Having 2 domains with same name - Impact on SEO
-
Hi AllAs we still dwindle with the rankings not coming in line with the efforts.I have a question:
We have 2 websites
1. http://www.example.com/ (which lost traffic and rank in Jan 2013). So we assumed that it was due to some penguin penalty. So we worked on disavow extra but nothing actually helped.Though there was no manual penalty mentioned in the GWT. Frustrated with this we thought of having another website 6 months back:
2. https://example.org/ - we did all the right things and by the book. But we are not seeing ranking here too. We did backlink analysis on all competitors and worked on only quality links they had. So all our links are highly highly relevant. But still the ranks are not moving beyond third page...in fact they moved to 6-7 page in last 2-3 days.
Please suggest ..
1. is it due to same name of domain (our brand name) causing the issue. If yes should we go for 302 or 301 redirect to save ourselves from any penalty that our last website may have got. We can not leave that name unattended as our cataloges etc have that website mentioned. i will expect a scientific reply here not gut feeling please.
2. Is it to do with .org domain extension that it should not be with commercial organizations like us
Kindly reply at the earliest
Regards
Aman
-
Thanks for reply Matt. Agreed these are some links which surely could be out of frustration. Can get them removed. But I have a question, check out our competitors who rank in India. You will be amazed to see their link building. Even one has a sub domain pligg sub domain for all kind of bad links even sex related etc.
However, how can you help us to achieve our goal. You can send a PM too... I will be very glad.
-
According to Ahrefs you have a 63% of referring pages contain the word "hair." Your top anchors are hair, loss, transplant, treatment, india
You had 3 links on .edu domains, all of which were spam comments on forums which have now been removed.
Even your latest links are not very clean:
- http://community.macmillan.org.uk/cancer_types/breast-cancer/f/38/p/51392/515703.aspx
- http://origin.wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=114120&p=6418306
Do you think those are natural backlinks passing a lot of value?
-
Thats a very Valid Suggestion...Thanks will surely do it
Also please see if you can to suggest something which is keeping out website from Rank
-
Aman,... well what you are doing is creating thin pages which over time might just risk a Panda Penalty. You might want to at least no-index those blog pages.
-
That right we could have... but was not ready for a 1% chance so thought this to be best.
Secondly we wanted to show the same copy
-
Why not just use rel canonical?
-
Hi Jonathan
These are just our news coverages posted in other websites. so to avoid content duplicacy we just post images.... apart from news events all categories have text posts
-
Yes!! Matt Definitely it is true for the first website. But now we have a in-house team working on this. That is why are very sure about the links and its relevancy.
But all the websites that are ranking have really bad links but still they rank. One odd keyword of our is on 1st page but main were on 3rd now pushed back to 7th.
Our content sharing is much wider than any one of them. We are simply perplexed why is this all happening to us.
1. We changed even to server in India for new website. That means both websites are on different servers. The new one is in India.
2. New website is secure https://
We know we are just there but there is something we are missing for sure and not able to find that out... it is becoming challenging question for us. Any no of people we ask noone tells us the right solutions
-
Why are your blog pages, just an image of a photocopy of someone elses article. You realise Google can't read the text from Images for SEO purposes right?
-
You had an SEO company working for you a few years ago, yes? They did some REALLY dodgy linking - and yes, you have link issues on the domains.
Unfortunately it looks like both domains have the same issue - you've bought links or had an SEO company do work in the past. Either way you need a disavow, site cleanup & new authority built to the site. The new site is really good looking. Good luck with it! Let me know if you need anything further.
-
Thanks Matt for the reply,
As We didn't receive any manual penalty in GWT whether it is Panda or Penguin, that caused us drop our ranking of .com site. But after that we studied thoroughly by ourselves a lot in order to know first whole about SEO, all Google updates, guidelines , and best practices etc. And revamped our old .com website from scratch; whether it is about new site structure, best UX from users point of view, unique content, internal linking, meta tags, curating high in-depth researched article or blog posts, building quality & high relevant links etc
We also found many many suspicious backlinks as well here and thought to cleanup that as well may be the reason behind.Yes, with keeping above all best SEO practices in mind to formed another new website https://example.org/ . BUT still we are facing STRANGE behavior to our website by Google, & not considered us to beat our competitors. We worked enough hard & done backlink profile analysis of our competitors and found many bad activities by them, still ranking in good position in SERPs than us.
-
Hi,
If you are using the same content on both website then that could be the major issue but If you are not using the same content then your site ranking is not down due to exact domain name with different extension.
Second, to clear up something "Google has no way of knowing that your domain is a 'new version' of the old one, unless you tell it. The method for this is a 301 redirect but as you are saying that your site's ranking went down due to algorithm update so there is no point to redirect old website to new.
You can do one thing put a splash page on old website like
"Old website has moved to new website
New website formally old website
& provide a 'click here' link to reach new website (*** No 301 redirect in your case**)
Thanks
-
Whenever you don't give us a specific domain to help on, you have to give as much info as possible. On the .com, after you disavowed did you build new authority or just assume the disavow would be enough? (It's not.) On the .com you said you lost traffic January 2013 which is Panda, not Penguin. So you were probably doing a whole lot of link cleanup to solve a problem you can't solve with link cleanup.
Given the other domain isn't ranking either, I'd guess you have some sort of Panda (content) issue. Duplicate content, repetitious & spammy titles, huge keyword stuffed meta keywords tags, thin or non-existent content, etc. Without seeing the site itself it's hard to say but this all reeks of Panda.
As to the questions:
-
No, it's not the domain name being similar. Without knowing the domains hard to say about 301.
-
Definitely not.
-
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
-
Which seo firms produce the most authoritative SEO studies?
I'm not talking about conjectures or guesses -- but SEO studies that is actually backed up by hardcore data. Which SEO firm produces excellent data-driven studies you always trust?
Algorithm Updates | | Brand_Psychic0 -
More pages or less pages for best SEO practices?
Hi all, I would like to know the community's opinion on this. A website with more pages or less pages will rank better? Websites with more pages have an advantage of more landing pages for targeted keywords. Less pages will have advantage of holding up page rank with limited pages which might impact in better ranking of pages. I know this is highly dependent. I mean to get answers for an ideal website. Thanks,
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz1 -
What is your experience with markups (schema.org) in terms of SEO and best practice learnings?
Hi, I am looking to implement schema markups into a variety of websites and currently wondering about best practices. I am working on energy providers, building material, e-retailers, social association among others. While I understand every single one of these is an individual case, I could do with some advices from you, guys. Which markups would you consider key for search engines? I would have naturally chosen markups to highlight the business name, location and products but there is so much more to schema.org! Thanks,
Algorithm Updates | | A_Q0 -
SEO Audit after Penguin 2.1 what are you guys seeing? this is my thougts
We have looked at around 2000 sites since Penguin 2.1 launched a few weeks back. These include our customers and their own competitors site. We are going through all the data which is obviously going to take some time. Hopefully we will publish a report on our findings as we are happy to share. What I currently see in my early analysis is Roughly 70% of sites tested have 0% exact match Anchor Text for their money keywords. The other 30% have less than 5% exact match Anchor Text. The quality of the links is often still poor to the sites ranking on page 1. The content surrounding the links is only about 10-15% of the time related to the money keywords. The loading time of the sites ranking seems to not matter, we encountered a lot of slow sites. Design and usability of the site was not important. We are not seeing much impact via Social media, a lot of these sites are small business Less than 10% of sites on page 1 had a Google+ account More than 40% of page 1 sites had Facebook profiles. More than 80% of the sites ranking on page 1 had less than 100 links to the landing page that ranked What are your opinions of helping to recover if hit by the above??? Q) If you have too high an anchor text percentage and have been hit or may get hit in the future would you. a) create some more high quality links with more varied anchor text, ie Click here, brand name etc b) not create any more links just remove the links you have to dilute the anchor text c) change the anchor text on links you are able to These figures are a work in progress so data will change just wanting to share our early findings and try to get a good conversation going. What are you guys seeing?
Algorithm Updates | | tempowebdesign0 -
Shared Hosting - Bad for SEO? (exp. Godaddy)
There were a lot of questions and data on this a few years back and nothing terribly recent so i wanted to get the discussion going again and see if any new data has been published. Is hosting your website on a shared host like Godaddy or Network Solutions going to hurt your rankings because their holds a chance that you could be on the same IP as spammy websites? My gut feeling is no primarily because almost 90% of the worldwide web is on shared hosting but i do not have a lot of data to back it up. Id love to hear some feedback. Cheers - Kyle
Algorithm Updates | | kchandler0 -
Sub-domains and keyword rich domains
Hello All I'm hoping for some opinions as i am confused as to the best action for me to take. The problem:
Algorithm Updates | | jonny512379
Although i say the below, we have never been penalised by Google, not taken part in any bad link building and don't do too bad with SERP. but i worry Google may not like what i do these days. We have one main site that is broken down into areas/cities (i,e London, Manchester, etc) so the domain looks like www.domain.co.uk/London But in addition to this we also use Sub-domains to target popular areas (i,e. http://London.domain.co.uk).
These sub-domains take the content from the main site but of course only display results relevant to London and are optimised for "London + Keyword"
Any page that gets duplicated (i.e London.domain.co.uk/profile123 and www.domain.co.uk/profile123 are ALMOST the same content) we add a rel="canonical" link that points to the main domain+page on www.
All these sites have a large amount of links back to www.domain.co.uk/?Page so the user can also search in other areas other then London, etc. This method has worked well for us and is popular with both users and Google search results. All sites/sub-domains are added to GWT under the same account and all sites have unique sitemaps. I do however worry that Google may class this as link manipulation owing to the amount of links pointing back to the main domain and its pages (this is not the reason we use the sub-domains though) In addition to the above sub-domains we have a few domain names (5/6) that are keyword rich that we also place the same content on (i,e www.manchester-keyword.co.uk would show only content relevant to Manchester), and again these sites have links back to the main domain, so users can navigate other areas of the UK. I worry that these additional domains may also not be liked by Google What do people think? I have started to reduce/replace some of the additional keyword rich domains with sub-domains from the main site and then 301 the keyword rich domain (i.e. www.manchester-Keyword.co.uk now goes to http://Manchester.domain.co.uk) as i feel sub-domains may not be penalised as much as unique domains are.
There are domains that i dont really want to 301 as they bring in good amounts of traffic and users have bookmarked them, etc. Any opinions or what you think i should do would be great, as i really worry that if Google stops giving us good results, i'm in real trouble. Although im not sure if what we do is wrong with Google or not.0 -
Physical locationof the server vs customer base vs SEO penality?
HI All, We are an Australian business with our hosting currently based in Australia. We have recently been considering moving hosts for a few reasons. In particular when we have done analysis of hosting in the US and also with Rackspace say in Hong Kong we have found that the prices can be significantly cheaper or with more bells in whistles provided in the hosting of a dedicated server offshore vs Australia for the same price. Therefore from this point of view we would be much better off moving our hosting to the US or HK with Rackspace. There are the issues such as latency to take on board but lets put that to the side for the moment as we are mostly interested in understanding if offshore hosting will impact us from an SEO perspective and if so how and can these impacts be mitigated. So our first question is a) if we move our hosting offshore, will this impact our SEO? b) if it does impact our seo, how will it impact (ie lose rankings for organic pages due to IP address being offshore)? c) is A is also an impact are there ways of eliminating these impacts outlined in B? d) net - if the impacts on seo can be mitigated will the net result still be negative or could we still be seen on the same footing as a domain hosted in Australia? Thanks Sean
Algorithm Updates | | sbcinv0 -
Which is the better option in 2012, sub-domains or sub-directories?
Pinnion offers online software for surveys and trivia games. Information about our product is at www.pinnion.com and then interested users create their accounts at secure.pinnion.com. The surveys that they create link back to secure.pinnion.com, so we would obviously like to gain whatever SEO benefits we can from that structure. We've been advised that moving from secure.pinnion.com to www.pinnion.com/secure would be the best way to accomplish this. A 2009 post by Rand seems to support that POV, but then a 2011 post over SEObook claims that everything has changed 100% since then. There was a little conversation here and here in Q&A last Fall that touched on this subject, but nothing really definitive. Would love to get thoughts on this subject based on the collective wisdom today. Thanks.
Algorithm Updates | | yahuie0