use to get more then 1000 unique visitors per day. Both the websites are running since 2004. Three months back one of the website stopped indexed by google and page rank fall from 3 to 0. With this particular site which stopped indexing, I use all sort of back links. One of it is reciprocal links, I deleted all the reciprocal links from this website thinking that they are useless. After I deleted reciprocal links 2 months before, this thing is happening.
              Most probably because many of your partners detected you removed their links, they do the same and your ranking dropped!

              Try build more backlinks to it, may be few hundreds and see how it goes.
              Signature

              Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1372950].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author sterlingtek
            Originally Posted by djbory View Post

            Yes to both questions for the last two sites...
            The website that desapeared 4 months ago is not in Webmaster. I didn't have webmaster by that time, so for that site I wouldn't know.

            Let me know if you want to take a look at my sites.
            I would like to know if you resolved this.

            Chris
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1481294].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jpieter77
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1137995].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by jpieter77 View Post

      Are you using something automated for the content? Or do you write it all yourself?
      I write most myself. The sites are HTML so the content are articles that I usually write myself. However, I don't think you could get penalized for content. Everybody knows that. Thanks for trying to help though.
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1138100].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
    Duplicate Content???

    @ jpieter77 and @ Orator

    If you are thinking he may be having an issue due to dupilcate content, please read Google's clear and concise definition of duplicate content. Actually, I would suggest that EVERYONE who is a IMer or an aspiring IMer, to read this: Duplicate content - Webmasters/Site owners Help

    Once you understand Google's position on this subject, it will become a non-issue for you. Always remember - never guess at IM. Be clear on what the rules are and you'll be just fine!

    Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.
    -- Calvin Coolidge
    Signature
    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1138091].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post


      Once you understand Google's position on this subject, it will become a non-issue for you. Always remember - never guess at IM. Be clear on what the rules are and you'll be just fine!

      Maybe you should rephrase that because it leaves the impression that duplicate content is never an issue. It very well can be

      "In the rare cases in which Google perceives that duplicate content may be shown with intent to manipulate our rankings and deceive our users, we'll also make appropriate adjustments in the indexing and ranking of the sites involved. As a result, the ranking of the site may suffer, or the site might be removed entirely from the Google index, in which case it will no longer appear in search results."

      We might debate what Google means by "rare" but it seems pretty clear from the way Google operates that they have parameters in place for detection of "suspicious" duplicate content.

      I would agree that generally duplicate content is not quite the problem alot of people make it out to be but it really isn't a complete non issue.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1139616].message }}
  • Quite simply Google has picked up on your artificial linking scheme. And you are NOT banned, you are just being filtered.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1140324].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by InternetMarketingIQ View Post

      Quite simply Google has picked up on your artificial linking scheme. And you are NOT banned, you are just being filtered.
      You don't think some duplicate paragraph could get you penalized? Some IMers say that's not a reason to lose google rankings... Others say the opposite....
      You don't have much control over that, since people will always copy content from you.
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1141111].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author dburk
        Originally Posted by djbory View Post

        You don't think some duplicate paragraph could get you penalized? Some IMers say that's not a reason to lose google rankings... Others say the opposite....
        You don't have much control over that, since people will always copy content from you.
        Your absolutely right that there is no duplicate content penalty. There is however, a filter that prevents the SERP from showing multiple instances of the same content. Searchers would quickly abandon any search engine that did not filter the massive amount of duplicate pages from their SERP.

        Usually the page with the highest PR will win out and avoid the filter. So you could have content that is not original and still get it to rank, but you are going to have to build more authority and trust than all those other pages with the same content.

        For example, if you have unique content and your ranking score is just slightly below the page at position #3 on the SERP you would still appear on page one at position #4 of the SERP. However, if your page contains content that is a duplicate of the page at position #3 then you will not appear anywhere at all on the SERP, not even position #1000.

        Yes, you can still rank a page with duplicate content, but if you fail to win a better position then all other copies of the same content you will be not be found anywhere on the SERP.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1141670].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by dburk View Post


          Yes, you can still rank a page with duplicate content, but if you fail to win a better position then all other copies of the same content you will be not be found anywhere on the SERP.
          Yep and as far as that content goes its not all that different from a penalty.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1143107].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Carl Pruitt
          Originally Posted by dburk View Post

          Yes, you can still rank a page with duplicate content, but if you fail to win a better position then all other copies of the same content you will be not be found anywhere on the SERP.
          I don't know my behind from third base as far as SEO. I just try to cover the basics and build links without resorting to linking services. So this next question is just out of real curiosity.

          I often see this particular information about duplicate content ranking on forums and seo blogs, but yet when I do a search "in real life" (not as marketing research) I frequently see multiple results on the first page which have the exact same content. The only difference may be some design elements on the page, or different headers/footers/etc. In fact, when this happens to me, I do understand why Google would try to prevent it. It makes my own search frustrating.
          Signature

          Thanks!
          Carl Pruitt
          http://LongRunPublishing.com

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1143134].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author djbory
            Originally Posted by Steve Crooks View Post

            Djbory, all answers that you receive about this problem should be treated with caution. It is virtually impossible to know for real why a site's pages disapear from the indexes, we can speculate and reason but that is all. Google will never disclose why they deindex, ban, sandbox etc because by doing that it is a short step to working out their algo.

            However, there are a few points that you can be absolutely certain about when it comes to Google.

            1. They look for relevancy of content to keywords.
            2. They punish sites that are trying to manipulate their algos.
            3. They trust sites more that have backlinks from current highly trusted sites.
            4. They are putting a lot more emphasis on visitor experience with your sites.

            It could be argued that just by attempting to ask for backlinks from various websites you are trying to manipulate Google's algo but thankfully they don't penalise all attempts at getting backlinks just ones that are trying to deceive. 3-way links are definitely designed to deceive Google. Why else do we do it? They are supposed to look like 1 way links which Google like so naturally they are going to be pi**ed when they decipher any 3 way link network.

            2 way links are fine so long as you don't overdo it because you are not deliberately setting out to deceive. Google can easily see reciprocal links and as such don't mind them so long as they are not part of a scheme.

            Keep everything as natural and transparant as possible, article marketing is fine, commenting on blogs is fine, syndicating articles is fine and contextual links are also fine. They work because you are not trying to do anything deceptive.

            I guess the bottom line is, if you are doing anything that can be perceived as trying to deceive Google then don't be suprised to be punished by deindexing or worse.. banning.

            Can you get your site's pages back in? Yes, but don't hold your breath. Remove all the dodgy backlinks to your site and request a reinclusion through your webmaster tools account.. Also, check this out for more information.
            Requesting reconsideration of your site - Webmasters/Site owners Help
            Thanks Steve. I will try to find out what is the reason that this has happened, so me and the folks that have been following this post can benefit in the future:

            I will do 3 steps and I'll keep a post of my progress:

            1.- Today I will remove and re-write every paragraph that have been duplicated from my sites and will implement an aggressive backlinking campaign; bookmarking, blog posting, articles, the whole 9 yards... I will go with this for a week to see if I can improve ranking...

            2.- If the above doesn't work, I will remove myself from the 3 WAY LINKING Service and will stop linking from my own websites...

            3.- If the 2 steps above alone don't make the trick, I will resubmit the sites to Google for consideration...

            I will keep updating my progress....


            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            Yep and as far as that content goes its not all that different from a penalty.
            I agree.

            Originally Posted by Carl Pruitt View Post

            I don't know my behind from third base as far as SEO. I just try to cover the basics and build links without resorting to linking services. So this next question is just out of real curiosity.

            I often see this particular information about duplicate content ranking on forums and seo blogs, but yet when I do a search "in real life" (not as marketing research) I frequently see multiple results on the first page which have the exact same content. The only difference may be some design elements on the page, or different headers/footers/etc. In fact, when this happens to me, I do understand why Google would try to prevent it. It makes my own search frustrating.
            That's exactly my point. And I just checked and the last site which lost ranking has unique content.

            Another point is that the sites that had duplicated content were in the first page of Google for months, one of them #1 for 3 keywords, even with duplicated content and it was PR4.

            If duplicated content was the issue in this site, the others sites with duplicated content should've been filter out, not the one that was #1 and PR4 (that site was de-indexed completely).

            Maybe Google algo takes time to detect duplicate content, if that's the case... Or in fact was the 3WAY LINK scheme...:confused:
            Signature
            >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

            Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1143253].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author djbory
              Hey guys, just an update; another one of my sites that had keywords ranking in page 1 and 2 of Google is not ranking anymore. Now the casualty # is 4 sites dead!

              With the exception of one keyword that was in page #1 in google is now #59, I assume that is going to keep dropping....This is not good! They are dropping like flies, and I feel like my hands are tied....

              Any advise would be welcome...
              Signature
              >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

              Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1143453].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Stephen Crooks
                It could just be the Google dance and it might bounce back again but it does appear to be some sort of pattern with your sites. It could be that all 4 of your sites are just going through the normal ups and downs but if not then there is something in your promotional activities that is not to Google's likeing. Ditch the 3 way links scheme immediately in my opinion.

                Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                Hey guys, just an update; another one of my sites that had keywords ranking in page 1 and 2 of Google is not ranking anymore. Now the casualty # is 4 sites dead!

                With the exception of one keyword that was in page #1 in google is now #59, I assume that is going to keep dropping....This is not good! They are dropping like flies, and I feel like my hands are tied....

                Any advise would be welcome...
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1143471].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author djbory
                  Originally Posted by Steve Crooks View Post

                  It could just be the Google dance and it might bounce back again but it does appear to be some sort of pattern with your sites. It could be that all 4 of your sites are just going through the normal ups and downs but if not then there is something in your promotional activities that is not to Google's likeing. Ditch the 3 way links scheme immediately in my opinion.
                  It's not the google dance Steve, because the first site that was penalized is now de-indexed. And it was over 4 months ago...:confused:

                  I'm going to check the sites that are linking to that site to see if I can find some patern...
                  Signature
                  >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                  Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1143488].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cienik
    i suggest you to try some site to test whether you get banned or not. you still have the pagerank right ? if yes then you don't get banned
    Signature

    Want to learn How to Make money online , Boost traffic and Blogging tips CLICK THIS :
    More than hundred way make money online , pure home job , boost traffic, SEO,and great tips = FREE

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1141605].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
    @ Franco Mocke

    This is the recently released google caffeine: >>>>>>> Google The URL looks like this: http : // www 2. sandbox. google . com / The spaces are to override the WF automated link converter.

    @ TristanPerry

    Google changes it's algorithims at least once week, probably more! They have to because Internet Marketing noobies are at the bottom of their game clogging the Internet Highways with junk. And Web Spammers, BlueFartters and Cybercrooks are on top of their game trying to rip off and harm the masses! Moments right after story broke about the ESPN reporter Erin Andrews being videotaped in the buff, BlueFartters had the #2, #3 positions on the Google SERPs for people searching for the video. They beat out ALL of the news agencies and gossip sites and everyone else. But when a surfer clicked on either link, they found themselves dab smack in the middle of an automated .exe file that ruined their hard drive. Bet you'd like to know how they got ranked so high so fast wouldn't you??? Hahaha! The SEO Pros know! Hint, Hint, there's a way to perform a "Backwards Analysis."

    Worrying about Google's algorithm changes or its impact is like worrying about the weather. Why worry? Why not just have ways to monitor the weather and then have an umbrella, raincoat, some sunscreen, a parka, flashlight, windbreaker, generator, swim suit, gloves, boots, tennis shoes, etc.? In other words BE PREPARED! The best way to be prepared. Learn SEO and proper backlinking strategies, NOW! Not tomorrow! Not after you launch another site. Not after you get BANNED, suffer a Google Slap or get dumped in the Google Sandbox.

    @ djbory

    You checked your GWT for that site yet?


    A mind troubled by doubt cannot focus on the course to victory.
    - Arthur Golden
    Signature
    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1141892].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post


      @ djbory

      You checked your GWT for that site yet?


      A mind troubled by doubt cannot focus on the course to victory.

      - Arthur Golden
      Yes, The one that doesn't appeared to be indexed, indeed, shows at GWT as "site no indexed", the sitemap status shows a greenmark though.
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1143000].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Stephen Crooks
        Djbory, all answers that you receive about this problem should be treated with caution. It is virtually impossible to know for real why a site's pages disapear from the indexes, we can speculate and reason but that is all. Google will never disclose why they deindex, ban, sandbox etc because by doing that it is a short step to working out their algo.

        However, there are a few points that you can be absolutely certain about when it comes to Google.

        1. They look for relevancy of content to keywords.
        2. They punish sites that are trying to manipulate their algos.
        3. They trust sites more that have backlinks from current highly trusted sites.
        4. They are putting a lot more emphasis on visitor experience with your sites.

        It could be argued that just by attempting to ask for backlinks from various websites you are trying to manipulate Google's algo but thankfully they don't penalise all attempts at getting backlinks just ones that are trying to deceive. 3-way links are definitely designed to deceive Google. Why else do we do it? They are supposed to look like 1 way links which Google like so naturally they are going to be pi**ed when they decipher any 3 way link network.

        2 way links are fine so long as you don't overdo it because you are not deliberately setting out to deceive. Google can easily see reciprocal links and as such don't mind them so long as they are not part of a scheme.

        Keep everything as natural and transparant as possible, article marketing is fine, commenting on blogs is fine, syndicating articles is fine and contextual links are also fine. They work because you are not trying to do anything deceptive.

        I guess the bottom line is, if you are doing anything that can be perceived as trying to deceive Google then don't be suprised to be punished by deindexing or worse.. banning.

        Can you get your site's pages back in? Yes, but don't hold your breath. Remove all the dodgy backlinks to your site and request a reinclusion through your webmaster tools account.. Also, check this out for more information.
        Requesting reconsideration of your site - Webmasters/Site owners Help
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1143098].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
          Originally Posted by Steve Crooks View Post

          Djbory, all answers that you receive about this problem should be treated with caution. It is virtually impossible to know for real why a site's pages disapear from the indexes, we can speculate and reason but that is all. Google will never disclose why they deindex, ban, sandbox etc because by doing that it is a short step to working out their algo.
          There's a Lot To Be Learned From This Thread! Much Thanks To Djbory For Starting It!


          Hello Steve Crooks, you made some very valid points to which I wholeheartedly concur. Especially the four points; you were right on track! However, there is one statement we MUST reflect upon to glean some nuggets that will be beneficial to all. I have no way of knowing how your business model is set up or what IM means to you specifically, but with me, I do this FULL TIME with no back up plan in case it doesn't work! It does work and it will continue to work - failure (not even for one website) is not an option and will never be! I do this for myself and for clients. My background is in Electronic Intelligence and I've assembled a team, we call the "Brainstorm Team" each with various backgrounds, (IT, Military, Physics, Marketing, etc.)

          Between us, we track Google like the military and Homeland Security tracks threats and potential threats. We (talking about members of our tram) all have a lot at stake; therefore we cannot afford to be slackers about IM. You could say that we run radar and sonar on the Big G day and night. We keep Matt Cutts, Adam Lasnik, and other G brain trusts and the algorithm changes on DEFCON 3 at all times. If we detect anything out of the ordinary with the Big G, we go to DEFCON 4 and evaluate the site in question! I'm sharing this to make this point resounding, irrefutable and overwhelmingly clear; WE MEAN BUSINESS!

          For certain people, IM is a dream that will soon fade. For others it's a roll of the dice. For others is a part time gig that doesn't hold a high significance on their to do list. Still for others, it's one of the many "Get Rich Quick" fantasies they will engage to see if it is going to be THE ONE. And finally, there is the group of IMers who half-heartedly work the business with nominal results. When you have people as we do - with a lot at stake; YOU LEAVE NOTHING TO CHANGE! Others may, but we DO NOT guess at IM! We DO NOT guess at our Web Properties! And, we DO NOT guess at our client's Web Properties!

          Having shared that, you made this statement, "It is virtually impossible to know for real why a site's pages disapear from the indexes." Actually, Steve, you can KNOW and you can know each and every single solitary time! When a person gets banned, dropped from the index, gets sand boxed, etc., and they send an inquiry to Google. They receive an email stating the reason(s) why.

          Inexperienced IMs, look at that email response and say, "Google didn't say much, as a matter of fact - they were quite vague!" Wrong answer people! The Big G pinpointed the problem; THAT PERSON was simply operating in a lack of knowledge about Google's TOS, other parameters and what stays under the radar and what makes Google's radars go: RED ALERT! RED ALERT Repeat RED ALERT!

          For all of you who really desire to succeed at IM, I strongly urge you to quickly get past the point of guessing about Google and worrying about getting banned, de-indexed, sand boxed or Google slapped. If you develop a proactive IM business model that includes aggressively staying on top of the Big G and the other three, you'll be fine. PLUS, if you want to get above the $10K, $15k, $18k per month and higher range, this will be required! Anytime an IMer succeeds at SEO, PPC, CPA or AFF Marketing, the competition gets fierce! The people who stumble upon IM success are the ones who are subject to waking up one morning and seeing their dreams and aspirations the same place Google put BMW in 2006.

          *************************

          OK, got that out of the way, now here's a quick update, Djbory PM'ed me the website in question and we are putting it through an analysis. We'll post the results, if not late tonight, the first thing tomorrow morning - so don't forget to keep track of this thread! You'll learn something!

          What we WILL NOT be posting are the actual URLs of the website and advise Djbory not to post them and not to PM them either. Until then...


          ~ Where the determination is, the way can be found. ~
          George S. Claso

          ~ A determined soul will do more with a rusty monkey wrench than a loafer will accomplish with all the tools in a machine shop. ~
          Robert Hughes
          Signature
          Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

          SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1144726].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Stephen Crooks
            okay... Wow.. Just like the A-Team!



            Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

            There's a Lot To Be Learned From This Thread! Much Thanks To Djbory For Starting It!


            Hello Steve Crooks, you made some very valid points to which I wholeheartedly concur. Especially the four points; you were right on track! However, there is one statement we MUST reflect upon to glean some nuggets that will be beneficial to all. I have no way of knowing how your business model is set up or what IM means to you specifically, but with me, I do this FULL TIME with no back up plan in case it doesn't work! It does work and it will continue to work - failure (not even for one website) is not an option and will never be! I do this for myself and for clients. My background is in Electronic Intelligence and I've assembled a team, we call the "Brainstorm Team" each with various backgrounds, (IT, Military, Physics, Marketing, etc.)

            Between us, we track Google like the military and Homeland Security tracks threats and potential threats. We (talking about members of our tram) all have a lot at stake; therefore we cannot afford to be slackers about IM. You could say that we run radar and sonar on the Big G day and night. We keep Matt Cutts, Adam Lasnik, and other G brain trusts and the algorithm changes on DEFCON 3 at all times. If we detect anything out of the ordinary with the Big G, we go to DEFCON 4 and evaluate the site in question! I'm sharing this to make this point resounding, irrefutable and overwhelmingly clear; WE MEAN BUSINESS!

            For certain people, IM is a dream that will soon fade. For others it's a roll of the dice. For others is a part time gig that doesn't hold a high significance on their to do list. Still for others, it's one of the many "Get Rich Quick" fantasies they will engage to see if it is going to be THE ONE. And finally, there is the group of IMers who half-heartedly work the business with nominal results. When you have people as we do - with a lot at stake; YOU LEAVE NOTHING TO CHANGE! Others may, but we DO NOT guess at IM! We DO NOT guess at our Web Properties! And, we DO NOT guess at our client's Web Properties!

            Having shared that, you made this statement, "It is virtually impossible to know for real why a site's pages disapear from the indexes." Actually, Steve, you can KNOW and you can know each and every single solitary time! When a person gets banned, dropped from the index, gets sand boxed, etc., and they send an inquiry to Google. They receive an email stating the reason(s) why.

            Inexperienced IMs, look at that email response and say, "Google didn't say much, as a matter of fact - they were quite vague!" Wrong answer people! The Big G pinpointed the problem; THAT PERSON was simply operating in a lack of knowledge about Google's TOS, other parameters and what stays under the radar and what makes Google's radars go: RED ALERT! RED ALERT Repeat RED ALERT!

            For all of you who really desire to succeed at IM, I strongly urge you to quickly get past the point of guessing about Google and worrying about getting banned, de-indexed, sand boxed or Google slapped. If you develop a proactive IM business model that includes aggressively staying on top of the Big G and the other three, you'll be fine. PLUS, if you want to get above the $10K, $15k, $18k per month and higher range, this will be required! Anytime an IMer succeeds at SEO, PPC, CPA or AFF Marketing, the competition gets fierce! The people who stumble upon IM success are the ones who are subject to waking up one morning and seeing their dreams and aspirations the same place Google put BMW in 2006.

            *************************

            OK, got that out of the way, now here's a quick update, Djbory PM'ed me the website in question and we are putting it through an analysis. We'll post the results, if not late tonight, the first thing tomorrow morning - so don't forget to keep track of this thread! You'll learn something!

            What we WILL NOT be posting are the actual URLs of the website and advise Djbory not to post them and not to PM them either. Until then...


            ~ Where the determination is, the way can be found. ~
            George S. Claso

            ~ A determined soul will do more with a rusty monkey wrench than a loafer will accomplish with all the tools in a machine shop. ~
            Robert Hughes
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1144760].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author djbory
            Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

            There's a Lot To Be Learned From This Thread! Much Thanks To Djbory For Starting It!


            Hello Steve Crooks, you made some very valid points to which I wholeheartedly concur. Especially the four points; you were right on track! However, there is one statement we MUST reflect upon to glean some nuggets that will be beneficial to all. I have no way of knowing how your business model is set up or what IM means to you specifically, but with me, I do this FULL TIME with no back up plan in case it doesn't work! It does work and it will continue to work - failure (not even for one website) is not an option and will never be! I do this for myself and for clients. My background is in Electronic Intelligence and I've assembled a team, we call the "Brainstorm Team" each with various backgrounds, (IT, Military, Physics, Marketing, etc.)

            Between us, we track Google like the military and Homeland Security tracks threats and potential threats. We (talking about members of our tram) all have a lot at stake; therefore we cannot afford to be slackers about IM. You could say that we run radar and sonar on the Big G day and night. We keep Matt Cutts, Adam Lasnik, and other G brain trusts and the algorithm changes on DEFCON 3 at all times. If we detect anything out of the ordinary with the Big G, we go to DEFCON 4 and evaluate the site in question! I'm sharing this to make this point resounding, irrefutable and overwhelmingly clear; WE MEAN BUSINESS!

            For certain people, IM is a dream that will soon fade. For others it's a roll of the dice. For others is a part time gig that doesn't hold a high significance on their to do list. Still for others, it's one of the many "Get Rich Quick" fantasies they will engage to see if it is going to be THE ONE. And finally, there is the group of IMers who half-heartedly work the business with nominal results. When you have people as we do - with a lot at stake; YOU LEAVE NOTHING TO CHANGE! Others may, but we DO NOT guess at IM! We DO NOT guess at our Web Properties! And, we DO NOT guess at our client's Web Properties!

            Having shared that, you made this statement, "It is virtually impossible to know for real why a site's pages disapear from the indexes." Actually, Steve, you can KNOW and you can know each and every single solitary time! When a person gets banned, dropped from the index, gets sand boxed, etc., and they send an inquiry to Google. They receive an email stating the reason(s) why.

            Inexperienced IMs, look at that email response and say, "Google didn't say much, as a matter of fact - they were quite vague!" Wrong answer people! The Big G pinpointed the problem; THAT PERSON was simply operating in a lack of knowledge about Google's TOS, other parameters and what stays under the radar and what makes Google's radars go: RED ALERT! RED ALERT Repeat RED ALERT!

            For all of you who really desire to succeed at IM, I strongly urge you to quickly get past the point of guessing about Google and worrying about getting banned, de-indexed, sand boxed or Google slapped. If you develop a proactive IM business model that includes aggressively staying on top of the Big G and the other three, you'll be fine. PLUS, if you want to get above the $10K, $15k, $18k per month and higher range, this will be required! Anytime an IMer succeeds at SEO, PPC, CPA or AFF Marketing, the competition gets fierce! The people who stumble upon IM success are the ones who are subject to waking up one morning and seeing their dreams and aspirations the same place Google put BMW in 2006.


            *************************



            OK, got that out of the way, now here's a quick update, Djbory PM'ed me the website in question and we are putting it through an analysis. We'll post the results, if not late tonight, the first thing tomorrow morning - so don't forget to keep track of this thread! You'll learn something!

            What we WILL NOT be posting are the actual URLs of the website and advise Djbory not to post them and not to PM them either. Until then...


            ~ Where the determination is, the way can be found. ~
            George S. Claso

            ~ A determined soul will do more with a rusty monkey wrench than a loafer will accomplish with all the tools in a machine shop. ~
            Robert Hughes
            Great post men!!! I admire your courage, your determination and your way of thinking!!!! With a mindset like that it is impossible to fail...

            I hope we all learn from you...

            Keep it up...

            DJBory
            Signature
            >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

            Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1145521].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author dburk
              Wow! I just learned something from this thread too!!!

              Apparently the more you SHOUT, use EXCLAMTION MARKS!!!! and BOAST about about how GREAT you ARE, the MORE people LIKE your POST!!!!

              Let's ALL of START doing this so that WE can all DO OUR PART in making this a BETTER forum!!!!!!!!!!! YOU can COUNT on ME to DO MY PART as soon as I figure out HOW to make my FONTS BIG BOLD and RED!!!!!!

              I AM SOOOO DAMN GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!

              <LOL> Tongue pressed firmly in cheek </LOL>
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1145610].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bossaway
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1145622].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by bossaway View Post

      How does your site do in Google Caffeine search results? Maybe it will pop back up once they implement their new search engine.
      Let me know how to use Google caffeine to see what happen...

      Djbory
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1145636].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author banker0679
        wow i can't believe how anyone is giving out advice w/out knowing the sites!

        Here are some general rules....


        1. If one site is penalized....and 2 other sites LINK to the penalized site then those 2 sites will be penalized by DEFAULT. Linking to a penalized site WILL hurt your site.

        2. This is NOT THE SANDBOX. Can't even believe that someone wrote that. According to the OP the whole site is GONE from Google. That is NOT THE SANDBOX!

        3. More than likely...if you have ANY DUPLICATE CONTENT Google may FILTER out ALL of your sites except for the originating source. Chances are that they may just put the most authoritative site, and FILTER OUT the rest.

        If you copy/pasted your site to many other sites....then you better believe that Google will take sites out of their index. Best way of checking this is COPY/PASTE the first line of a paragraph in your site, and google it in quotations. If you see it on another website then you better change that website or your own. YOUR SITE SHOULD ALWAYS BE ORIGINAL CONTENT!

        4. If you have 10 pages on your site...and they ALL basically contain the same content then you better believe Google will FILTER YOU out. It's not a penalty...it's a filter. As soon as you change it...you may see a change within 1 week. You can file a reinclusion request to maybe have it done faster

        5. If you have 10 pages...but only link to the homepage......looks spammy. Build links to the homepage AND to every individual content page on your site.

        Submitting your site to google webmaster tools is not going to help.
        Google may reindex you...but will take your site out again after it sees that you're offering duplicate content.

        You HAVE to change all the content on all of your pages and/or sites. That is your problem.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1145675].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author banker0679
          also

          3way linking is

          a-b, b-c

          link wheel is
          a-b, b-c, c-a

          3way linking is harder to spot as it is open ended
          Link wheel is a circle and will always circle back to the 1st link
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1145688].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
            Originally Posted by banker0679 View Post

            also

            3way linking is

            a-b, b-c

            link wheel is
            a-b, b-c, c-a

            3way linking is harder to spot as it is open ended
            Link wheel is a circle and will always circle back to the 1st link
            Link Wheel is just a concept.

            There are no limit to implementing link wheel, in fact, the more mix up your links between the properties, the better!
            Signature

            Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1145770].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Paxton
              There is one other option to consider as the basis of your problems. Human review.

              Websites will go through a human review (obviously not all websites - that would be impossible) but websites that the search engines think are moving up the rankings too quickly, can be flagged for a review by human checkers.

              This is actually a very good thing if you're prepared for it. Can be pretty bad if you're not ready though.

              Have a look at your websites. Presumably these are monetized somehow. Are you using raw data feeds? What is the status of any images you might have used? Right click an image on your site and check the properties. Where does the image originate?

              What is the status of the links to the merchant's sites? Do these include all the images for example.

              Duplicate content checks by Google serve for more then simply determining if a particular site deserves to outrank another site. When somebody does a search for a particular term, obviously the search engines want to serve up the most relevant, informative and original versions of anything to do with the search term.

              If you're an affiliate for Product X for example, which page has the most relevant, informative and original version of anything to do with Product X? Most probably it's the Merchant site. Any affiliate sites will use the same images and content as the merchant site, immediately flagging the site as an affiliate.

              Some will argue that Google hates affiliate sites. All my sites are affiliate sites and Google seems to like them pretty good, so I would disagree with the "hates" bit. Certainly gives us a hard time, but not hate.

              There is a lot of discussion on minimizing link-building footprints. It might be wise to look at your "affiliate footprint" as well.

              Just my opinon of course.
              Signature
              Never undersell yourself - SEO is a skill clients are prepared to pay big money for
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146016].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author djbory
                Originally Posted by Paxton View Post

                There is one other option to consider as the basis of your problems. Human review.

                Websites will go through a human review (obviously not all websites - that would be impossible) but websites that the search engines think are moving up the rankings too quickly, can be flagged for a review by human checkers.

                Have a look at your websites. Presumably these are monetized somehow. Are you using raw data feeds? What is the status of any images you might have used? Right click an image on your site and check the properties. Where does the image originate?
                Google states itself that googlebots can't read images, so they encourage webmasters to use self explanatory alternate text. So I don't think this may be an issue.

                Djbory
                Signature
                >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146734].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Paxton
                  Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                  Google states itself that googlebots can't read images, so they encourage webmasters to use self explanatory alternate text. So I don't think this may be an issue.

                  Djbory
                  Thing is, I'm not talking about Bots here nor am I referencing alt texts. My post references the human review elements, and I quote from the guidelines for human reviewers:

                  "Pictures are nice, but where do they come from? Check the properties of any image and you will see they come from ******* (an example: ht*******.jpg) --- so this is an affiliate of ****** that adds no value, presents the feed available by signing up as a ******* affiliate with nothing else. Images come as part of the feed. Spam - Offensive"

                  end quote


                  Links and names removed, but you get the gist. This is from Google by the way.

                  Just because the bots can't read images, it doesn't mean the search engines will leave this open to being exploited. Everything counts.
                  Signature
                  Never undersell yourself - SEO is a skill clients are prepared to pay big money for
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146810].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author djbory
                    Originally Posted by Paxton View Post

                    Thing is, I'm not talking about Bots here nor am I referencing alt texts. My post references the human review elements, and I quote from the guidelines for human reviewers:

                    "Pictures are nice, but where do they come from? Check the properties of any image and you will see they come from ******* (an example: ht*******.jpg) --- so this is an affiliate of ****** that adds no value, presents the feed available by signing up as a ******* affiliate with nothing else. Images come as part of the feed. Spam - Offensive"

                    end quote


                    Links and names removed, but you get the gist. This is from Google by the way.

                    Just because the bots can't read images, it doesn't mean the search engines will leave this open to being exploited. Everything counts.
                    Ok, but for example, the site that was banned had only one image, and I bought it on istockphoto. Secondly, you say yourself all your sites are affiliate sites, if you don't use any affiliate images then what images do you use to promote affiliates products? And to finish, just do a search on google and about 99% of the sites that promote affiliate products and are doing good in google, are using the affiliate's images.

                    Djbory
                    Signature
                    >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                    Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146853].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Paxton
                      I think we've kind of crossed lines here.

                      I'm not saying human review is the cause of your site problems. Without knowing anything about your sites or business model that would be making a few light years worth of assumptions.

                      What I mentioned is a POSSIBILITY, and one which a lot of people seem to ignore.

                      The reference to images has nothing to do with stock photos or images, which I use a lot of myself. The reference to images has to do with blocks of content from merchant sites / affiliate networks.

                      Here's a scenario to consider just to illustrate my point:

                      Somebody signs up for one of the big affiliate networks, CJ for sake of argument. They find an offer they would like to promote. They find a nice image with some descriptive text, use the "build-a-link" feature of the network and copy / paste the code to their website.

                      That code includes the image code, which shows up when you right-click the image and look at the properties. It will show the image as originating from either the affiliate network or the merchant site.

                      Take the same image and insert it into your website and the properties will show the image as originating from your website.

                      Same image, different properties.

                      The same goes for data-feeds. Use a data-feed from a network, and all the images included plus the link structure, point to the fact that your site is an affiliate site, offering little of value over and above the original site (network / merchant site).

                      Yes, affiliate sites will use the affiliate images in general. It's how you use the images.
                      Signature
                      Never undersell yourself - SEO is a skill clients are prepared to pay big money for
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146891].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author djbory
                        Originally Posted by Paxton View Post


                        Here's a scenario to consider just to illustrate my point:

                        Somebody signs up for one of the big affiliate networks, CJ for sake of argument. They find an offer they would like to promote. They find a nice image with some descriptive text, use the "build-a-link" feature of the network and copy / paste the code to their website.

                        That code includes the image code, which shows up when you right-click the image and look at the properties. It will show the image as originating from either the affiliate network or the merchant site.

                        Take the same image and insert it into your website and the properties will show the image as originating from your website.

                        Same image, different properties.

                        The same goes for data-feeds. Use a data-feed from a network, and all the images included plus the link structure, point to the fact that your site is an affiliate site, offering little of value over and above the original site (network / merchant site).

                        Yes, affiliate sites will use the affiliate images in general. It's how you use the images.
                        I think I got you, and no, I never do that. All images are storaged on my server. I would never post a image in my site that is storaged on somebody else server, even if this is an affiliate network that I'm promoting.

                        When I check the properties of my images, they of course, show mydomain/myimage.gif

                        I don't use my images to link either...
                        Signature
                        >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                        Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1147071].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Paxton
                          Like I said - just a possibility, but something to consider none the less.

                          It's one of those things where you sometimes just have to cut your losses. How much effort do you put into reviving a website which might not be salvageable when the same effort (or less) could result in better rankings for a completely new site? Tough one.

                          Best of luck rectifying things.
                          Signature
                          Never undersell yourself - SEO is a skill clients are prepared to pay big money for
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1147168].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Marigold
                      May be there is a simple explanation.Exactly same thing happened to one of my site.It simply vanished from google 48 hours back.Previous to that a lot of my keywords were not there any more in the SERP.But 2 days back it simply vanished.Not a single keword was in google search.I asked my brother to have a look.He fixed the problem and I am in the first page for my primary keyword as I was previously.Some other keywords are also gradually appearing in search results.
                      The problem was my older version of wordpress had a bug and a worm had infected my system.It all sounds very techie to me so dont ask me to explain the exact steps.May be some warrior will be able to help.My brother removed the worm or whatever and updated my wordpress to the latest version. I am back in first page no 2 for my keyword.It is worth a try along with other steps suggested by other warriors.
                      Please check this out.
                      wordpress.org/development/2009/09/keep-wordpress-secure/
                      Got to rush to my 12 hour office job.All the best.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1168059].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
          Originally Posted by banker0679 View Post

          3. More than likely...if you have ANY DUPLICATE CONTENT Google may FILTER out ALL of your sites except for the originating source. Chances are that they may just put the most authoritative site, and FILTER OUT the rest.
          Nope, duplicate content only apply in 2 ways:

          1. Google "TRY NOT TO" show duplicate content in the top 10 result for a particular keyword.

          2. Google will ignore one of your article that post twice or more on your own site.

          If you are referring duplicate content scrap from other website or article directories, you are WRONG!

          If this kind of duplicate content filter exists, many news sites and auto blog will be filtered! But my experience tells me otherwise.

          It all depends on your backlinks, as long as you have a lot of backlinks, you can outrank original poster for the same article!

          It doesn't make sense to filter duplicate articles, may be that article just too good not to spread it? If Google filter website based on this rule, many innocent sites will be gone! And that is very bad for Google, because Google is trying hard to provide as much useful information as possible, filtering those sites will limit Google data source.

          - Kok Choon
          Signature

          Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1145768].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author banker0679
            uhhh no.

            I'm telling you with dealing with multiple sites from different clients that had this problem

            I'm not telling you from what i think is correct or my theories

            I'm basing this on experience

            You tell me what articles/press releases/websites show up in the top 100 placements that all have the SAME CONTENT, and have been there for over 1 month?

            It isn't in just the 'top 10'

            You're obviously not aware of the recent Google filters for duplicate content

            You need to read what I wrote...

            If you write something on your website and it's scraped by hundreds of sites...YOUR site will APPEAR at the top IF your site is MORE AUTHORITATIVE THAN THE OTHER SITES.

            If NY Times reposts your article then your site will be pushed down the rankings while NY Time will rank AND stay there.

            You're thinking of 'what makes sense' but I'm telling you from experience.
            HUGE DIFFERENCE!

            You also state that it depends on backlinks if you want to outrank the original article lol
            Then you say that many innocent sites would be gone. So which one is it?

            Go get some experience and stop posting 'what you think' may happen

            Originally Posted by kkchoon View Post

            Nope, duplicate content only apply in 2 ways:

            1. Google "TRY NOT TO" show duplicate content in the top 10 result for a particular keyword.

            2. Google will ignore one of your article that post twice or more on your own site.

            If you are referring duplicate content scrap from other website or article directories, you are WRONG!

            If this kind of duplicate content filter exists, many news sites and auto blog will be filtered! But my experience tells me otherwise.

            It all depends on your backlinks, as long as you have a lot of backlinks, you can outrank original poster for the same article!

            It doesn't make sense to filter duplicate articles, may be that article just too good not to spread it? If Google filter website based on this rule, many innocent sites will be gone! And that is very bad for Google, because Google is trying hard to provide as much useful information as possible, filtering those sites will limit Google data source.

            - Kok Choon
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146576].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mattiyu
    Thanks crew chief, great points!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1146861].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
    A quick update, we've viewed the sites in question and identified what the issue(s) are and why the primary site in questioned was "sand boxed" and it definitely was sand boxed! The other sites experienced what we classify as "Collateral damage." Djbory could recover the primary site if he wanted to.

    @ kkchoon - you were right! This had nothing to do with the three way linking system. I'm familiar with the system by JL, don't currently use it but that system (which is a great system) had no bearing on this issue.

    @ Paxton - you were right! Looks like the site came on the Google radar and was sent to Human review for further review and got SLAMMED into the proverbial sand box.

    @ Steve Crooks - you hit the nail on the head dead on! The website overall failed on the forth point you made when you said, "They are putting a lot more emphasis on visitor experience with your sites."

    As soon as I take care of the paying clients - I'll post the detailed analysis.
    Signature
    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1147210].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

      A quick update, we've viewed the sites in question and identified what the issue(s) are and why the primary site in questioned was "sand boxed" and it definitely was sand boxed! The other sites experienced what we classify as "Collateral damage." Djbory could recover the primary site if he wanted to.

      @ kkchoon - you were right! This had nothing to do with the three way linking system. I'm familiar with the system by JL, don't currently use it but that system (which is a great system) had no bearing on this issue.

      @ Paxton - you were right! Looks like the site came on the Google radar and was sent to Human review for further review and got SLAMMED into the proverbial sand box.

      @ Steve Crooks - you hit the nail on the head dead on! The website overall failed on the forth point you made when you said, "They are putting a lot more emphasis on visitor experience with your sites."

      As soon as I take care of the paying clients - I'll post the detailed analysis.
      Thanks a lot... I will be wating for your conclusion to start working on my sites
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1147389].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
    Here is the site analysis of the website in question...

    Site Analysis:
    Website Age (Feb 24 09)
    Website objective (Affiliate)
    404 not found pages (2)
    Redirects (2)
    Content pages (0)*
    Privacy Policy (0)*
    Sitemap (√)
    Duplicate Content (√)*
    Link farm (No)
    Bad Neighborhood (No)
    Internal links (7)
    External links (98) on Home page
    External links (250) on 7 internal pages
    Links to risky web properties, i.e., bad neighborhoods (0)
    Blog Spam Links (8)*
    Site a = 98.31%
    Site b = 56.25%
    Site c = 52.37%
    Site d = 40.64%
    Site e = 40.64%
    Site f = 40.64%
    Site g = 98.31%
    Site h = 58.00%

    *Blog Spam Links = This indicates that the domain that the page exists on has a high occurrence of links that appear to be from blogs. While this is normal in many cases, such as with forums or other blogs, for many commercial websites this could indicate an attempt to increase search engine rankings through blog comment spamming.

    *Content pages = this site has no content. Meaning no articles that ads value to the surfer's experience.

    *Duplicate Content = duplicate content consists of scraped sales pages.


    404 not found pages = The 404 error means the page we attempted to spider does not exist. While missing pages in and of themselves are not signs of a bad neighborhood, it may mean that the site linking to the missing page is not updated as frequently as it should. The general consensus is that search engines may determine that a site that leads to many 404s should have a lower trust factor.

    * Privacy Policy = This site has an "Incomplete or bad Privacy Policy"

    Overall, the site was Sand Boxed due to the fact that it was recently launched (Feb 2009) and took on an aggressive link building campaign. This would not have been a problem except for these factors:

    (a). The site has absolutely NO content whatsoever
    (b). It has a total of 348 outgoing links, all "Do follow"
    (c). It is linked to questionable Spam commenting blogs on 8 occasions
    (d). The primary objective of the site is one particular Affiliate program, however, it (the site) appears to attempt to divert surfers to click on one of 200+ outgoing links.

    What brought the site on the Google radar was the fact that it was new and rapidly grew backlinks. Again, in and of itself, that isn't a problem; it happens everyday! The problem was, this site was turned over to a human for analysis. Once reviewed, there was no way it was going to pass considering the above factors.


    Got to get back to the paid clients...


    I'll comeback with some final thoughts on recovery...
    Signature
    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1147773].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author djbory
      Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

      Here is the site analysis of the website in question...

      Site Analysis:
      Website Age (Feb 24 09)
      Website objective (Affiliate)
      404 not found pages (2)
      Redirects (2)
      Content pages (0)*
      Privacy Policy (0)*
      Sitemap (√)
      Duplicate Content (√)*
      Link farm (No)
      Bad Neighborhood (No)
      Internal links (7)
      External links (98) on Home page
      External links (250) on 7 internal pages
      Links to risky web properties, i.e., bad neighborhoods (0)
      Blog Spam Links (8)*
      Site a = 98.31%
      Site b = 56.25%
      Site c = 52.37%
      Site d = 40.64%
      Site e = 40.64%
      Site f = 40.64%
      Site g = 98.31%
      Site h = 58.00%

      *Blog Spam Links = This indicates that the domain that the page exists on has a high occurrence of links that appear to be from blogs. While this is normal in many cases, such as with forums or other blogs, for many commercial websites this could indicate an attempt to increase search engine rankings through blog comment spamming.

      *Content pages = this site has no content. Meaning no articles that ads value to the surfer's experience.

      *Duplicate Content = duplicate content consists of scraped sales pages.


      404 not found pages = The 404 error means the page we attempted to spider does not exist. While missing pages in and of themselves are not signs of a bad neighborhood, it may mean that the site linking to the missing page is not updated as frequently as it should. The general consensus is that search engines may determine that a site that leads to many 404s should have a lower trust factor.

      * Privacy Policy = This site has an "Incomplete or bad Privacy Policy"

      Overall, the site was Sand Boxed due to the fact that it was recently launched (Feb 2009) and took on an aggressive link building campaign. This would not have been a problem except for these factors:

      (a). The site has absolutely NO content whatsoever
      (b). It has a total of 348 outgoing links, all "Do follow"
      (c). It is linked to questionable Spam commenting blogs on 8 occasions
      (d). The primary objective of the site is one particular Affiliate program, however, it (the site) appears to attempt to divert surfers to click on one of 200+ outgoing links.

      What brought the site on the Google radar was the fact that it was new and rapidly grew backlinks. Again, in and of itself, that isn't a problem; it happens everyday! The problem was, this site was turned over to a human for analysis. Once reviewed, there was no way it was going to pass considering the above factors.


      Got to get back to the paid clients...


      I'll comeback with some final thoughts on recovery...
      Thanks Crew, but you focus the analysis on the wrong site. As I explained to you I gave you the URL for that site just in case there was some kind of pattern on all my sites, but as I told you that site was not built with the purpose of SEO whatsoever.

      It was built with the idea to promote a product Launch with articles. I didn't even build backlinks to that site; not even one. All the backlinks came from the 3 way link service. That's why all the outbound links.

      I didn't even bother creating content for that site. However, that site was in first page of google for about 2 months before it was banned.

      And I didn't even care when it was banned or sadboxed because the conversions were near to zero. I just worried there was some kind of pattern with all my sites, that's the only reason I sent you that URL

      I PM you regarding the other sites..
      Signature
      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1147902].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
        Originally Posted by djbory View Post

        Thanks Crew, but you focus the analysis on the wrong site. As I explained to you I gave you the URL for that site just in case there was some kind of pattern on all my sites, but as I told you that site was not built with the purpose of SEO whatsoever.

        It was built with the idea to promote a product Launch with articles. I didn't even build backlinks to that site; not even one. All the backlinks came from the 3 way link service. That's why all the outbound links.

        I didn't even bother creating content for that site. However, that site was in first page of google for about 2 months before it was banned.

        And I didn't even care when it was banned or sadboxed because the conversions were near to zero. I just worried there was some kind of pattern with all my sites, that's the only reason I sent you that URL

        I PM you regarding the other sites..
        @ djbory, actually I started off with the first site that fell off, to see how/if it impacted the other site(s). We'll have a detailed analysis either late this evening or first thing tomorrow morning.
        Signature
        Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

        SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1148546].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author djbory
          Thanks so much Chief, I really appreciate you're doing this...
          Signature
          >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

          Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1148615].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author djbory
            Good News! #1 on Google!!!

            Guess I'm Getting The Hang Of This... See it right here...:rolleyes:

            Banned From Google Careful

            Djbory
            Signature
            >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

            Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1148819].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
            Originally Posted by djbory View Post

            Thanks so much Chief, I really appreciate you're doing this...
            Here is the analysis for the site in question...

            Site Analysis:
            Website Age (Oct 24 08)
            Website objective (Affiliate)
            404 not found pages (0)
            Dead pages ()*
            Redirects (7)
            Content pages (13)*
            Duplicate Content (√)*
            Privacy Policy (0)*
            Sitemap (√)*
            Internal linking structure (?)*
            Link farm (No)
            Bad Neighborhood (No)
            Internal links (13)
            External links (245)*
            Links to risky web properties, i.e., bad neighborhoods (1)
            Blog Spam Links (11)*
            Site a = 40.64%
            Site b = 40.64%
            Site c = 40.64%
            Site d = 48.79%
            Site e = 40.64%
            Site f = 42.22%
            Site g = 41.37%
            Site h = 53.33%
            Site i = 73.07%
            Site j = 72.68%
            Site k = 48.79%

            *Links to risky web properties = your site is linked to a questionable website, "pokermoneyclips" that is deemed as a bad neighborhood.

            *Dead pages = these are pages that you have either abandoned or forgotten. Since they are not on your sitemap, this could be construed as an attempt to manipulate the search engines. The solution to the problem is to perform a website cleanup and remove orphaned files and any other files that are deemed, "Not being used." This would also include all of the dead pages such as: /article1.html

            *Site has an invalid BBB logo. If this site came under human review, which it most likely since it was linked to a site that was sand boxed, this would have been an automatic RED FLAG. Improper use of the BBB logo is a trademark infringement. To see how the BBB deals with violators look here: BBB Logo Use Violators - Southern Piedmont - Charlotte NC. You also have a second invalid logo from another company that provides trust certifications.

            *Blog Spam Links = This indicates that the domain that the page exists on has a high occurrence of links that appear to be from blogs. While this is normal in many cases, such as with forums or other blogs, for many commercial websites this could indicate an attempt to increase search engine rankings through blog comment spamming. If this site came on the human review, which as stated previously, it most, likely did, this Blog Spam Link pattern sets off a MAJOR red flag; only because you have the same IP address connecting to four different web properties. There's nothing natural about that. :confused:


            *Duplicate Content = duplicate content consists of articles scraped from Article directories. This in and of itself is not bad. The problem is, you're using articles duplicated by numerous other websites.


            * Privacy Policy = This site has an "Incomplete or bad Privacy Policy" See this site for an example of a privacy policy that meets Google's standards.

            *Internal linking structure = your internal linking structure is essentially non-existent. Meaning you have a few pages within the site linking to the homepage. :confused:

            Overall, the KEYWORDS (those that highly ranked and otherwise) on this website were filtered from the SERPs due to the fact that it was linked to questionable site, in addition to duplicate content issue and some of the aforementioned infractions.

            PLEASE NOTE: This site was not banned, neither was it de-indexed; it was filtered from the SERPs, (A.K.A) sand boxed. Meaning, if you make the proper corrections, you will see the same or better results in the SERPS.

            Your suggested course of action...

            (1). Remove the aforementioned logos
            (2). Perform a website clean up and remove ALL dead pages and orphaned files
            (3). Revamp your Privacy Policy (Google takes this more serious than you think)
            (4). Install a "Sitemap" in line with Google's suggestions (Your current Sitemap doesn't meet Google's suggestions)
            (5). Acquire unique content, (P.S keep the same keyword density from the current articles)
            (6). Slowly remove duplicate content by replacing it with Unique Content
            (7). Remove the External link pages (over 200 links)
            (8). Place "No Follow" tags on your Affiliate links and on most external links
            (9). Establish an Internal linking system that links pages within the site to other pages within the site.
            (10). When you can, put each website on a separate IP address. Until then, your money makers definitely should be separated from the pack.

            (11). The overall design of your site is negatively impacting your CTR
            (a). Place navigation menu on all pages
            (b). The color scheme should be the same throughout the entire website. Right now it looks like two separate websites
            (c). Upgrade header
            (d). Place footer on all pages
            There is no need resubmit your site to the SEs, being that it was not banned, as you make those changes, (at the top of the list is acquiring unique content, you'll pick right up where you left off.
            Signature
            Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

            SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1150744].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author djbory
              Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

              this Blog Spam Link pattern sets off a MAJOR red flag; only because you have the same IP address connecting to four different web properties. There's nothing natural about that. :confused:
              Chief I don't want to take more of your time but in order to fix everything I need to make sure I understand.

              I didn't know that commenting in blogs could be a bad thing......

              What do you mean by: "you have the same IP address connecting to four different web properties",

              I have a hosgator reseller account....

              Djbory
              Signature
              >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

              Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152925].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
                Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                Chief I don't want to take more of your time but in order to fix everything I need to make sure I understand.

                I didn't know that commenting in blogs could be a bad thing......

                What do you mean by: "you have the same IP address connecting to four different web properties",

                I have a hosgator reseller account....

                Djbory
                In the report you see four sites with a degree of spam at 40.64%. See below.

                Blog Spam Links (11)*
                Site a = 40.64%
                Site b = 40.64%
                Site c = 40.64%

                Site d = 48.79%
                Site e = 40.64%
                Site f = 42.22%
                Site g = 41.37%
                Site h = 53.33%
                Site i = 73.07%
                Site j = 72.68%
                Site k = 48.79%

                We checked, and all of those sites were on the same Class C IP address. You either, posted comments to those blogs, not realizing they were on the same IP address. Or, You probably, (most likely) established links with sites that have a high degree of links versus content. In and of itself, those numbers wouldn't have triggered a Google Red Alert, but when you factored in all of the other conditions surrounding your site, Google erred on the side of caution by filtering out your sites on the SERPs.

                And just so you know, that percentage means that 40.64% of what's on that blog(s) is comments and/or links versus content. That's not good and it's not natural. Google doesn't reveal what type of balance they'd like to see, but the general rule seems to be 70% content and 30% comments. REMEMBER, this is a general rule of thumb, not law. Some of your sites, due to the HIGH DEGREE of out going links failed that general rule of thumb. We didn't perform a backwards analysis on the 40.64% sites to pinpoint the offending sites, (that wasn't necessary).

                "I didn't know that commenting in blogs could be a bad thing..." It is not when done in a planned,well thought out manner. But going blog commenting crazy will get a person noticed by the Google Web Spam Team.

                "I have a hosgator reseller account...." You're good here, most definitely! Once you clear up the out going link issue, you'll be fine!
                Signature
                Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

                SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1153528].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                  ahhah crewchief seriously...how long have you been doing SEO?

                  I'm getting a good laugh about your postings, and other noobs are believing everything you say.

                  Google doesnt penalize you for spam backlinks...they devalue them...rendering them useless

                  Also..having backlinks from the different IP addresses isn't worth much more than having all the links on the same IP.

                  I know and see many sites that create partner pages with different topic but same niche...and do RECIPROCAL LINKING across 5-6 sites...and rank on page 1 of Google.....all on the same hosting account AND same owners
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1153784].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author djbory
                    Originally Posted by banker0679 View Post


                    having backlinks from the different IP addresses isn't worth much more than having all the links on the same IP.

                    I know and see many sites that create partner pages with different topic but same niche...and do RECIPROCAL LINKING across 5-6 sites...and rank on page 1 of Google.....all on the same hosting account AND same owners
                    Hey banker, your post is open to a big interesting discussion. I'm not an expert whatsoever, but I've always heard that Google devaluates links that comes from the same IP address...

                    There are some called experts that swear that Google can even penalize you for having so many links from one IP address, because they interpret the action as a trying to manipulate the rankings... Not to mention the same account... Just a comment... :confused:

                    Djbory
                    Signature
                    >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                    Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1154968].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                      penalty and devalue are two different things

                      I'm on the side of the fence that always put things on different IPs...or used to be
                      I have a few friends who have 5-6 websites about the same thing..and reciprocal link all of the sites together.....and they rank VERY WELL for VERY COMPETITIVE TERMS

                      After seeing soo many sites that are on the same IP and ranking very high.....it just makes me see that it's a myth.

                      I was always a believer of different IPs then I started a new website(s) placed them all on hostgator...and they all rank well for competitive keywords. These links are reciprocal links and on the same IP..and it's no problem.

                      Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                      Hey banker, your post is open to a big interesting discussion. I'm not an expert whatsoever, but I've always heard that Google devaluates links that comes from the same IP address...

                      There are some called experts that swear that Google can even penalize you for having so many links from one IP address, because they interpret the action as a trying to manipulate the rankings... Not to mention the same account... Just a comment... :confused:

                      Djbory
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1154982].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                    Originally Posted by banker0679 View Post

                    ahhah crewchief seriously...how long have you been doing SEO?

                    I'm getting a good laugh about your postings, and other noobs are believing everything you say.
                    Unfortunately I am going to have to agree with you here. The analysis is fairly easy to do and all that is happening here is that the analysis is being stated followed by a whole lot of conjecture. Basically a whole bunch of things with the hope that one will stick.

                    djbory I apologize if am off but based on everything I have read I think your problem is not related to one or even two things but to your approach. It seems clear you haven't concentrated on content. Gurus and those trying to position themselves as Gurus always like to point out things that got your sites de-indexed or penalized but the truth is with hundreds of things Google looks at it is never that simple.

                    Thats why these arguments break out. Some people use three way links no problem, some people have links from the same IPs no problem, some people link to penalized sites and see no problem. Why? Because for some sites they aren't a problem. Google looks at a whole range of things and a site that has decent content, inspires totally natural links and is not involved in multiple actions that raise red flags may in fact do fine even breaking one of these rules.

                    If you are relying on link tricks and duplicated content (that probably wasn't even good content before it was duplicated) the chances are high you could change the link trick to another one and end up with the same result.
                    Signature

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1155543].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author djbory
                      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post


                      Thats why these arguments break out. Some people use three way links no problem, some people have links from the same IPs no problem, some people link to penalized sites and see no problem. Why? Because for some sites they aren't a problem. Google looks at a whole range of things and a site that has decent content, inspires totally natural links and is not involved in multiple actions that raise red flags may in fact do fine even breaking one of these rules.
                      I happen to agree with you totally in this part of this post... You may do many things that some Gurus deem wrong in Google eyes and still do very Good in Google... but the problem is if you breaking all Google guidelines or , let's say: Imers guidelines, and your ranks suddenly go to hell, then you won't know what really happened, which is my case...

                      After all I think is better to do everything the best way possible, just to be on the safe side... The analysis of Crew Chief was very well done and very professional... And he pointed out many things that I can do to improve my site...

                      Banker is right in the fact that I don't know yet what caused my sites to suddenly lose all rankings... After all, I was in Google first page for over 3 months with my site the way it was... Obviously something happens....
                      As Crew Chief said, maybe the sites got under Google radar and went for human review...

                      But, I want to express my very personal point here: if sites go under Google radar that often, there's no way so many affiliate sites would still be on first page...

                      Let's be honest guys... How many affiliate sites do you think would pass a Google Human review? Maybe CNN or National Geographic... I watch some of the sites that are still ranking first page of Google for my keywords and I hit myself on the keyboard... Those sites suck in every single point Crew Chief exposed and on many more small details and yet they are still there thriving... Why is that???

                      I guy I respect a lot, Steve Clayton from ComBlue says, Google doesn't give a dam about content... it is all about backlinks...

                      I just don't know anymore....
                      Signature
                      >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

                      Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1155612].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                        Originally Posted by djbory View Post

                        I guy I respect a lot, Steve Clayton from ComBlue says, Google doesn't give a dam about content... it is all about backlinks...

                        I just don't know anymore....
                        Are you referring to this terribly headlined article?


                        Does Google Really Care about Content? | The Internet Marketing Blueprint

                        because its one of the most misleading titles to come out this year. Read the report and you'll wonder why Steve would write such a thing except for creating controversial link bait. He also seems to censor his comments when anyone points out the problems with this article. His blog but if you write a controversial piece I think you should be open enough to take some hard critiques. Not tearing down Steve. I just think in this case he got carried away writing a controversial piece for backlinks.

                        Steve doesn't prove anything about Google not caring about content in this research. He shows ONLY that PR is not affected by content. Now here is what you need to know.

                        PR is NOT the only key ingredient in how your site is ranked in search results -FACT. CNN is one of the few remaining PR 10 sites and they do NOT rank number one for every key word or phrase they mention.

                        On Warriors probably the most well known case of rankings is Angela's ranking for the word "backlink" but what everyone skips over is that her ranking is for a CONTENT rich page. Its a good article about backlinks not a keyword spamming piece. As you move down the first page of search results for "backlink" you can see lower PR sites beating higher PR sites.

                        So even in the case of Angela's "backlink" results the facts prove that high PR backlinks combined with good content is very effective and that google DOES care about content. I don't mean to step on toes here but isn't this ridiculous? Whats the number one mission of a search engine? Isn't it to give relevant content? With the hundreds of things that google looks at isn't it foolish to claim that content is not in there?

                        Don't believe it. Do some searches and you will see lower PR sites beating higher PR ranked sites in search positioning over and over again. Use a good SEO plugin for Firefox that gives you the PR. Doesn't take long and it will destroy this false idea that PR is all there is and that content doesn't matter.

                        True - nothing beats a human reader to determine good content so Google will NEVER be even near perfect in finding the best content but there is absolutely NO DOUBT that Google looks at the page that is linked to and analyzes it - From the domain name, to the page name, to the H1 tags to the keywords on the page. Those are VERY well known and hint at even more lesser known and even secret ingredients to do with content.

                        Example - Is it just a coincidence that Angela's backlink article uses a number of keywords that are related to the word backlink that she is targeting? Even some of those that are listed by Google as related in their keyword analysis tool? Does Google just ignore that when an article on a subject is well written it tends to have related words on the page as well as the word or phrase being targeted? That would be brain dead.
                        Signature

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1156376].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author cagliostro
                          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                          Are you referring to this terribly headlined article?


                          Does Google Really Care about Content? | The Internet Marketing Blueprint
                          I will have to disagree.

                          I'm working for two years in a travel niche. The top 5 are, Wikipedia, the website of the official tourism bureau of the city, and 3rd there is a pure junk website.

                          That 3rd website has ONLY a huge number of backlinks and it is 15 years old. For me, it should be in page 100.

                          So, if Google does care about content, how do you explain the above ?

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1364222].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author dburk
                            Originally Posted by cagliostro View Post

                            I will have to disagree.

                            I'm working for two years in a travel niche. The top 5 are, Wikipedia, the website of the official tourism bureau of the city, and 3rd there is a pure junk website.

                            That 3rd website has ONLY a huge number of backlinks and it is 15 years old. For me, it should be in page 100.

                            So, if Google does care about content, how do you explain the above ?

                            Hi cagliostro,

                            I'm not sure which keyword you are referring to, the search term "travel" returns:
                            1. orbitz.com
                            2. expedia.com
                            3. tarvelocity.com
                            4. priceline.com
                            5. hotwire.com

                            This seems relevant to me. I assume you must be referring to a slightly more obscure keyword with less commercial value.

                            What you think of as a "pure junk website" might be considered as very useful by Google and their users. It sounds like you are describing what is known as a "Hub" website which users, and Google, find to be very useful websites that aggregate and organize a collection of resources on a particular topic.

                            You see it doesn't matter what you personally see as quality, only what Google, or Google's users deem to be valuable. You may want to reevaluate your methods and do research on why a website like that may prove to be useful to search engine users.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1364899].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                              Exactly - seems like its a search term with a city name. Site might be junk to him but considered an authority site on the city by google. Far be it from me to be denying the power of backlinks since I sell a backlink package but content does also matter
                              Signature

                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1365235].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author cagliostro
                                Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                Exactly - seems like its a search term with a city name. Site might be junk to him but considered an authority site on the city by google. Far be it from me to be denying the power of backlinks since I sell a backlink package but content does also matter
                                Right, it is a city name.

                                And, believe me, it is pure junk for everybody's criteria. BUT Google.

                                But has tones of backlinks and some really good ones from authority websites, i have no idea how they did that.
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1366851].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author cagliostro
                              Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                              Hi cagliostro,

                              I'm not sure which keyword you are referring to, the search term "travel" returns:
                              1. orbitz.com
                              2. expedia.com
                              3. tarvelocity.com
                              4. priceline.com
                              5. hotwire.com

                              This seems relevant to me. I assume you must be referring to a slightly more obscure keyword with less commercial value.

                              What you think of as a "pure junk website" might be considered as very useful by Google and their users. It sounds like you are describing what is known as a "Hub" website which users, and Google, find to be very useful websites that aggregate and organize a collection of resources on a particular topic.

                              You see it doesn't matter what you personally see as quality, only what Google, or Google's users deem to be valuable. You may want to reevaluate your methods and do research on why a website like that may prove to be useful to search engine users.
                              I don't speak for the "travel" keyword but for the general travel niche. So your example is meaningless.

                              And the website i'm talking about is pure junk and on #3 of first page at Google.

                              I think i know what a junk website is.

                              For me Google doesn't always care for content and quality. I see that in a huge ammount of "Work from Home" pyramide companies, Adsense publishes in one website i run about Jobs.
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1366416].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author dburk
                                Originally Posted by cagliostro View Post

                                I don't speak for the "travel" keyword but for the general travel niche. So your example is meaningless.

                                And the website i'm talking about is pure junk and on #3 of first page at Google.

                                I think i know what a junk website is.

                                For me Google doesn't always care for content and quality. I see that in a huge ammount of "Work from Home" pyramide companies, Adsense publishes in one website i run about Jobs.
                                Hi cagliostro,

                                You may find it helpful to think like a search engine, or a search engine user. Search engines retrieve results based on keywords, not "general" industry niches. They rank those results by relevance primarily and use signals from users and other webmasters to sub-sort these results by usefulness.

                                When you make a judgement on a web page's quality it is subjective, while the search engines are only capable of objective judgments. They use a set of rules to decide what is useful to users and that is their qualitative process.

                                My point is that it's more useful to learn and understand how search engines evaluate and rank web pages then to use our own subjective judgments of a page's quality. The keyword that you feel represents the "general travel niche" could be a keyword that is rather ambiguous and has little competition, therefore the SE has little choice about what to display.

                                By the way, the following websites are the top ranked for the keyword "jobs" on Google:
                                1. careerbuilder.com
                                2. monster.com
                                3. indeed.com
                                4. jobs.com
                                5. snapjobs.com

                                Again these results seem very relevant to me, looks like Google's ranking algorithm is working just fine. Google is primarily interested in relevance, and they leave the subjective judgments of quality to users, following the signals received by their users. One man's junk is another man's useful content.
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1366812].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
                                  Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                  My point is that it's more useful to learn and understand how search engines evaluate and rank web pages then to use our own subjective judgments of a page's quality. The keyword that you feel represents the "general travel niche" could be a keyword that is rather ambiguous and has little competition, therefore the SE has little choice about what to display.

                                  By the way, the following websites are the top ranked for the keyword "jobs" on Google:
                                  1. careerbuilder.com
                                  2. monster.com
                                  3. indeed.com
                                  4. jobs.com
                                  5. snapjobs.com

                                  Again these results seem very relevant to me, looks like Google's ranking algorithm is working just fine. Google is primarily interested in relevance, and they leave the subjective judgments of quality to users, following the signals received by their users. One man's junk is another man's useful content.
                                  Somehow Google know how to connect all relevant result together, that lead to a myth that relevant link help in ranking...

                                  But is relevancy linking really a myth?

                                  Can you share more about your experience?
                                  Signature

                                  Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1366862].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author cagliostro
                                  Originally Posted by dburk View Post


                                  When you make a judgement on a web page's quality it is subjective, while the search engines are only capable of objective judgments. They use a set of rules to decide what is useful to users and that is their qualitative process.

                                  My point is that it's more useful to learn and understand how search engines evaluate and rank web pages then to use our own subjective judgments of a page's quality. The keyword that you feel represents the "general travel niche" could be a keyword that is rather ambiguous and has little competition, therefore the SE has little choice about what to display.
                                  I don't think so. A website that is attractive and usefull, stands out easily. Subjective maybe a good looking shoe or a shirt, even a good looking woman. Not a website.

                                  I'm working on that specific niche for 2 years now. I have studied all websites upto page 5, each and every.

                                  This particular website has nothing BUT backlings. So for me, backlinks are the N1 important thing for Google.

                                  Keep in mind that this website i'm talking about, is nowhere in yahoo or bing (at least not in the 1st 10 pages).
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1366867].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                    Originally Posted by cagliostro View Post

                                    I don't think so. A website that is attractive and usefull, stands out easily. Subjective maybe a good looking shoe or a shirt, even a good looking woman. Not a website.

                                    Hi again Cagliostro,

                                    Google never sees whether a site is attactive unless there is a human reviewing it. the crawler that indexes your site coudl care less about attractive.

                                    This particular website has nothing BUT backlings. So for me, backlinks are the N1 important thing for Google.
                                    I'd agree with that andd I'd add that it might be much more important for your niche keywords

                                    Certain highly niched keywords Google might not do a greatjob in assessing relevant keywords and content. However it doesn't translate to an across the board truth for all of google's search engine.

                                    Are backlinks critical? ABSOLUTELY. You might also want to check the kind of backlinks they have. Alot of people (especially list packet sellers) like to talk about High PR sites but they don't talk about how the number of people using the links translate to a diluted Pagerank flowing from those links. Google has made it absolutely clear that PR juice degrades and divides according to the number of backlinks coming from a site.

                                    Your competitor might be using or getting backlinks that are more exclusive and not ones that are diluted by thousands of users putting up multiple backlinks..
                                    Signature

                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1366992].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author dburk
                                    Originally Posted by cagliostro View Post

                                    I don't think so. A website that is attractive and usefull, stands out easily. Subjective maybe a good looking shoe or a shirt, even a good looking woman. Not a website.

                                    I'm working on that specific niche for 2 years now. I have studied all websites upto page 5, each and every.

                                    This particular website has nothing BUT backlings. So for me, backlinks are the N1 important thing for Google.

                                    Keep in mind that this website i'm talking about, is nowhere in yahoo or bing (at least not in the 1st 10 pages).
                                    Hi cagliostro,

                                    Again, it's not about what you think, it's about what Google thinks. Apparently Google thinks this page merits that ranking, so it does.

                                    I'm not sure what you mean by "This particular website has nothing BUT backlings." Do you mean to say it has no visible content, or that the content is made up of nothing but outbound links? I'm not sure why you think this "junk" page has no usefulness. Could you elaborate on the contents of that page?
                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367138].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
                                      Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                      Hi cagliostro,

                                      Again, it's not about what you think, it's about what Google thinks. Apparently Google thinks this page merits that ranking, so it does.

                                      I'm not sure what you mean by "This particular website has nothing BUT backlings." Do you mean to say it has no visible content, or that the content is made up of nothing but outbound links? I'm not sure why you think this "junk" page has no usefulness. Could you elaborate on the contents of that page?
                                      Google think? Google just follow links...

                                      Recently the new Google caffeine thing may add more focus for on page optimization too!

                                      From previous experience, Google don't really care about the content, although they really want their SERP to be useful, but they still base their ranking decision on backlinks, relevant or not.
                                      Signature

                                      Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367483].message }}
                                      • Profile picture of the author dburk
                                        Originally Posted by kkchoon View Post

                                        Google think? Google just follow links...

                                        Recently the new Google caffeine thing may add more focus for on page optimization too!

                                        From previous experience, Google don't really care about the content, although they really want their SERP to be useful, but they still base their ranking decision on backlinks, relevant or not.
                                        Hi kkchoon,

                                        I have to disagree, Google does care about content. Their algorithms are tuned to read the content and apply a formula to determine relevance. Their SERP list pages based on relevance.

                                        While inbound links are important, it's how they effect the relevance of the page that matters. Relevant inbound links will improve a page's relevancy score while irrelevant pages do not.

                                        If a page has no relevant content for a particular keyword you can have all the irrelevant backlinks you want and never show up in the SERP. There has to be some signals that indicate the page is relevant to a particular keyword to show up in the SERP.

                                        Some folks think that the aesthetics of your web page plays a role, I think it plays no direct role in SERP rankings. It could influence human behavior which might indirectly influence ranking but it is typically minimal at best.

                                        There is no easy and reliable way that a search engine can evaluate quality of content, this they leave to human behavior. Google uses a number of signals from human behavior that they can easily measure to get indicators infer quality or usefulness.

                                        Backlinks are among those human behavioral indicators. If webmasters of other important websites are linking to your page then that is considered a vote for the usefulness or quality of your content. However, if a page about snake charming, with absolutely no content about auto insurance, links to a page about auto insurance, it may contribute to the total PR of that page but not to the relevance nor towards ranking for auto insurance.
                                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367665].message }}
                                        • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                                          not true

                                          look into 'google bombing'

                                          you'll see that the anchor text doesnt even have to be about what's on the page for it to work

                                          doing so with what the other poster recommended will be a minigoogle bomb...which still works






                                          Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                          Hi kkchoon,

                                          I have to disagree, Google does care about content. Their algorithms are tuned to read the content and apply a formula to determine relevance. Their SERP list pages based on relevance.

                                          While inbound links are important, it's how they effect the relevance of the page that matters. Relevant inbound links will improve a page's relevancy score while irrelevant pages do not.

                                          If a page has no relevant content for a particular keyword you can have all the irrelevant backlinks you want and never show up in the SERP. There has to be some signals that indicate the page is relevant to a particular keyword to show up in the SERP.

                                          Some folks think that the aesthetics of your web page plays a role, I think it plays no direct role in SERP rankings. It could influence human behavior which might indirectly influence ranking but it is typically minimal at best.

                                          There is no easy and reliable way that a search engine can evaluate quality of content, this they leave to human behavior. Google uses a number of signals from human behavior that they can easily measure to get indicators infer quality or usefulness.

                                          Backlinks are among those human behavioral indicators. If webmasters of other important websites are linking to your page then that is considered a vote for the usefulness or quality of your content. However, if a page about snake charming, with absolutely no content about auto insurance, links to a page about auto insurance, it may contribute to the total PR of that page but not to the relevance nor towards ranking for auto insurance.
                                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367687].message }}
                                        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                          Originally Posted by dburk View Post


                                          Some folks think that the aesthetics of your web page plays a role, I think it plays no direct role in SERP rankings.

                                          Too true Dburk. How could it? Google's crawling bot isn't a human being. Like any computer it recognizes just 1 s and 0s. Might as well expect a computer to pickout the best artist

                                          There is no easy and reliable way that a search engine can evaluate quality of content, this they leave to human behavior
                                          Mostly true but not entirely. There is a semantic relationships between words and phrases with other words and phrases when the content is relevant and of some quality. You are right its not reliable but it can come close in a number of niches. If you see an article about tooth brusshes and you see bristle, bristle count, various grades, peridontal diseases, Gingivitis and Dentist it IS more likely to be both relevant and of better quality than one that has brushes, sale, buy now and sparkling.
                                          Signature

                                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367800].message }}
                                          • Profile picture of the author dburk
                                            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                            Mostly true but not entirely. There is a semantic relationships between words and phrases with other words and phrases when the content is relevant and of some quality. You are right its not reliable but it can come close in a number of niches. If you see an article about tooth brusshes and you see bristle, bristle count, various grades, peridontal diseases, Gingivitis and Dentist it IS more likely to be both relevant and of better quality than one that has brushes, sale, buy now and sparkling.
                                            This relates to relevance, not quality, which was the exact point that I was trying to make.
                                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1368174].message }}
                                            • Profile picture of the author dburk
                                              Hi Kok Choon,

                                              You seem to be making my point. First you point out how relevant backlinks influence page relevance i.e. Google Bombing and then follow this up with why it doesn't matter. You seem to be arguring against your own point. :confused:

                                              When you say:
                                              "Unless you have proof or studies, I am not convinced that "relevant link" has anything to do with getting your keyword rank"
                                              I'd like to refer you to your own evidence used in the very same post:

                                              Google this keyword "coolest guy on the planet", you see the top 2 guys - Jonathan Leger and Brad Fallon. While Brad Fallon, non of the on page stuff found! That's Google Bomb!

                                              Massive backlinks with that keyword and "FORCE" Google to reckon it for the targeted keyword!
                                              So which is it? Relevant backlinks get you ranked for a targeted keyword or they don't? You just pointed out that Brad Fallon was ranked solely on the influence of backlinks that were relevant to a targeted keyword. It couldn't be on-page factors so it had to be relevant backlinks. Am I missing something? :confused:

                                              I must stress this:

                                              Relevant link don't help, but Relevant on page content and proper inner linking do helps in ranking for the targeted keywords!
                                              Here you seem to counter your previous point that Google doesn't care about content, only backlinks.

                                              I would love to see some evidence regarding relevant link help in keyword ranking, as oppose to non-relevant but high authority domain links. If you Google for Angela's backlinks, there are tons of testimonials from Warriors using irrelevant links to rank for their keywords, but I've yet seen any evidence on relevant link help to rank the keyword...
                                              Now here you are asking me to prove a negative. I challenge you to find a single example of a page ranking for a keyword where that page has no mention of that keyword nor does any of the inbound links. That would be evidence of irrelevant backlinks causing you to rank for a keyword. In the absence of such evidence I find as ample proof that irrelevant backlinks have no direct influence on ranking for a targeted keyword.

                                              I'm sure you will find folks that will say all kinds of unfounded claims, but where's the evidence? It's just empty words if there is no evidence. I challenge you to find a single example of irrelevant backlinks getting somebody ranked. I've never seen it and doubt you can find any evidence that it ever occurs.

                                              Angela herself has counseled folks on this forum about following her explicit instructions to ensure that the backlinks they create with her packets are made relevant to the keyword they are targeting. If you follow her instructions you will be creating relevant backlinks, if you don't make your backlinks relevant they don't help much. Relevance is paramount when it comes to backlinks.
                                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1368317].message }}
                                              • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
                                                Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                Hi Kok Choon,

                                                You seem to be making my point. First you point out how relevant backlinks influence page relevance i.e. Google Bombing and then follow this up with why it doesn't matter. You seem to be arguring against your own point. :confused:

                                                When you say:

                                                I'd like to refer you to your own evidence used in the very same post:

                                                So which is it? Relevant backlinks get you ranked for a targeted keyword or they don't? You just pointed out that Brad Fallon was ranked solely on the influence of backlinks that were relevant to a targeted keyword. It couldn't be on-page factors so it had to be relevant backlinks. Am I missing something? :confused:
                                                You call it relevant backlink, you should be more specific, that is call targeted keyword link.

                                                Just to clarify here:

                                                When you said relevant backlink, does it come from relevant content? I can always use unrelated content, and link it with "relevant" backlink to my site and still rank for that keyword.

                                                I am arguing the point - relevancy doesn't help!

                                                Many "expert" tell people to only get links from related niche, related blog, related sites, that is not true.

                                                Angela's backlinks are from all kind of sites, and it still works great! If

                                                relevant link = targeted keyword link

                                                I think we are just arguing the name, and there is no point arguing the name here.

                                                I must apologize for my misunderstanding!


                                                Originally Posted by dburk View Post


                                                Here you seem to counter your previous point that Google doesn't care about content, only backlinks.
                                                I think I must stress everything!

                                                There are 2 part, link from and link to. When I say Google doesn't care about content, I should stress this - Google doesn't care about the content link from!

                                                Can you agree on this? Google only care about the link keyword, they don't care about the link content.

                                                Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                Now here you are asking me to prove a negative. I challenge you to find a single example of a page ranking for a keyword where that page has no mention of that keyword nor does any of the inbound links. That would be evidence of irrelevant backlinks causing you to rank for a keyword. In the absence of such evidence I find as ample proof that irrelevant backlinks have no direct influence on ranking for a targeted keyword.
                                                I would love to accept your challenge, but we are not arguing the same thing, and in fact you agree to my point ! Alright, to be fair we both agree that link from relevant content and niche don't help, but link from "relevant link" or "targeted keyword" is a must!

                                                Can we agree on that or you want to "correct" me?

                                                Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                I'm sure you will find folks that will say all kinds of unfounded claims, but where's the evidence? It's just empty words if there is no evidence. I challenge you to find a single example of irrelevant backlinks getting somebody ranked. I've never seen it and doubt you can find any evidence that it ever occurs.
                                                Yes, I agree, that's why I must clarify everything here! Now we all agree that profile type link does work, and work very well!

                                                Just get links from any High Domain PR authority site will greatly help your site ranking, and the link doesn't really need to be from the same niche.

                                                Agree?
                                                Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                Angela herself has counseled folks on this forum about following her explicit instructions to ensure that the backlinks they create with her packets are made relevant to the keyword they are targeting. If you follow her instructions you will be creating relevant backlinks, if you don't make your backlinks relevant they don't help much. Relevance is paramount when it comes to backlinks.
                                                If you think I meant "you don't have to put the targeted keyword in the link", I must clarify here...

                                                I do see people using direct linking, that is not effective but it still works! When you gain tons of links from various places, quantity does matter! I see website with direct linking and still rank for their targeted keyword with old school on page optimization - putting keywords at the bottom of the site!

                                                This is still working but very inefficient! It might take 10 times or more links to achieve the wanted result as oppose to putting a "targeted keyword" in the link!

                                                Lastly, please accept my apology for misunderstanding Don Burk, and arguing something that doesn't exists!

                                                Kok Choon
                                                Signature

                                                Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

                                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1368902].message }}
                                                • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
                                                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                                  Overstated again. Perhaps its a language thing. I just wish you would stop repeating that because its misleading even though I think I get what you are trying to say. Its better to say Google doesn't care about content when it comes to the site you backlink from
                                                  Hi Mike! I just love you saying that "Overstated again."!

                                                  Thanks for pointing out, but what I really meant is source content, where the link comes from!

                                                  Any also, if you have enough backlinks that say otherwise, you can convince Google that your site is about that keyword!

                                                  If you look at Brad site, he is truly the SEO Guy! I can't found any on page keyword optimization and still rank 2nd!

                                                  The point here is not ranking #1 or #2, because the result is fluctuating! He needs a lot more links, may be 10 times more link to rank for that keyword without on page optimization!

                                                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                                  I think you and Dburk MAY be misunderstanding each other. Heres what he wrote

                                                  I took it that he meant "anchor text relevance" in the links which I think everyone admits is useful if not absolutely required and then he went on to talk about content on the page linked to. I'll leave it to him to clarify.
                                                  You are right, I apologize to Don, but if he don't meant "anchor text relevance", I would love to continue the debate !

                                                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                                  actually both. If what I am looking for is information about tooth brushes and not just wanting to buy one then an article that covers those important topics is going to be seen as quality as well.

                                                  I think kkchoon thinks you are saying that the site that gives you a backlinks has to have content on its page that is relevant to your own page content regardless of link text. If thats not it then I am not understanding him either and if you are implying that a link without relevant link text has no benefit I would agree with him.
                                                  Yes, that is what I think, and thanks for clarifying...

                                                  Now we all agree that High Domain PR links work even without the need to find relevant niche, relevant content on the link source, that's what I need to know!

                                                  Thanks Mike! For helping me clarifying everything, appreciate your help!

                                                  Kok Choon
                                                  Signature

                                                  Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

                                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1368925].message }}
                                                • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                                  Originally Posted by kkchoon View Post


                                                  Just get links from any High Domain PR authority site will greatly help your site ranking, and the link doesn't really need to be from the same niche.

                                                  Agree?
                                                  Well I agree here. I thought that might have been what you meant.


                                                  I do see people using direct linking, that is not effective but it still works! When you gain tons of links from various places, quantity does matter!
                                                  I agree with this as well. If I find a PR9 site I am not going to pass it up just because it doesn't allow me to post anchor text. I haven't found any evidence that a link without anchor text is treated by Google as no follow therefore it has some usefulness. Of course anchor text as you say is always better.

                                                  I know that there are some pretty popular people on Warriors that will disagree with me but I have seen ample evidence that Google has the ability to spot keyword anchor text spamming and that even in the abscence of that ability varying your linking strategy (not always using the same anchort text) if even a little bit has long term benefits.
                                                  Signature

                                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1368950].message }}
                                                  • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
                                                    Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                                    Well I agree here. I thought that might have been what you meant.

                                                    I agree with this as well. If I find a PR9 site I am not going to pass it up just because it doesn't allow me to post anchor text. I haven't found any evidence that a link without anchor text is treated by Google as no follow therefore it has some usefulness. Of course anchor text as you say is always better.

                                                    I know that there are some pretty popular people on Warriors that will disagree with me but I have seen ample evidence that Google has the ability to spot keyword anchor text spamming and that even in the abscence of that ability varying your linking strategy (not always using the same anchort text) if even a little bit has long term benefits.
                                                    That's what I keep telling people, you just can't ask everyone to agree with us, right... ?
                                                    Signature

                                                    Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

                                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1370228].message }}
                                                    • Profile picture of the author dburk
                                                      Hi kkchoon,

                                                      It sounds like you are starting to come around, let me clarify my point just a bit.

                                                      By relevant backlinks I do mean the content of the page where the link is "from". I think that you may be overlooking the fact that you must insert at least one HTML element on the page linked "from" to make that page (the page linked from) relevant.

                                                      After you have created your backlink, a process that requires you to insert HTML elements onto the linked "from" page, you will find that page has relevance simply by the act of using relevant anchor text. If you fail to make that page relevant, by inserting relevant anchor text, the backlink will still help you if other elements of that page are relevant. It is the relevance of the linking page, the page linked "from", that gives your backlink it's power to influence your target page's relevancy score.

                                                      Anchor text in outbound links is a well known factor in influencing a web page's relevance. This is why hub pages have so much ranking power. Relevance of the linked "from" page is the reason why you can rank very high for a competitive keyword with only a handful of well chosen backlinks.

                                                      So when you say relevance doesn't matter, I have to completely disagree, it is absolutely essential if that backlink is to give any direct benefit. While I hear some folks argue that the they really mean the website topic doesn't need to be relevant. I agree, search engines don't rank websites they rank web pages, the topic of your website almost never plays a direct role in SERP rankings. I have never argued that website topics are important for the ranking of a page.

                                                      A website's topic can influence the relevance of a page via inbound links, and it certainly may impact the relevance the page has to the human visitors if they navigate to that page from somewhere else on that website. A web page is part of a web of links to and from that page. That web doesn't necessarily need to be part of the main website, though it typically is, search engines examine that web for relevance and they are not much concerned with which site the page is part of.

                                                      When you create outbound links your are creating a web, and the pages you link to becomes part of that web, and pages they link to extend that web. Search engines like Google look at the relevance of that web as a way of scoring your page's relevance. Those factors, combined with your on-page relevance, result in a total relevancy score which a page is ranked by.

                                                      If you truly understand this concept, which is the basis for search engine ranking results, you would never say that relevance of a page where you place a backlink is not important. The more relevance that page has, the more power and influence it has to help you rank for your targeted keyword.
                                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1370750].message }}
                                                      • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
                                                        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                        Hi kkchoon,

                                                        It sounds like you are starting to come around, let me clarify my point just a bit.
                                                        I wish I am, but I still don't buy relevancy on the source site.

                                                        The reason - I've many sites that rank for my own targeted keywords with many links from forum, blogs and websites, these are profile type links, from different type of content site, and they all share the same thing - High Domain PR, but with different topic.

                                                        Not sure if this means anything to you, only the link has the relevant keyword to my site.

                                                        If you are referring to my link and keyword - yes, they are relevant, but site - no, they are definitely not...

                                                        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                        By relevant backlinks I do mean the content of the page where the link is "from". I think that you may be overlooking the fact that you must insert at least one HTML element on the page linked "from" to make that page (the page linked from) relevant.
                                                        Are you referring to a link?

                                                        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                        After you have created your backlink, a process that requires you to insert HTML elements onto the linked "from" page, you will find that page has relevance simply by the act of using relevant anchor text. If you fail to make that page relevant, by inserting relevant anchor text, the backlink will still help you if other elements of that page are relevant. It is the relevance of the linking page, the page linked "from", that gives your backlink it's power to influence your target page's relevancy score.
                                                        You mean many directly links to a site, and Google will use onpage factor to rank your site? Yes, I've seen that!

                                                        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                        Anchor text in outbound links is a well known factor in influencing a web page's relevance. This is why hub pages have so much ranking power. Relevance of the linked "from" page is the reason why you can rank very high for a competitive keyword with only a handful of well chosen backlinks.
                                                        What else matters beside link, I though link was the most important and may be the only factor affecting your ranking...

                                                        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                        So when you say relevance doesn't matter, I have to completely disagree, it is absolutely essential if that backlink is to give any direct benefit. While I hear some folks argue that the they really mean the website topic doesn't need to be relevant. I agree, search engines don't rank websites they rank web pages, the topic of your website almost never plays a direct role in SERP rankings. I have never argued that website topics are important for the ranking of a page.
                                                        Do you mean the web page content must be relevant to give good ranking?

                                                        or

                                                        Even if the web page content is irrelevant, but the keyword is relevant is enough?

                                                        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                        A website's topic can influence the relevance of a page via inbound links, and it certainly may impact the relevance the page has to the human visitors if they navigate to that page from somewhere else on that website. A web page is part of a web of links to and from that page. That web doesn't necessarily need to be part of the main website, though it typically is, search engines examine that web for relevance and they are not much concerned with which site the page is part of.
                                                        I really doubt that the source site relevancy content has much influence to the ranking of a targeted keyword that I try to rank, I find it more effective with 1 way High domain PR links.

                                                        Having said that, I must agree with you if you meant relevancy will help you rank for many keywords that we might not have in the anchor text!

                                                        The problem is, you need to find a lot of relevant sites and links, which are not easy to find by the way!

                                                        I would build my site with proper on page LSI and theme keywords in my categories to rank for potential long tail keywords that related to my topic, but I will focus on getting links from High Domain PR sites, it work faster this way.

                                                        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                        When you create outbound links your are creating a web, and the pages you link to becomes part of that web, and pages they link to extend that web. Search engines like Google look at the relevance of that web as a way of scoring your page's relevance. Those factors, combined with your on-page relevance, result in a total relevancy score which a page is ranked by.
                                                        How do you find relevant sites? Through competitor analysis or some special tools? I found it relatively hard to get links from relevant sites.

                                                        While I see great result from non-relevant but high Domain PR links, I now do my SEO with it, and love the result!

                                                        Still rank high for many related long tail keywords

                                                        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                                        If you truly understand this concept, which is the basis for search engine ranking results, you would never say that relevance of a page where you place a backlink is not important. The more relevance that page has, the more power and influence it has to help you rank for your targeted keyword.
                                                        I still think relevancy is overrated. I rank my site with targeted keyword but all links from different type of sites.

                                                        Anyway, thanks for this great relevancy lesson! Until I see more studies and proof on how to leverage it in mass scale, I will still use my High PR links for the job.
                                                        Signature

                                                        Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

                                                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1370844].message }}
                                                        • Profile picture of the author dburk
                                                          Hi kkchoon,

                                                          Why do you insist on bringing up sites! Search Engines do not rank websites, they rank web pages. That is central to the point that I'm am making and you keep trying to twist what I'm saying about pages to apply to websites. I see that as a fundamental misunderstanding of how SEO works. You seem to understand some aspects but aren't able to comprehend how they relate to each other.

                                                          Search engines see your page as part of a web of pages, not as part of a website. You web page is part of a web that is made up of links to and from your page. This web can exist without any links whatsoever to or from other pages on a domain.

                                                          The links to and from a page have a very strong influence on the relevance of that page. By simply adding an outbound link to a page your effect the relevance of that page. Therefore it is impossible to have a backlink with relevant anchor text from an irrelevant page, it is misleading to suggest that you can. That seems to be crux of your argument, which I find completely invalid.

                                                          When someone tries to make the argument you have chosen, after they think it through a little, they realize the invalidity of their position and typically try to shift the argument to be about "website" relevance which only a naive SEO person would buy into. Search engines don't rank websites nor do they consider the relevance of a website topic.

                                                          Search engines do factor the web a page is part of and this web need not be part of the domain the page resides on. When you create a web it can be made up of pages from many different domains and your page is part of this web. The relevance of your web has a major influence on your pages relevancy score.

                                                          I have challenged your arguments by pointing out the conflicts and invalidity of your exact words, while you have made your counter argument based upon redefining my words and arguing against your own reinterpreted version of what I said. I respectfully request that you address you counter argument to my precise words.

                                                          I believe there are two fundamental concepts you must understand to comprehend advanced SEO tactics. First, search engines rank web pages not websites. Second, relevance is not an absolute value, it is a relative value and the primary influence of SERP rankings.

                                                          You are arguing that "all it needs is High Domain PR Authority link" and "Relevant link don't help" I counter your point with my assertion that relevance is absolutely essential. Without it you get virtually no value towards ranking your targeted keyword.

                                                          To be clear, I am saying it needs to be a backlink from a page that is relevant to have ranking benefit. Adding a relevant "targeted keyword link" influences the relevance of the page where the backlink is placed, but SEO professionals have realized for many years that backlinks without "targeted keyword link" are also beneficial provided there are other factors on that page that are relevant.

                                                          So relevance is in fact the only essential property for a backlink to help your rank a targeted keyword. Relevant anchor text helps to make the page it is placed on to be relevant.

                                                          When considering the fundamental concept that relevance is a relative value, that means one page will tend to be more relevant than other relevant pages. The higher the relevance, the greater the power to influence the relevance of the pages it links to.

                                                          So a page that has relevant incoming links, relevant page titles, relevant page text and relevant anchor text on outbound links will be more influential than the same page with just relevant anchor text. And if you remove that last remaining signal of relevance it will no longer influence the ranking of your targeted keyword.

                                                          Relevance is not only important, it is absolutely essential. I am speaking of page relevance because that is the only kind of relevance that search engines recognize. Please don't try to inject non sequitur arguments like "website niche" or topic relevance into my argument.
                                                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1371144].message }}
                                            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                              Originally Posted by dburk View Post

                                              This relates to relevance, not quality, which was the exact point that I was trying to make.
                                              actually both. If what I am looking for is information about tooth brushes and not just wanting to buy one then an article that covers those important topics is going to be seen as quality as well.

                                              I think kkchoon thinks you are saying that the site that gives you a backlinks has to have content on its page that is relevant to your own page content regardless of link text. If thats not it then I am not understanding him either and if you are implying that a link without relevant link text has no benefit I would agree with him.
                                              Signature

                                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1368882].message }}
                                      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                        Originally Posted by kkchoon View Post

                                        From previous experience, Google don't really care about the content, although they really want their SERP to be useful, but they still base their ranking decision on backlinks, relevant or not.

                                        Kkchoon thats a pretty bad overstatment. Although we both sell backlink packages we need to be balanced. Saying Google doesn't care about content is false. Terribly false. Anyone that has done much SEO research will tell you that High PR sites are often jumped over in the SERPS when the content is solid. Backlinks are important but not the only thing that matters.
                                        Signature

                                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367677].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author islander1
          Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

          @ djbory, actually I started off with the first site that fell off, to see how/if it impacted the other site(s). We'll have a detailed analysis either late this evening or first thing tomorrow morning.
          Hey Crew Chief,

          I wonder if you could help me out as well. I have a site just like djbory that seems to have been sandboxed. Here's what happened:

          -I launched the site April 2009 and at first only built links slowly, then became for aggressive these past couple months.

          -I have used Onlywire, Digg, Article syndication with backlinks, Angela's backlinks and Free Traffic System to build links to the site.

          -Until yesterday, I ranked in 1st page Google for many long-tail keywords including number one for a couple of them, including the name of the site.

          -Today, ALL my rankings are gone EXCEPT, I am still on the bottom of page 1 of Google for the keyword that is also the name of the site, so I guess the site is indexed.

          -two weeks ago, I re-designed the site and completely re-did the content on the home page. In doing this, I copied ALOT of the content from the merchant sales page for the product I'm promoting.

          -to the best of my knowledge, I have done nothing shady-I am pretty new and wouldn't know what to do anyway. I have only employed the above-mentioned strategies.

          Is it possible that it alot of content similar to the merchant sales page could cause me to be sandboxed?

          Also, if I pm you the name of the site, would you be willing to take a quick look at that for me?

          Thanks in advance! I greatly appreciate any help you can provide!
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1149218].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
            Originally Posted by islander1 View Post

            Hey Crew Chief,

            I wonder if you could help me out as well. I have a site just like djbory that seems to have been sandboxed. Here's what happened:

            -I launched the site April 2009 and at first only built links slowly, then became for aggressive these past couple months.

            -I have used Onlywire, Digg, Article syndication with backlinks, Angela's backlinks and Free Traffic System to build links to the site.

            -Until yesterday, I ranked in 1st page Google for many long-tail keywords including number one for a couple of them, including the name of the site.

            -Today, ALL my rankings are gone EXCEPT, I am still on the bottom of page 1 of Google for the keyword that is also the name of the site, so I guess the site is indexed.
            Hello islander1, I have your request and one from gmr324 scheduled for an analysis and for those of you following this thread, we won't be able to perform any additional analysis until next week.
            Signature
            Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

            SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1150908].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author islander1
              Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

              Hello islander1, I have your request and one from gmr324 scheduled for an analysis and for those of you following this thread, we won't be able to perform any additional analysis until next week.
              High Crew Chief,

              Sent you a PM with my site details. Thanks for looking at this, I greatly appreciate your expert analysis!
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152386].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
                Originally Posted by islander1 View Post

                High Crew Chief,

                Sent you a PM with my site details. Thanks for looking at this, I greatly appreciate your expert analysis!
                You're Welcome!!!
                Signature
                Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

                SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152406].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author islander1
              Here is some more detail on the site crew chief is looking at for me:

              -The site is almost certainly not banned because there is one keyword (which also happens to be the name of the site) that still shows up at the bottom of page 1 in the Google search. I had held the #1 spot for this keyword pretty much since the site was launched.

              -a search for site:sitename.com also shows site and all internal pages.

              -site has opt-in form on the top, then contains a lot of content from the merchant sales page for the product it promotes.

              -site has 42 other article pages which are linked to the main page, but some of those were renamed a few weeks ago (stupidly by me cause I wanted to better optimize them). This caused a handful of indexed pages to come up '404 not found', which I have learned by reading this thread that Google doesn't like.

              -There has been no 'black hat' link building that I know of. However, the link-building has been very aggressive these past couple months.

              In addition to social bookmarking, I have been using Angela's high PR backlinks, and a service called Unique Article Wizard, which send a unique version of each article I submit to hundreds of different directories with backlinks to my site.

              I have been sending about 3-5 articles a week to UAW for the past couple months, which in theory is creating literally thousands of backlinks of uniques articles to my site. Perhaps I over-did it.

              These are the main factors I can think of that may be causing the 'sandboxed' status. None of them seem to be blatant violations of any rules, so I it will be interesting to see what Crew Chief comes back with for his expert analysis on my site.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152522].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
                @ islander1

                A couple of quick questions and requests...

                (1). Are you using GWT Google Webmaster's Tools? _______

                (2). If so, when you are looking in the, "Sitemaps" section, how many, "Indexed URLs" do you see?

                (3). When looking in the, "Crawl errors" section, please list your errors, if any...

                HTTP ____

                In Sitemaps ____

                Not followed ____

                Not found ____

                Restricted by robots.txt ____

                Timed out ____

                Unreachable ____


                Originally Posted by islander1 View Post

                Here is some more detail on the site crew chief is looking at for me:

                -The site is almost certainly not banned because there is one keyword (which also happens to be the name of the site) that still shows up at the bottom of page 1 in the Google search. I had held the #1 spot for this keyword pretty much since the site was launched.

                -a search for site:sitename.com also shows site and all internal pages.

                -site has opt-in form on the top, then contains a lot of content from the merchant sales page for the product it promotes.

                -site has 42 other article pages which are linked to the main page, but some of those were renamed a few weeks ago (stupidly by me cause I wanted to better optimize them). This caused a handful of indexed pages to come up '404 not found', which I have learned by reading this thread that Google doesn't like.

                -There has been no 'black hat' link building that I know of. However, the link-building has been very aggressive these past couple months.

                In addition to social bookmarking, I have been using Angela's high PR backlinks, and a service called Unique Article Wizard, which send a unique version of each article I submit to hundreds of different directories with backlinks to my site.

                I have been sending about 3-5 articles a week to UAW for the past couple months, which in theory is creating literally thousands of backlinks of uniques articles to my site. Perhaps I over-did it.

                These are the main factors I can think of that may be causing the 'sandboxed' status. None of them seem to be blatant violations of any rules, so I it will be interesting to see what Crew Chief comes back with for his expert analysis on my site.
                Signature
                Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

                SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152650].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Jeremy Kelsall
                  WOW - Very good info Crew Chief!

                  I know who I will be trying to book an appointment with if I run across something I can't figure out lol

                  Jeremy
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152673].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
                    Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall View Post

                    WOW - Very good info Crew Chief!

                    I know who I will be trying to book an appointment with if I run across something I can't figure out lol

                    Jeremy
                    Thanks Jeremy, actually it's not just me, I have a "Crack" Brainstorm Team of IMers who love the challenge. It keeps us sharp on our toes plus it helps keep our ears to the ground for any Big G rumblings.
                    Signature
                    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

                    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152691].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author islander1
                  Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

                  @ islander1

                  A couple of quick questions and requests...

                  (1). Are you using GWT Google Webmaster's Tools? _______

                  (2). If so, when you are looking in the, "Sitemaps" section, how many, "Indexed URLs" do you see?

                  (3). When looking in the, "Crawl errors" section, please list your errors, if any...

                  HTTP ____

                  In Sitemaps ____

                  Not followed ____

                  Not found ____

                  Restricted by robots.txt ____

                  Timed out ____

                  Unreachable ____
                  Hi Crew Chief,

                  I'm sorry, I don't know how to use GWT and I pay someone to build my sites cause I'm not tech savvy. Is the info you are requesting necessary for a diagnosis? If so, could someone explain to me how to use GWT? Specifically, can someone explain how to verify my site using either HTML file or Meta tag so I can start using the tool?

                  Thanks, I greatly appreciate it!
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1156129].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author islander1
                    Ok I figured out how to verify and I checked my GWT for this site.

                    Crew Chief, in the "sitemaps" section, I don't show any submitted sitemaps, so I guess the guy who built this site never submitted one. I reckon that could be a problem and I should probably figure out how to submit one right away.

                    In the "crawl errors" section, there are 7 "not found" errors. Those were the pages I mentioned that I stupidly re-named trying to give the pages a better name for keyword optimization, not realizing this consequence.

                    Otherwise, there are no other listed crawl errors.

                    Something else is strange though, in the "dashboard" section of GWT, it shows my site with a top 10 ranking for upwards of 100 different keywords-pretty much the ones I had been ranking for, but when I search Google, my site doesn't come up for any of them.

                    Is the GWT tool sometimes not up to date, or could this be a problem with my own browser? I don't know what to think now, please advise.

                    BTW, I don't care what others think of Crew Chief's advice, all I know is that he's helping me and a couple other people out free of charge giving us useful information as to how to resolve our problems. I am grateful and appreciate that fact that there are people like Crew Chief on this forum.


                    Originally Posted by islander1 View Post

                    Hi Crew Chief,

                    I'm sorry, I don't know how to use GWT and I pay someone to build my sites cause I'm not tech savvy. Is the info you are requesting necessary for a diagnosis? If so, could someone explain to me how to use GWT? Specifically, can someone explain how to verify my site using either HTML file or Meta tag so I can start using the tool?

                    Thanks, I greatly appreciate it!
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1156202].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                      Originally Posted by islander1 View Post

                      BTW, I don't care what others think of Crew Chief's advice, all I know is that he's helping me and a couple other people out free of charge giving us useful information as to how to resolve our problems. I am grateful and appreciate that fact that there are people like Crew Chief on this forum.
                      If you think that Crew Chief is the only one "giving useful information" in this thread you aren't using this thread to your best advantage and will always need someone to hold your hand. Thats the whole purpose of a thread like this - to learn from everyone. Thats where I give the OP serious credit. He's not locking into one perspective. He's learning from everything.
                      Signature

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1156399].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author islander1
                        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                        If you think that Crew Chief is the only one "giving useful information" in this thread you aren't using this thread to your best advantage and will always need someone to hold your hand. Thats the whole purpose of a thread like this - to learn from everyone. Thats where I give the OP serious credit. He's not locking into one perspective. He's learning from everything.
                        Mr Anthony,

                        Did I say that Crew Chief the only one "giving useful information" ? I don't think so. I was simply responding to some negative remarks in this forum regarding Crew Chief that he was providing me and a couple others useful information free of charge to help us solve our problems and I am very grateful for his help.

                        I in no way mean to discount the others on this forum that are giving us helpful info. This is a great learning experience for all of us here.
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1157801].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                          im not sure if YOU GET IT

                          false information can harm your internet business more than help you

                          if you were/are banned and you listening to the wrong person...then google can blacklist you if they see that you're attempting to circumvent their system
                          this is why their reinclusion request ASKS if you were helped by an SEO company. They even ask you to list the seo company's name/info.

                          Originally Posted by islander1 View Post

                          Mr Anthony,

                          Did I say that Crew Chief the only one "giving useful information" ? I don't think so. I was simply responding to some negative remarks in this forum regarding Crew Chief that he was providing me and a couple others useful information free of charge to help us solve our problems and I am very grateful for his help.

                          I in no way mean to discount the others on this forum that are giving us helpful info. This is a great learning experience for all of us here.
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1157808].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                            Originally Posted by banker0679 View Post

                            im not sure if YOU GET IT

                            false information can harm your internet business more than help you

                            if you were/are banned and you listening to the wrong person...then google can blacklist you if they see that you're attempting to circumvent their system
                            Yep. Help is relative to actually being helped -regaining a good position in Google. I think there is more than enough evidence in this thread that the problems are with the entire approach NOT just trying to find out what the one thing was that caused the penalty. In fact I think its downright dangerous to try to just tweak a few things rather than changing the whole approach.

                            We all game the system a bit - Three way backlinks, buying packets where we can post our own backlinks etc but thats got to be mixed in with giving Google what they want. Put the content in that gets some natural backlinks.

                            A) It breaks the patterns that Google is looking for.
                            B) It ensures you don't fall off the map if the artificial links are either removed or are ignored.
                            Signature

                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1159001].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                          Originally Posted by islander1 View Post

                          Mr Anthony,

                          Did I say that Crew Chief the only one "giving useful information" ? I don't think so. I was simply responding to some negative remarks in this forum regarding Crew Chief that he was providing me and a couple others useful information free of charge to help us solve our problems and I am very grateful for his help.

                          You went much further than that Islander. You said you didn't care about others opinions about his advice which pretty much discounts others here that are trying to help. You followed that by stating that you were appreciative that there were people like crew chief willing to help without any reference to a number of other people contributing in this thread. So thats why I responded that way. If you say now that you appreciate everyones help then we are cool.
                          Signature

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1158980].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author islander1
                            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                            You went much further than that Islander. You said you didn't care about others opinions about his advice which pretty much discounts others here that are trying to help. You followed that by stating that you were appreciative that there were people like crew chief willing to help without any reference to a number of other people contributing in this thread. So thats why I responded that way. If you say now that you appreciate everyones help then we are cool.
                            You're right Mr Anthony, I did say that and I was wrong. There are many people(along with Crew Chief) on this thread that have given out useful and helpful information. I should have chosen my words more carefully and for that I apologize.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1160810].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author depapepee
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1150178].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author gmr324
      I also noticed your insightful and comprehensive feedback to djbory in his
      thread about his potential Google penalty.

      I've been hoping to get an expert opinion on a site I have on whether
      its experiencing a Google sandbox/filter/de-index/penalty.

      site age: 19 months
      site PR: PR4
      Site has ZERO errors in Markup Validator Service / The W3C Markup Validation Service


      --- Site Rankings History

      o site:sitename.com shows site
      o site ranks nowhere for a search on its own domain name
      o Google daily UV volume is about 25 and is half of Yahoo and Bing daily volume
      o this problem started and has persisted since Jan 09
      o My daily UVs peaked at about 600 in Dec 08 / now sitting at 150 total daily UVs


      --- Post Content

      o Unique content product reviews generally 200-275 in word count
      o All product images are stored on my site
      o The affiliate links are set to Nofollow
      o Roughly 400 reviews posted
      o Privacy Policy page exists


      --- Site Backlinks

      o 13,000+ niche related backlinks to my site
      o My site has one-way site-wide blogroll backlinks from over 20 established/high-PR niche sites
      o Many of my backlinks were generated from link bait articles listed on RHS of homepage
      o Have 13 .edu backlinks most of which were changed to NoFollow now
      o Never paid for or sold a backlink and don't even have a blogroll
      o No reciprocal or three-way linking ever used
      o Have submitted many blog comment backlinks on niche and non-niche sites


      --- On-Page SEO

      o My site is optimized for title and meta tags
      o No hidden text issues


      --- Google Webmaster Tools

      o Sitemap is verified
      o 7 404 Not Found Errors
      o 0 Timed Out
      o 0 Unreachable



      --- Advice Received Thus Far

      I've been told to get another domain and do a 301 redirect
      Also been advised to move all my content and backlinks to another domain
      I've also been told to avoid filing a re-inclusion request at all costs since
      it puts me on the Google radar even if the penalty is removed (which is unlikely)
      I submit frequent unique content and try to add value by outlinking to related authority sites

      Would appreciate your expert opinion and rather not have my site mentioned on the forum
      since I don't believe its a good practice to discuss specific site details on a public forum

      Also, I'm curious if you could elaborate on what you refer to as blog commenting spam

      It's a total mystery how the site can be PR4 and have this problem for so long.
      As a matter of fact, it was upgraded from a PR3 to a PR4 while this problem existed.

      Many Thanks

      gmr324
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1150855].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author djbory
    Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

    There is no need resubmit your site to the SEs, being that it was not banned, as you make those changes, (at the top of the list is acquiring unique content, you'll pick right up where you left off.

    Great Job! Thank you very much Crew Chief for the detailed analysis. I really appreciate what you've done here, and I'm sure that many other guys from this forum will have something to do for the next few days revising their websites...

    It would be nice that you leave the details of your paid service, in case somebody needs an expert review in the future...

    Now I will roll my sleeves and get down to work. I'll keep an update of my progress in this thread.

    DJBory
    Signature
    >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

    Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152219].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
      Originally Posted by djbory View Post

      Great Job! Thank you very much Crew Chief for the detailed analysis. I really appreciate what you've done here, and I'm sure that many other guys from this forum will have something to do for the next few days revising their websites...

      It would be nice that you leave the details of your paid service, in case somebody needs an expert review in the future...

      Now I will roll my sleeves and get down to work. I'll keep an update of my progress in this thread.

      DJBory
      Hey buddy, you're quite welcome and definitely keep us posted! In terms of new clients - NO CAN DO! We're backed up as it is and see no end in sight until Mar 2010.

      Much success to you!

      Gillis, The Crew Chief
      Signature
      Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

      SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152323].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Neromancer
    Wow didn't know google was now banning 3 way links jeesh
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1152684].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author esh
    The point is google can identify a 3 way cliques or nodes. If you have enough of them to trigger google's alarm then you are in danger. The takeaway is to create links as close to natural. Diversify your links across atleast 50+ domains/ips to be in safe hands.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1154285].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author banker0679
      in danger of what? getting your links devalued or getting penalized?

      there's a HUGE DIFFERENCE

      you dont get deindexed because of backlinks

      you get penalized for what you do on the website ...not from outside measures


      if you think there's a 'google alarm' then you're crazier then this guy trying to help the OP
      If there was such an alarm then there would be over 1million alarms going off every second!!!!!!!! Do you know how many sites are participating in 3way link schemes? Do you honestly think Google has the manpower to take care of it? lol

      Originally Posted by esh View Post

      The point is google can identify a 3 way cliques or nodes. If you have enough of them to trigger google's alarm then you are in danger. The takeaway is to create links as close to natural. Diversify your links across atleast 50+ domains/ips to be in safe hands.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1154446].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author nahid5692001
    there is great information here for new people, thank you
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1155689].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author normpurc
    hi,

    I am new to the internet marketing business and after reading the above posts I think Google can be your best friend or your worst enemy.

    If they remove your site, one would think they would inform you as to what happened and why such a drastic action was deemed necessary.

    just my 2 cents
    Norm
    Signature

    Please read the sig file rules

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1155839].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Baba Pandey
    Building huge backlinks in short time or using blackhat method will result you ban from google.
    Signature

    Yo Yo Baba Pandey ! Wanna see my signature ? Contact Me

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1156154].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
    WOW :confused:

    I'm away for a few days and this thread turns into a War of Words???

    Also looks like I may have a few sullied SEO egos, but that assessment is mere conjecture on my part... hahaha!!!

    But puhle-e-e-z-e don't penalize, I mean devalue my humor...

    I'm currently on (JD) Jury Duty and this should be my last day.
    Signature
    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1162284].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author pokermoneyclips
      Just real quick, where did you find the "links to risky web territory" thing on my site {pokermoneyclips} (I stumbled across this forum looking at my backlinks)

      Last I checked I was still doing well on Google.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1165339].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post

      But puhle-e-e-z-e don't penalize, I mean devalue my humor...
      Are you kidding me? I personally would never devalue your humor. Your post #79 was hilarious. I particulalrly like

      "Between us, we track Google like the military and Homeland Security tracks threats and potential threats."

      I could hear the music from the old show - "the A -team" ( equally funny if you ever watch it) playing in the background as I read that post.

      If you ever put that sales copy to audio make sure to get Mr. T to end it with -

      "I pity the fool that doesn't hire Crew Chef" Good stuff man.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1165927].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ryan6
    If you were banned then your site would be completely deindexed. Maybe you should target more valuable backlinks and see how that works out.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1165379].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Crew Chief
    OK folks, I'm finally done with JD Jury Duty!!!

    I was in Federal Court and these people somehow believe that $40 a day plus mileage is supposed to be an enticing friggin deal.

    Anyhow, it's over and I couldn't be a more happy camper.

    I've got to catch up with my paying clients and should be back to normal by tomorrow!
    Signature
    Tools, Strategies and Tactics Used By Savvy Internet Marketers and SEO Pros:

    SEO G.O.L.D. = Genuine Overall Link Diversity
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1181892].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bigcat1967
    Would 3 way linking be considered a link wheel as well?
    Signature

    <a href="https://changeyourbudget.com/save-money-on-your-water-bill/">How to Lower Your Water Bill</a>

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1182685].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author djbory
    Hey Guys,
    Just an update: My sites are back in Google again. I transformed the sites completely; even the content was totally changed with fresh unique content. They're not back on first page yet and they're not ranking for the keywords they were originally ranking, but at least they reappeared.

    I know that with an aggressive backlinking program they'll be back on first page. What the problem was? I don't clearly know that, since I did so many changes to them, but one thing I know; it WAS NOT THE 3 WAY LINK system because I still on it and they are back....

    I would be really careful with duplicate content; not only the one you copy from other sites or from the product creator description as well, since it is considered by Google as duplicate, and they could filter you out because the product owner usually will have more authority than you. I did this the first time.

    I also found somebody was literally copying content from me and ranking higher that me with my own content. I reported this to the owner of the site and they removed the content.

    Thanks to Chief, Steve, Don and all the guys who helped me out through this...
    I will let you know when they're on Google first page again.

    Djbory
    Signature
    >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

    Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1198453].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author islander1
      Originally Posted by djbory View Post

      Hey Guys,
      Just an update: My sites are back in Google again. I transformed the sites completely; even the content was totally changed with fresh unique content. They're not back on first page yet and they're not ranking for the keywords they were originally ranking, but at least they reappeared.

      I know that with an aggressive backlinking program they'll be back on first page. What the problem was? I don't clearly know that, since I did so many changes to them, but one thing I know; it WAS NOT THE 3 WAY LINK system because I still on it and they are back....

      I would be really careful with duplicate content; not only the one you copy from other sites or from the product creator description as well, since it is considered by Google as duplicate, and they could filter you out because the product owner usually will have more authority than you. I did this the first time.

      I also found somebody was literally copying content from me and ranking higher that me with my own content. I reported this to the owner of the site and they removed the content.

      Thanks to Chief, Steve, Don and all the guys who helped me out through this...
      I will let you know when they're on Google first page again.

      Djbory
      Thanks for the update. What you say makes a lot of sense. I'm just a newbie and know NOTHING about SEO, but it seems to me Google would only penalize you for things YOU have control of-meaning stuff you put on your own site.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1205512].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author djbory
        Originally Posted by islander1 View Post

        Thanks for the update. What you say makes a lot of sense. I'm just a newbie and know NOTHING about SEO, but it seems to me Google would only penalize you for things YOU have control of-meaning stuff you put on your own site.
        That is correct.....

        UPDATE ON MY SITES!

        My sites are back on the first pages of Google and one of my best sites, from one of Clickbank most competing niches, over 9,000,000 results, is not just back on first page of Google, but #1 on Google for all my keywords... This is JUST GREAT! HAPPY ENDING STORY!

        Thanks again to Crew Chief, Don, Steven and all the guys who offered sincere help...

        (Crew Chief -- you got to go and see for yourself)

        DJBory
        Signature
        >> Thank You Google For The Updates <<

        Ranking Just Got A Lot Easier
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1241486].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author dburk
          Hi DJBory,

          Congrats, that's great to hear.

          Thanks for keeping us updated with your progress.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1241574].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author islander1
          Originally Posted by djbory View Post

          That is correct.....

          UPDATE ON MY SITES!

          My sites are back on the first pages of Google and one of my best sites, from one of Clickbank most competing niches, over 9,000,000 results, is not just back on first page of Google, but #1 on Google for all my keywords... This is JUST GREAT! HAPPY ENDING STORY!

          Thanks again to Crew Chief, Don, Steven and all the guys who offered sincere help...

          (Crew Chief -- you got to go and see for yourself)

          DJBory
          Wow! Congrats on your success! You've given me hope.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1253728].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author samjustin
    I think You target multiple keywords in a one row, That why Google may push you back on all.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1253796].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DogScout
    Interesting thread, Just a note. In one video I saw, Matt Cutts as much as admitted that part of his job is to 'mis-direct' those attempting to identify Google's exact do's and don't other than content, content, content. Using anything he says as 'proof' of Google allowing or not penalizing, de-indexing or filtering one technique or another is not exactly what I would consider real proof. (Test, Test, Test).


    Watching these sites disappear, and the steps taken to regain them pretty much help to explain some of what Google is and is not looking at TODAY. Their algorithms do change a lot, what they pass by today, they focus on tomorrow.

    Great thread and right or wrong, Crew Chief spent a ton of time helping this guy for free and his recommendations did work. Kudos to him and everyone that chimed in with an attempt to help.

    PS-if you have several sites on one host and a robots text in the root nofollow/noindex any of the other folders that contain other sites and the IP is the same for each site, either switch hosts to one that automatically assigns a different IP with each address (such as GoDaddy) or buy a dedicated IP for each site. (IMO)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367065].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by DogScout View Post

      Interesting thread, Just a note. In one video I saw, Matt Cutts as much as admitted that part of his job is to 'mis-direct' those attempting to identify Google's exact do's and don't other than content, content, content. Using anything he says as 'proof' of Google allowing or not penalizing, de-indexing or filtering one technique or another is not exactly what I would consider real proof.
      Yes misdirection is part of the game but I think thats mostly in regard to information that could be used to "spam". Like you said the content points he makes aren't part of the misdirection as Google has a vested interest in encouraging good content.

      I get static for example when I mention that Anchor text should be varied some. I have seen evidence that the exact same keyword anchor text over and over actually results in losing ground not gaining. You'll probably never see Matt Cutt confirm or deny that.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367648].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tjcocker
    Thanks to all for this useful thread. If I learned one thing it's:

    Don't be a spammer.

    No offense to the OP man, but your site sounded like a pretty obvious affiliate site with little to no value. Hey, more power to you if it can make you some money. I also agree that it probably wasn't just one or two factors leading to your problems. The whole thing looked and smelled like spam, so they treated it as such.

    At least you changed them and they're back. That's a pretty awesome improvement from the panic at the start of this thread. Working together helps us all learn, and in this instance the results were very positive.

    Tim

    ...I'm sure I said something flameworthy, so go ahead and get it out.
    Signature
    Initrode Consulting -Boulder SEO, Copywriting, Editing, Website design, etc...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367408].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kkchoon
    Wow, this is gonna be long...

    Alright, first of all, Google doesn't care about content, they use links, this is in the pass and present!

    However, newly update Google Caffeine may change this, let's wait and see.

    Google this keyword "coolest guy on the planet", you see the top 2 guys - Jonathan Leger and Brad Fallon.

    What interesting is, Johnathan page uses a lot of on page optimization:

    1. The URL
    2. The Title
    3. H1 Tag
    4. Bold Text

    While Brad Fallon, non of the on page stuff found! That's Google Bomb!

    Massive backlinks with that keyword and "FORCE" Google to reckon it for the targeted keyword!

    Google found that many people is trying to use the Google Bomb, they are in the process of "refining" their algorithm...

    When I said "Google doesn't care about the content" I mean the targeted page, I was referring to Don Burk "relevant link".

    Unless you have proof or studies, I am not convinced that "relevant link" has anything to do with getting your keyword rank, because all it needs is High Domain PR Authority link to convince Google!

    I must stress this:

    Relevant link don't help, but Relevant on page content and proper inner linking do helps in ranking for the targeted keywords!

    Not only that, if you do proper LSI theme keyword research, your site would also rank for many related terms that you never consider before!

    I would love to see some evidence regarding relevant link help in keyword ranking, as oppose to non-relevant but high authority domain links. If you Google for Angela's backlinks, there are tons of testimonials from Warriors using irrelevant links to rank for their keywords, but I've yet seen any evidence on relevant link help to rank the keyword...

    I will change my stand, just need some proof.

    Kok Choon
    Signature

    Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367840].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by kkchoon View Post

      Wow, this is gonna be long...

      Alright, first of all, Google doesn't care about content, they use links, this is in the pass and present!
      Overstated again. Perhaps its a language thing. I just wish you would stop repeating that because its misleading even though I think I get what you are trying to say. Its better to say Google doesn't care about content when it comes to the site you backlink from

      While Brad Fallon, non of the on page stuff found! That's Google Bomb!

      Massive backlinks with that keyword and "FORCE" Google to reckon it for the targeted keyword!

      Sorry thats wrong. Look at the results and the page. The content keywords ARE on the page. Its in the left column and Google highlights it to show that it has identified the content on the page = "2nd coolest guy on the planet"

      I think you and Dburk MAY be misunderstanding each other. Heres what he wrote

      While inbound links are important, it's how they effect the relevance of the page that matters. Relevant inbound links will improve a page's relevancy score while irrelevant pages do not.

      If a page has no relevant content for a particular keyword you can have all the irrelevant backlinks you want and never show up in the SERP. There has to be some signals that indicate the page is relevant to a particular keyword to show up in the SERP.
      I took it that he meant "anchor text relevance" in the links which I think everyone admits is useful if not absolutely required and then he went on to talk about content on the page linked to. I'll leave it to him to clarify.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1367980].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MusicisMagic
    Hi,

    I would check and see how Google cross-references. I have heard that Google sometimes will decide not to like your site, will remove it and then look for other sites you may have. This may not fit your situation entirely but it's worth checking into. Hope that helps.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1370161].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    dburk,
    I'd like to believe that google looks at page content when determining the relevance of a link but what I'd like to believe isn't fact. If it's going to be a productive conversation you are going to have to offer up some proof. I personally lean in this direction as I believe it makes semantic and relevant sense.

    We have to realize that hundreds of people come on warriors making claims. It's only productive if instead of making statements we offer proof. I think an argument can be made for it but I won't get fully behind that until I can see much better evidence than I have seen.

    I'd like also to point out that PR and PR juice is not relevant centric. That is, a site or page doesn't have varied PR based on keywords or content. If you believe that PR is at least one of the factors that can affect serps then a link that conveys PR still has importance even if not relevant for a particular key word. anchor text yes is always to be preferred but like I said I don't see any reason to overlook a high PR site just because it doesn't allow time for anchor text.

    Let's try to stick to substantive statements that we can prove rather than just statements back and forth without evidence. It's pointless to counter assertion with assertion.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1372296].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dburk
      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

      dburk,
      I'd like to believe that google looks at page content when determining the relevance of a link but what I'd like to believe isn't fact. If it's going to be a productive conversation you are going to have to offer up some proof. I personally lean in this direction as I believe it makes semantic and relevant sense.

      We have to realize that hundreds of people come on warriors making claims. It's only productive if instead of making statements we offer proof. I think an argument can be made for it but I won't get fully behind that until I can see much better evidence than I have seen.

      I'd like also to point out that PR and PR juice is not relevant centric. That is, a site or page doesn't have varied PR based on keywords or content. If you believe that PR is at least one of the factors that can affect serps then a link that conveys PR still has importance even if not relevant for a particular key word. anchor text yes is always to be preferred but like I said I don't see any reason to overlook a high PR site just because it doesn't allow time for anchor text.

      Let's try to stick to substantive statements that we can prove rather than just statements back and forth without evidence. It's pointless to counter assertion with assertion.
      Hi Mike,

      I'm sure by now you must have seen plenty of examples of pages ranking highly for a keyword when few if any of the backlinks contain the target keyword within the anchor text. This is quite common, I hope you not asking for proof of this.

      The PR is a non sequitur and I don't disagree with any of your assertions regarding PR except the part about it being a factor in ranking. I have not seen evidence that a page's PR is a significant factor in SERP ranking. My evidence is the first page of SERP for virtually every keyword search you can imagine. Please show me where pages are ranked by PR! Clearly it's relevance that the search engines use to sort SERP listings. Again look at a handful of SERP to verify this.

      The evidence is readily available for all to see and is so abundant I'm surprised that you imply it doesn't exist. I am only pointing out what is clearly visible to anyone who can type a keyword into the Google search box.

      If you need something beyond what you can see for yourself in the SERP, name it. Do I need to do a screen shot for you and mark it up with a highliter? Are you confused about what to look for?

      My primary assertion is that I have done a lot of research and have never found a single example of a page that ranked for a keyword based on backlinks from totally irrelevant pages. I believe the absence of evidence is the proof. If no one can produce a single example then it's reasonable to assume it doesn't exist. They only way to prove a negative absolutely is to study SERP of every keyword search ever performed and to study every website in existence. We can make a statistically valid analysis if we have a large enough dataset. Granted my dataset gives me approximately 95% probability with 5% margin of error and that is statistically valid in my eyes.

      You need to examine the evidence for yourself if you want to be certain. Start with this bit of evidence:

      how to rank with irrelevant backlinks - Google Search
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1372558].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by dburk View Post

        Hi Mike,

        I'm sure by now you must have seen plenty of examples of pages ranking highly for a keyword when few if any of the backlinks contain the target keyword within the anchor text. This is quite common, I hope you not asking for proof of this.
        I've made it perfectly clear what I am asking for. I am asking for evidence that isolates backlinks. anchor text and on page content leaving just the link and the content of the page being linked from.

        Please show me where pages are ranked by PR! Clearly it's relevance that the search engines use to sort SERP listings. Again look at a handful of SERP to verify this.
        Where did I imply that anywhere? . You complain about KKChoon putting words in your mouth and yet here you are doing the same. Pages are not ranked by PR obviously but given similiar content and other SEo factors anyone who has done any research can see that PR plays a role in Serps. Its not that it overrides relevance but when there is relvance it has an effect. If you haven't seen this then its you that needs to look

        I am only pointing out what is clearly visible to anyone who can type a keyword into the Google search box.
        Sorry. thats utter rubbish and dodging. You can't just type in a search word and look at the rankings to determine why they are ranked the way they are. You would have to go to the site analyze the content, check the backlinks and the achor text etc. This is basiic stuff.

        If you need something beyond what you can see for yourself in the SERP, name it. Do I need to do a screen shot for you and mark it up with a highliter? Are you confused about what to look for?
        Thats transparently condescending. No a highliter is not required. Please get off the ego trip. IF thats what this is about then let me know and I'll exit. I don't need the ego stroke. let me make it so clear a child can understand it by responding to your next blurb.

        My primary assertion is that I have done a lot of research and have never found a single example of a page that ranked for a keyword based on backlinks from totally irrelevant pages. I believe the absence of evidence is the proof.
        In order to do any scientific analysis in regard to a single factor you must at least attempt to isolate other contributing factors. The overwhelming majority of sites ranking for anything meaningful have multiple kinds of links not just irrelevant. I consider your assertion borderline gibberish. To make such a conclusive statement you would have to be able to track down ALL links on a site (which almost no tool will provide). isolate the weight of the various kinds of backlinks and then extrapolate the weight given to sites with irrelevant content. Only by doing tha analysis and not just by looking at the serps without reference to backlinks, on site SEo etc can you claim with any degree of proof that irrelevant content links have no value or that Google analyzes content to content between pages linked.

        The burden of proof lies with you since we already know that PR can flow to a site regardless of content. and yes PR can have a weight on serps when the content is relevant. You essentially havee to show that content of a site linked from if irellevant has no weight.

        I trust you can see that you have to do that isolation of other factors in order to present your "abscence of evidence" as being proof. A good place to start is by identifying a site at least high in irrelevant backlinks.


        We can make a statistically valid analysis if we have a large enough dataset. Granted my dataset gives me approximately 95% probability with 5% margin of error and that is statistically valid in my eyes.
        Nonsense. Unless your tests screen out other contributing factors you have nothing reliable. Thats a basic elementary scientific approach.

        You need to examine the evidence for yourself if you want to be certain.

        Don't ask me too present your evidence. You have multiple times demanded evidence. Now its time to live up to that standard. NO cute links and sending others on wild goose trips. Demand evidence then give it. I'm not antagonistic to this concept. I've said that. However true SEo facts have to be established by well researched and properly weighted evidence not what we suspect or, allege or assert.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1372887].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author dburk
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Where did I imply that anywhere? .You complain about KKChoon putting words in your mouth and yet here you are doing the same.
          These are your words, are they not?:
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          If you believe that PR is at least one of the factors that can affect serps then a link that conveys PR still has importance even if not relevant for a particular key word.
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Pages are not ranked by PR obviously but given similiar content and other SEo factors anyone who has done any research can see that PR plays a role in Serps. Its not that it overrides relevance but when there is relvance it has an effect. If you haven't seen this then its you that needs to look
          The only role where I see PR have any significant influence is on weighting the value of a backlink. The PR of a page has no measurable effect on that same page's ranking, all of the ranking power is passed to the outbound links. So there is no direct influence.


          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Sorry. thats utter rubbish and dodging. You can't just type in a search word and look at the rankings to determine why they are ranked the way they are. You would have to go to the site analyze the content, check the backlinks and the achor text etc. This is basiic stuff.
          Yes, that was exactly my point. This is basic stuff and there is no need for me to prove what should be so obvious to an SEO pro.

          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Thats transparently condescending. No a highliter is not required. Please get off the ego trip. IF thats what this is about then let me know and I'll exit. I don't need the ego stroke. let me make it so clear a child can understand it by responding to your next blurb.
          Yes, it does sound condescending, I'm sorry about that. I just don't know if you have advanced knowledge of SEO or you are just learning this stuff. You seem to jump into a discussing between Kok Choon and I, and it felt to me as if you were trying to act as referee. Now i'm getting the impression you just want fight regardless of what I might say.

          In research we call this peer review. Please don't mistake my arguing a position passionately as having anything to do with egos. Sometimes valuable information can be uncovered by discussing every minute element of a theory.

          I am simply trying to get anyone to produce an example of ranking a page using backlinks from irrelevant pages. Many have claimed it, but when pressed for an example, it cannot be produced.

          I am deliberately poking and prodding anyone who makes such a claim to see if they might produce an example. I don't want to go out on a limb and make an absolute claim without trying as hard as I can to validate my conclusion. If I hurt someone's ego in the process, I'm sorry it is just my callous way.

          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          In order to do any scientific analysis in regard to a single factor you must at least attempt to isolate other contributing factors. The overwhelming majority of sites ranking for anything meaningful have multiple kinds of links not just irrelevant. I consider your assertion borderline gibberish. To make such a conclusive statement you would have to be able to track down ALL links on a site (which almost no tool will provide). isolate the weight of the various kinds of backlinks and then extrapolate the weight given to sites with irrelevant content. Only by doing tha analysis and not just by looking at the serps without reference to backlinks, on site SEo etc can you claim with any degree of proof that irrelevant content links have no value or that Google analyzes content to content between pages linked.
          I tend to agree, but I'm not the one claiming that irrelevant backlinks will be effective. I am just trying to get a single example from someone who claims it does work. Logically I don't see how it could. I have seen so many folks on this forum make this claim without a single example. I have asked nicely and been given examples that always included links from highly relevant pages, the exact opposite of what was claimed.

          To be honest, I doubt it's possible and would welcome any example that proved my doubts to be wrong. I just have a desire to keep a lot of folks from being tricked into thinking that backlinks from irrelevant pages will help them rank, that just seems cruel to me.

          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          The burden of proof lies with you since we already know that PR can flow to a site regardless of content. and yes PR can have a weight on serps when the content is relevant. You essentially havee to show that content of a site linked from if irellevant has no weight.
          How do you prove a negative if not simply by the absence of evidence?

          Technically, PR passes to a page, not a site.

          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          I trust you can see that you have to do that isolation of other factors in order to present your "abscence of evidence" as being proof. A good place to start is by identifying a site at least high in irrelevant backlinks.
          Apparently they are impossible to find because they never rank in search engines. How would you go about finding one? My approach has been to ask those in this forum that claim to have such a site, so far no one has managed to produce one.

          Again a ask if anyone has an example, please present.

          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Nonsense. Unless your tests screen out other contributing factors you have nothing reliable. Thats a basic elementary scientific approach.
          That was precisely my approach. Every website we studied with backlinks from totally irrelevant pages did not rank at all for the Keyword. And let me add that I can't think of one reason why it should.

          I cannot reproduce the results that a few folks have claimed they received. If I could find an example, maybe I can analyse how it was managed. After an exhaustive search I still haven't found a single example.

          I thought I found one once, but it turned out to be recently expired domain that had a ton of relevant backlinks the owner wasn't aware of.

          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Don't ask me too present your evidence. You have multiple times demanded evidence. Now its time to live up to that standard. NO cute links and sending others on wild goose trips. Demand evidence then give it. I'm not antagonistic to this concept. I've said that. However true SEo facts have to be established by well researched and properly weighted evidence not what we suspect or, allege or assert.
          I'm not sure if you are just trying to be cute, or if you are unaware of how ridiculously simple this evidence is to produced in massive quantiles.

          To answer your demand I will supply three examples and by looking at these it should be clear that available samples are virtually limitless.


          Page: IBM Support & downloads - United States
          Keyword: dog training
          Irrelevant backlinks: 17,412
          Rank for Keyword: NOT IN TOP 100 RESULTS

          Page: http://www.ge.com/energy
          Keyword: green energy
          Irrelevant backlinks: 2,860
          Rank for Keyword: NOT IN TOP 100 RESULTS

          Page: GM - Technology - Electric Cars - Welcome
          Keyword: electric vehicle
          Irrelevant backlinks: 162
          Rank for Keyword: NOT IN TOP 100 RESULTS

          And there are at least a hundred billion (not kidding) more examples that I could dig up.

          Again it seems ridiculous that you would need me to present examples of something that should be so obvious, you have got to jerking my chain.

          The evidence of pages not ranking from the use of irrelevant backlinks is overwhelming. That doesn't necessarily mean that there aren't any outliers. Some folks have claimed it is possible, but I'd like to know if they are mistaken or there really is a possibility.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1373099].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Let me cut pass all the posturing and attempts at twsiting that I don't agree with in your posts and get to down to basics.


            Peer revioew is not stating I did research and its so obvious you can do it yourself and get my results. In peer review you state the methodolgy, the tools and the results. Finally you may be getting where I am coming from. Since you did this study of 1300 sites lets have your methodology precisely how you isolated others factors in a sites search result to get a valid assessment of one factors influence or lack of influence on its ranking. This is important because in peer review we get to see the assumptions a researcher may have made leading toward a weak conclusion. Case in point -


            I have seen so many folks on this forum make this claim without a single example. I have asked nicely and been given examples that always included links from highly relevant pages, the exact opposite of what was claimed.
            See thats why I needed to see how you isolated factors in your alleged study. That criteria of your study shows how weak the conclusion would be. Sites that rank well tend to have been around at least for a few months. They have gotten natural links and yes they are more likely to first get natural links from sites in their niche or related to it. It is exceedingly rare that as I rollout products and services I don't get natural links of that kind. I'm into IM and relate to Im so guess what? Surprise people in IM link back to me!

            The mere existence of a backlink lists that includes "links from highly relevant pages" does nothing to exclude a positive effect of non relevant links. Thats a totally bogus criteria. Thats like saying you don't need water to grow because everyone you have ever met also eats food and that means water has no benefit. All it does is show - as everyone already knew - that the average site has all kinds of mixed links.

            Using that criteria you have shown conclusively not a thing. Since you need to isolate other factors and most sites by the very nature of business and the internet have multiple kinds of links you need a process and methodology that takes that into account and isolates those factors out. KKchoon is moving along that path to a case study with those controls. Since you have now shown a glaring problem with your criteria your research is not worth much and I will look to KKchoon's upcoming research.



            that backlinks from irrelevant pages will help them rank, that just seems cruel to me.
            Cruelty is over reaching what you know and replacing assumption for fact without good methodology. Its why bogus cancer cures are particularly cruel.


            That was precisely my approach. Every website we studied with backlinks from totally irrelevant pages did not rank at all for the Keyword. And let me add that I can't think of one reason why it should.
            thanks that confirms what "precisely was yoru approach". Of course you wouldn't find it. Not because it proves anything but that the average site that has done anything INVARIABLY gets links from sites in its own niche or related content. Sorry its my time to be amazed at how obviously faulty this criteria of yours is.

            Any site that has "totallly irrelevant pages" has done nothing to promote their site or their business so of course they haven't ranked. Even if you buy packets and spam on blogs you will invariable end up getting a link from a relevant page or pages. In my "packets" every month I have all kinds of niches. the chances of using it for a few months and not getting a bunch of relevant links is vanishingly small.

            After an exhaustive search I still haven't found a single example.
            And you never will because it really is a riduclous methodology when you look at it.


            I'm not sure if you are just trying to be cute, or if you are unaware of how ridiculously simple this evidence is to produced in massive quantiles.
            Cute I most definitely am. I dont' have to try . No at this point I'll call it out. Your methoodology is illogical and bogus. You can produce "massive quantities" of sites and if you assumptions are massively off as they are it doesn't mean anything. I was hoping for something more because like I said I thinkg its semantically more elegant and maybe should be how Google does it.

            To answer your demand I will supply three examples and by looking at these it should be clear that available samples are virtually limitless.
            thanks I'll deal with that in the next post.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1373842].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by dburk View Post



            Page: IBM Support & downloads - United States
            Keyword: dog training
            Irrelevant backlinks: 17,412
            Rank for Keyword: NOT IN TOP 100 RESULTS

            Were you tired when you wrote this as an example? Its like the twilight zone. Its a garbage example that has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

            Is IBM support and download optimized ON PAGE for the keyword "dog training"? You are confused. The reason why the site doesn't rank well has nothing to do with irrelevant or relevant backlinks. Its not a backlink issue at all. It can't rank because the site itself doesn't have the content to rank for that keyword! Thats not an issue of backlinking.

            THATS BECAUSE THE PAGE ITSELF HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DOG TRAINING.

            My goodness.

            Please tell me you meant something else. Please or I am wasting my time debating with an SEO neophyte pretending to be an expert.

            We already know that the irrelevant links if they have PR to give will relay that to IBM AS PR JUICE. If there was another site besides IBM with identical content or near content and it has PR rank of zero and IBM stand at say 6 (didn't check) that the chances are really good that that added PR will affect the rank positively provided of course that its the proper keywords.

            No one ever said, implied, came even close to breathing that backlinks without any content on the reffered to page (for the keywords) could rank a site for a keyword. Thats not the point of debate. You are lost

            Again it seems ridiculous that you would need me to present examples of something that should be so obvious, you have got to jerking my chain.
            It seems obvious to me that you think its ridiculous because you have no clue what we are talking about here. To clarify we are talking about when all things are equal. The page is optimized, the onpage content is relevant - how can we isolate for the effect of PR being passed form non relevant sites and what evidence do we have that gogle analyzes the content of the referring page beyond the anchor text. You come up empty on everything but making assertions without evidence by appealing to the color of the sky.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1373911].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author banker0679
              hmmm George Bush whitehouse page had nothing to do with miserable failure..yet he was ranking for it


              again folks....Google the word 'google bombing'
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1374186].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by banker0679 View Post

                hmmm George Bush whitehouse page had nothing to do with miserable failure..yet he was ranking for it


                again folks....Google the word 'google bombing'
                Google refactored its algorythm since then so thats not as effective.
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1374206].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author banker0679
                  when did they do that?

                  they 'said' they did that last year....but there was a story about Obama recently ranking for "cheerful achievement" this year

                  it says 'they quickly' took it down which means it was a manual update not automatically done by the algo

                  of course it still works today.....

                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  Google refactored its algorythm since then so thats not as effective.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1374215].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                    Oh I never said it doesn't work for some keywords I just said its not AS effective because google made some changes. I always caution against using these brute force means. You can spend a wholoe lot of time doing things like this and then they make a change to the algorythm and you drop like a rock. thats why I always say - vary your linking strategies.
                    Signature

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1374226].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author banker0679