Are paid links on your brand name considered bad by Google?
-
I've been intrigued recently by the penalty applied to a site we have just started working with. They were penalised back in summer last year as their previous link builder had built 60,000 links all with the same hard to get keyword anchor text....we're still sorting it out.
My question now is that if the client pays for inclusion on some relevant sites, such as niche directories and those sites automatically produce 'follow' links, would the client be penalised if they link on their own company name? For example if they manufacture blue widgets and the anchor text on the link is 'ABC Manufacturing' rather than 'Blue Widgets' would Google see that as a reasonable link?
I appreciate that if they linked back on the keyword anchor text 'Blue Widgets' it would be wrong but I'm seeking clarification on using the company name. Any thoughts?
-
Thanks so much, but without this pain we would never have got the client! We're the good guys, just trying to unravel a tangle of American .edu links and sitewide footers from other American sites for a business based firmly in the UK. What the last guy was thinking we've no idea...
Thanks for taking the time to contribute
-
Thanks again Irving; we're advising the client to stay away from directories anyway, and concentrating on providing a useful service for end users. Links, if they happen, will be a bonus we hope!
Thanks guys...;-)
-
in my experience, ALL paid links should be no-folow. Also they may have penalized you for having all the same few keywords. A good link building strategy Must look natural to Google. Otherwise it's just a matter of time before you get penalized.
Sorry this happened to you, i feel your pain!
-
The difference is naturally occurring links from regular non paid diversified sites vs paid links from directory type sites that Google has already flagged as being bad neighborhoods used for SEO, and these sites are most likely linking to a lot of penalized sites as well which makes you guilty by association.
So it has more to do with the places you are linked on than it does overusing your brand name in the anchor text, plus naturally occurring links will have their own keyword mix and match diversity.
brandname
visit brandname
visit brandname.com
go to brandname
some will be do follow, some will be no follow, some might be image links
-
Thanks Irving. Just wondering though, the client naturally attracts links anyway so surely that can't harm them? Or can it? There's no way to stop that. They regularly blog and get shared on social as they are an 'authority' and spent years on page one of the results so people in the industry know them and we don't want to diminish this activity which, irrespective of links, is what they are known for. Any further thoughts from anyone welcome here!
Thanks all....
-
if your brand name is your domain name then you should already rank for that. don't build links while trying to recover from a penalty.
-
Thanks, good advice. We're slowly trying to undo the harm already done and build good relevant backlinks, hence the question. I think that we will need to take almost everything off and start again with this one.....
-
If you are already penalised, I wouldn't touch paid links of any kind, especially directory ones
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
What MOZ domain authority are considered bad links?
As a general rule of thumb, what MOZ domain authority are considered bad links? Ie., is it for sites that are 20 and below? What is the DA floor where you should target links from?
Link Building | | jspinder150 -
Relaunching a site that has had thousands of posts linking to the same 20 articles. How to properly setup internal linking?
I'm in the process of relaunching a music news site (www.prefixmag.com) that once did quite well in search (over a million monthly search visits in its prime). The site got crushed by Panda, etc. and we stopped updating it. I'm starting to do more research but one thing that I noticed was we have modules in the right rail (desktop) that are found on all of our article pages that point to the same posts. (Edit: Added attachment. The links in the right rail under Editor Picks, Features, News, Media, etc. are found on every page of the site). In other words, we have thousands of posts that all link to the same 20 or so articles. Should we not do this if we're not trying to emphasize these posts in Google? Assuming this is the case, what is the proper way to do internal linking? Do we simply setup a sitemap and link to it? I'm hoping to have the thousands of articles we've published over the years have a chance to rank in search again. Also, we have a number of posts that are thin in content should those pages not be submitted in the sitemap? Thanks in advance! 2KmX0
Link Building | | leggo0 -
Reporting a Link Scheme to Google
Hi Mozzers, Two questions...
Link Building | | FDAitsupport
There is a negative article showing up in the SERPS for my boss name which we've been doing some rep management to get rid of. Well, someone started building links to that property recently, and it has pushed the result to the #2 spot. I did some research, and the property has never had a single link pointed to it until recently. There are 7 referring domains, all of which use the same theme, and have the same author for each article. Each property has over 1,000 articles in not even 2 years. All articles are based around the same topic. The property they are promoting negatively went from 0 backlinks to 55 in under 2 months. My Question is, is it okay to report this to Google? It seems like a cut and dry example of a link scheme. Second question, I have recently seen an increase of spammy links showing up in ahrefs. These links were likely built by a predecessor of mine as far back as 2010. I had been letting them fall off naturally, but now they are coming back (around the same time the above mentioned link scheme began). Do you think someone is re-indexing my links as a sort of attack? Or is it possible Google is re-indexing them? I'm going to contact the webmasters where I can, but seriously considering using disavow tool. My rankings started dropping when the links started getting indexed. And continue to drop. Negative SEO, or Googles recent "Quality Update"? Thanks for any and all input. Ryan0 -
Paid Press Releases: Good for SEO or bad?
Press release services like prweb.com and emailwire.com seem to work, but are they a good idea?
Link Building | | aj6130 -
Ecomerce: Would 4 link sections leak too much link juice?
Hello, In my content management for our ecomerce site, I've found that there are sometimes links to sites in our industry that have "helpful links" sections. Several strong sites link directly to these resource sections. There are 4 different topics that fit this trend in our industry. Would it leak too much link juice to make 4 comprehensive link sections and place a link to them on our "Useful Articles" page? Or should I stick to one comprehensive link section? Or perhaps a small link section? Or none at all? Thanks.
Link Building | | BobGW0 -
Can high SERPS and/or social signals minimize Google penalties and a back linking removal question
As I am continually sizing up my competition in the SERPS I have scanned their sites with a fine tooth and comb. I have found that these sites practice in the very things that I have practiced in the past and have removed thinking that may be some of the reasons I was hit with Penguin. Some of these factors are: Link Scheme with sites they own (C Blocks) Content for Search Engines (Keyword rich text) Exact anchor text in back linking profile Yet even though my competition practices in these methods (One site even places exact anchor text in the footer and header of every page for one of their other forum site) they seem to have not even been touched with any of the recent updates. In fact it seems their ranking have increased. In scanning these sites the only major difference that I have been able to see between them and I is that their SERPS are higher than mine and they have way more social signals than me. One site has about 73k facebook likes where I only have about 300. My question is Can Google ignore penalties for sites that have higher SERPS and /or social signals that would effect another site that had lower ones? My other question is related to back links My main site has links from another site I built a long time ago (Pre SEO and not knowing what I was doing) somewhere in the 73k range. Obviously a HUGE signal to Google that this might be spam and I am aware. I have removed the links from that site but unfortunately the average crawl rate per day is very low so it is taking a very long time for Google to find those pages and re-crawl them to find the links gone. Since that site I have than has those links pointing to my main site has very low traffic I am totally willing to kill that entire site with a 404. Can this help speed up the removal of those links from that site? I figure since the site no longer exists all links from that site will be removed almost immediately from my main site. Any thoughts?
Link Building | | cbielich0 -
What are the pros and cons of using a link builder? Can link building be outsourced?
Hi, I have great content on my website which I would like to build external links to from other websites. I am told this will increase my domain authority and ultimately help search engine ranking positions. I have very limited time in my hands and now thinking of outsourcing the link building component to a specialist. Is this a good way of doing it? Could you recommend professional link builders?
Link Building | | Saunders18650