The Sky is NOT Falling: Here's Proof.

13 replies
  • SEO
  • |
I thought this may be of use for people who are struggling to see the fact that really, not all that much has changed - the main alterations in 2012, were really down to:
  • Excessive and blatant over-optimisation i.e. anchor text usage.
  • Over-reliance on a single link building mechanism.
  • Blatant spam tactics i.e. on-site content manipulation, spinning and duplication.

Here's a few screenshots of backlink profiles of Confused.com AND MoneySupermarket.com - the two biggest brands in car insurance in the UK. They occupy the two positions in the UK for the term 'car insurance'.



Blatant over optimisation in the above profile.

Moving to the UK's biggest brand...



Again, blatant.

And another...this time it's the same page as before, but look for the paid links on the right-hand side of the page, for yet another blatant indication to the search engine...



And another:



So, what's the point of all of this? Basically, to show that paid linking and non-ethical strategies are going on all over the place and at a far wider scale in some instances than any single person on this forum is capable of achieving.

That said, is this simply encouragement to go and do what you like? OF COURSE NOT. The important point to remember is something which could probably be called link absorption - these brands have extensive natural link profiles in place too, some could argue that those profiles are more capable of absorbing manipulative activity.

What's more, they are all increasing the probability that they will be detected, or that CERTAIN links will be detected (not their entire profile). However, if Interflora is anything to go by that may again just mean a little bit of creative use of the Google Disavow tool and 11 days later you are absolutely fine (at least that's the case for a brand with a large link profile which is likely to get publicity).

Remember, there are two different types of 'ranking penalties' - manual reviews and algorithmic penalties. The latter is panda, penguin etc, and it works by reviewing a pre-determined set of criteria to compare your site against; if you've been indulging too much in any single link building mechanism, then of course it stands to reason you increase the probability you will be 'detected'.

However, remember, it's MECHANICAL - you have to make yourself stand out, you have to behave stupidly, or you have to do too much too soon, so much so that it just looks obvious. New sites are obviously more likely to be a prime target for trying to build something on nothing, so above all else, focus on building authority into your website, actual authoritative links from other authoritative domains.

TO AVOID (PARTICULARLY IN THE EARLY STAGES):
  • Over-optimisation of anchor text (stick a lot of brand in there for the first few months and also moving forward too).
  • Make sure deep-linking is enforced.
  • Avoid excessive use of ANY one link building mechanism (but particularly the more obvious stuff i.e. private blog networks, commenting, paid links etc, most of which you should be staying away from entirely anyway), secure as many independent votes as possible i.e. independent links from independent domains.

The former, manual review i.e. Google Chrome, BMW etc, is unlikely to ever happen to you.
#falling #proof #sky
  • Profile picture of the author Make Money Ninja
    **** you for calling paid linking "non ethical".

    Also don't ruin peoples spot. It's bad for the SEO industry.
    Signature

    The Ultimate Guide To Link Building

    Get More Links - Generate More Traffic - Make More Money!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7925132].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author satrap
      Originally Posted by Make Money Ninja View Post

      **** you for calling paid linking "non ethical".
      I don't think that's necessary. I mean really?...
      Signature
      60 Awesome Ways to Make Money Without a Job
      .................................
      Check out my blog Survey Satrap featuring honest reviews of paid survey sites.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7927573].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lpezzini
    Do you help site get back on track?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7926999].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Gareth Mailer
      Originally Posted by lpezzini View Post

      Do you help site get back on track?
      No, I'm not looking to sell services on here - I'm on here mainly to boost my rep in this community and sell access to a PBN; I've got a great rep in certain parts of the UK, needs to translate overseas

      =====ANSWER========================

      You mean you've been penalised? Slight minefield.

      In some instances it can be very difficult to get out of, in others not so difficult. First step is to use the disavow tool (with an understanding of how it works, so read about it), then submit a reinclusion request. When they reject it, submit another, and another, and another, and another (this is all under the presumption you've received a notification through webmaster tools?).

      I've had prospects ring up having tried everything, and it hasn't recovered - they've then just opted for a new domain. If you for a new domain, DON'T 301 redirect the old site.

      301 redirecting the old site isn't a bad idea per say, it will even likely put a plaster on the penalty and restore everything for a few months (as has been the case with a few examples lately), however after time the penalty will likely just follow through. Even on a subdomain, in most instances.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7927208].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by Gareth Mailer View Post

        No, I'm not looking to sell services on here - I'm on here mainly to boost my rep in this community and sell access to a PBN;es.
        Breath of fresh cool air. Not just pushing services but not playing any games that there are no marketing motivations (which is so silly to pretend about on a marketing forum). I like your style.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7927716].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Gareth Mailer
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Breath of fresh cool air. Not just pushing services but not playing any games that there are no marketing motivations (which is so silly to pretend about on a marketing forum). I like your style.
          Cheers, Mike. I have seen your name batted about quite a bit on here too, sure we will have interesting conversations in the future

          In fairness, services wise, I'm proud of the extent to which I've manage to build the Agency up in just under 3 years i.e. from nothing to £150k turnover p/year and employing three people full time, the issue is scalability and time, hence why I've got other plans moving forward. It depends too much on me; that and I've got other projects on the side I want to put more time into!

          Anyway, be good to have a chat with you re: building PBNs as well, that's usually what's referred to when I see your name mentioned!
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7929007].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rjames
    great post...and you are indeed correct...Google always has and always will be able the back links...you just have to know how to do it correctly...most dont
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7927600].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jinx1221
    Originally Posted by Gareth Mailer View Post

    So, what's the point of all of this? Basically, to show that paid linking and non-ethical strategies are going on all over the place and at a far wider scale in some instances than any single person on this forum is capable of achieving.
    I think many of us (me included) are slightly on the paranoid side when it comes to getting the ol' Google Boot. Not that we should throw caution to the wind, far from it, it's better to be on the paranoid side, keeps you safe. But like the live examples Google shows you:

    Fighting Spam ? Inside Search ? Google

    These sites are so obvious, set up ONLY for spam, probably mass produced by the thousands, that Google almost has to do something about it.. kind of like, what would you do if some truck drove by your house every hour flinging sh#t in your front yard, you would have to do something. Its us, most of us, anyways, that are self promoting in most instances, just trying to get at least a little boost, or some more traffic, which btw google really isn't that much against self promotion.. its these blatant robospammers that they are really needing to weed out.

    These spammers aren't reading this forum, they belong to some underground groups, more hackers than seo'ers. I've stumbled inside one of their black hat forums once.. nothing like some "how do I spam blackhat like" thread here, or anything about blog comment spam, I mean, were talking frightening. What we do is kids stuff to them.

    Anyways, thanks for sharing!
    Signature

    The Ultimate Private Network Management,
    Visualization and Automation Tool




    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7927919].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Gareth Mailer
      Originally Posted by jinx1221 View Post

      I think many of us (me included) are slightly on the paranoid side when it comes to getting the ol' Google Boot. Not that we should throw caution to the wind, far from it, it's better to be on the paranoid side, keeps you safe. But like the live examples Google shows you:

      Fighting Spam ? Inside Search ? Google

      These sites are so obvious, set up ONLY for spam, probably mass produced by the thousands, that Google almost has to do something about it.. kind of like, what would you do if some truck drove by your house every hour flinging sh#t in your front yard, you would have to do something. Its us, most of us, anyways, that are self promoting in most instances, just trying to get at least a little boost, or some more traffic, which btw google really isn't that much against self promotion.. its these blatant robospammers that they are really needing to weed out.

      These spammers aren't reading this forum, they belong to some underground groups, more hackers than seo'ers. I've stumbled inside one of their black hat forums once.. nothing like some "how do I spam blackhat like" thread here, or anything about blog comment spam, I mean, were talking frightening. What we do is kids stuff to them.

      Anyways, thanks for sharing!
      Absolutely - paranoia is healthy, well very healthy in this industry. My only contest with it is simply over-generalisation of everything as 'dead' i.e. paid links are dead, guest blogging is dead, PBNs are dead, based on a few algorithmic updates which have only targeted, relatively, a VERY small number of websites (in the grand scheme of things).

      I appreciate the generalisations are coming from people with next to no experience of implementing campaigns practically, but the results above show a significant amount of manipulation still takes place across just about every single big generic keyword there is; of course, we're talking about brands with huge link profiles so some 'absorption' may be likely (my own theory which is one of the few things I talk about which I've not yet backed up with research - see above), but it's still there nonetheless.

      Just to clarify, I'm not recommending anyone engage in ANY of the above (everyone has to develop their own balance of risk), I'm just merely pointing out that Google has trillions of pages to crawl and index; a lot of people seem very concerned by the fact that Google is 'watching everything' and 'seeing everything' where truth be told, it's far from the case (which is more the point I was trying to make, rather than trying to highlight any single mechanism).

      In short, I think a a lot of people struggle to deal with the fact that Google is, ultimately, mechanical - providing you don't put yourself in front of it with a big "kick me" sign posted on your forehead i.e. over-manipulation relative to the size and quality of your link profile, you've still got quite a lot of freedom.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7929031].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by Gareth Mailer View Post

        Cheers, Mike. I have seen your name batted about quite a bit on here too,
        Yes......BATTED....is the operative word. lol

        In fairness, services wise, I'm proud of the extent to which I've manage to build the Agency up in just under 3 years i.e. from nothing to £150k turnover p/year and employing three people full time, the issue is scalability and time, hence why I've got other plans moving forward. It depends too much on me; that and I've got other projects on the side I want to put more time into!

        Anyway, be good to have a chat with you re: building PBNs as well, that's usually what's referred to when I see your name mentioned![/QUOTE]

        Originally Posted by Gareth Mailer View Post

        .
        I appreciate the generalisations are coming from people with next to no experience of implementing campaigns practically, but the results above show a significant amount of manipulation still takes place across just about every single big generic keyword there is
        Theres some cognitive dissonance here in that the tendency of most is to visualize all these things in ways they are used to seeing in WSOs. For example if you run a SEO network it must be a BLOG network, you have to be using poor or spun content and placing 25 links on a page. If its bought links then its a blog roll link. Google has been able to detect this unsophisticated way of doing things and people think that that means that Google can catch all forms of those techniques where its far from the truth and in some cases even impossible

        These are the poor man's way of doing things and its easier for Google to slap. The market in general is more sophisticated and more financially endowed. they can have articles that costs $50-$150 and be so authentic in a niche you would have no clue whatsoever any link is bought.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7930811].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Backlinko
    Now THIS is a case study I can get behind.

    The OP is showing a huge branded site ranking for legitimately tough keywords.

    And they're doing it with the help of paid links.

    Will Google find out about them? Maybe.

    But if you're in a tough niche like these guys, infographics and guest posting isn't going to get you to the top.

    One thing I'd like to add is that -- in addition to their paid links -- these sites have build a massive BRAND.

    In my opinion, brand signals are really important. Not only for ranking in the first place...but for making a site durable to future updates.
    Signature
    Find Awesome Keywords...Without ANY Tools
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7929245].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Gareth Mailer
      Originally Posted by Backlinko View Post

      Now THIS is a case study I can get behind.

      The OP is showing a huge branded site ranking for legitimately tough keywords.

      And they're doing it with the help of paid links.

      Will Google find out about them? Maybe.

      But if you're in a tough niche like these guys, infographics and guest posting isn't going to get you to the top.

      One thing I'd like to add is that -- in addition to their paid links -- these sites have build a massive BRAND.

      In my opinion, brand signals are really important. Not only for ranking in the first place...but for making a site durable to future updates.
      Two things on that, and increasingly the way I see SEO going (at least as far as big brands are concerned):

      Telelinks: I ran a test campaign about 4 months ago - I got our apprentice to ring an opt-in list of our contacts, to offer them a free page of content, in exchange for a link. He garnered an immediate 32% acceptance rate (some calls didn't go through, some people didn't get back after a call and an e-mail). Again, it was a small portion of UK based contacts stored in a CRM, but I genuinely believe the connected SEO is the SEO to hire.

      Offline Link Building: Tying it into a guerilla marketing type approach. I have a car insurance/pet insurance site on the side which works using a pingtree system to push leads through to providers. One of the approaches we're going to take in the next few months is to leverage as much brand awareness as possible, which will invariably lead to more links i.e. car wrapping 5 cars in the local area for £100 each per month; 6ft cardboard cutouts of me displayed in people's gardens with a high level of footfall etc.

      I'm on a major tangent, but traditional SEO is still traditional SEO, there are ways and means to do things purely online - however, IMO, if you want to build a truly stellar brand and acquire the type of natural links and brand awareness you need to acquire (the type that leads to truly free brand traffic i.e. not paid for, maintenance type generic traffic), you need to combine online with off.

      Cheers for the input
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7929550].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author paulgl
    There is no way to tell of paid links are hurting, or helping.
    You point out that those are some of the biggest sites in the UK,
    or something like that. That alone counts for authority and trustworthiness.

    Google never said paid links were bad. You must add the rest of that
    sentence.

    Amazon.com has in effect, a zillion paid links. They pay people
    to put them on their pages via commissions.

    Google does not know a paid link from a hole in the wall, unless they
    are tipped off in some fashion.

    I go and do what I want anyway. Everybody here should do the same.

    Google wants you to add nofollow to a paid link. But google can want all
    they want.

    Paul
    Signature

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

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7930838].message }}

Trending Topics