The most common PBN footprints

by writeaway 14 replies
SEOs have been relying on PBNs for a long time now to get a headstart on SERPS... BUT

more and more SEOs are complaining that their PBNs are getting penalized by Google.

To help stop the bleeding, here's a quick list of common PBN footprints that can lead to your network getting HAMMERED by Google

Common whois
Interlinking to other blogs in the network
Duplicate content from other blogs in the network
(BIG ONE) running ads with the same AFF ID in the network
Selling backlinks from your network (remember: you can't control the person who buys from you - what if this person buys from a network that got penalized?)

Care to add to the list?
#search engine optimization #common #footprints #pbn
Avatar of Unregistered
  • Profile picture of the author expmrb
    Too much linking can also be a factor. Suppose a web 2.0 blog has 10 articles and the owner has linked at least 3 links from 3 posts to his/her main site.
    Signature
    SEO Motionz Forum - A Digital Marketing Forum
    Forum Management & Promotion, SEO Tips, Money Making tips etc.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11019189].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author David Jones42
    "Selling backlinks from your network (remember: you can't control the person who buys from you - what if this person buys from a network that got penalized

    this one is responsible for mostly banned pbn.
    Signature

    Top mobile app, games, and web development company in India AIS Technolabs

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11019190].message }}
  • Crappy design 8 out of 10 PBNs have crappy designs and you can identify them just by looking at them.
    No logos, messed up widget section, no author but still you can see the author section, irregular formatting of posts.
    I can add a lot more here.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11019696].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author wilhb81
      Originally Posted by michaelkoehler92 View Post

      Crappy design 8 out of 10 PBNs have crappy designs and you can identify them just by looking at them.
      No logos, messed up widget section, no author but still you can see the author section, irregular formatting of posts.
      I can add a lot more here.
      Yup, I totally agreed with your opinions here. These similarities are too obvious and the BIg G will spot them miles away...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11020154].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author expmrb
    In generally webmasters prefer one site one link rule. But I don't think so if the site has atleast 30 posts and you are putting 2 links within the content with highly relevant anchor texts and the page within your main site to which they are linking are also relevant then I think that its fine.
    Signature
    SEO Motionz Forum - A Digital Marketing Forum
    Forum Management & Promotion, SEO Tips, Money Making tips etc.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11020130].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Originally Posted by writeaway View Post

    more and more SEOs are complaining that their PBNs are getting penalized by Google.

    No they're not.
    Signature
    Be your best self. - Darryl Philbin
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11020133].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pbn bz
    For me, I still see a lot of PBNs that obviously look like PBNs. That's a surefire way to get your sites penalised.

    Don't: put up a quick, cheap looking site, slap on a logo, minimum content, embed a video, with one link to your money site.

    Do: spend a bit more time making the site look real, this includes adding social profiles, real address/phone, decent layout, good images, good theme (free or paid), nice logo, more than just 500 words of content, recreate strong URLs (check in Majestic/Ahrefs) etc.

    Even better would be to post an article to the sites regularly and automatically syndicate it to the social profiles. To keep everything active.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11025424].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author writeaway
      Originally Posted by pbn bz View Post


      Do: spend a bit more time making the site look real, this includes adding social profiles, real address/phone, decent layout, good images, good theme (free or paid), nice logo, more than just 500 words of content, recreate strong URLs (check in Majestic/Ahrefs) etc.
      Solid points! How many words of content do you think would be better?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11025562].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author pbn bz
        A 5-10 page site (typical PBN size site) cannot look real with only 500 words of content.
        So I suggest 500-750 on the homepage, a couple of inner pages with a decent amount 400-600 per page, 200 on the About Us, 100 on the Contact Us, privacy policy or terms pages if needed.
        That's about 2000 words of content.
        And another point is don't use spun content, or really low quality content obviously not written by a native speaker (another massive giveaway for a fake site), get a half decent writer who can write near perfect English. There are plenty of grammar checkers available to correct it too.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11025749].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author writeaway
          Originally Posted by pbn bz View Post

          A 5-10 page site (typical PBN size site) cannot look real with only 500 words of content.
          So I suggest 500-750 on the homepage, a couple of inner pages with a decent amount 400-600 per page, 200 on the About Us, 100 on the Contact Us, privacy policy or terms pages if needed.
          That's about 2000 words of content.
          And another point is don't use spun content, or really low quality content obviously not written by a native speaker (another massive giveaway for a fake site), get a half decent writer who can write near perfect English. There are plenty of grammar checkers available to correct it too.
          I agree. Many BH services that offer 'content' for PBNs are quite atrocious-in terms of grammar as well as idiomatic expressions.

          Back to length issues:

          What do you think of the Buffer report regarding the 'scientifically proven' 'ideal' post length of 1500 words per page? http://blog.bufferapp.com/the-ideal-...ing-to-science

          I ask because I am in the process of putting together a framework for a 200 site PBN for a client.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11026156].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author pbn bz
            It's an interesting article, although I don't see many PBNs where posts are 1500 words in length. Usually they are 500-1000 words.

            I guess it depends on the budget available to build the PBN. Most people don't want to spend too much and try to get away with the minimum content.

            Anyway, I think you are more of a content expert than me anyway!
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11029072].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author writeaway
    Does it make sense to build new links to the PBN sites or should I just let them be?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11029413].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Originally Posted by writeaway View Post

      Does it make sense to build new links to the PBN sites or should I just let them be?
      Do you want to rank better on Google SERPs or stay where you're at?
      Signature
      Be your best self. - Darryl Philbin
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11029505].message }}
Avatar of Unregistered

Trending Topics