How is it possible that Interflora can bounce back from a Google penalty so quickly - is that normal?
-
As far as I understand it Interflora was removed from Google organic search results on February 20th.
I guess no one knows for sure why they were delisted other than Google but I have heard theories such as giving flower bribes to bloggers in return for links How sweet - and placing paid follow links inside advertorials within local newspaper sites.
Whatever the reason for their de listing it seemed Google must have wanted to send out a strong message since even a branded search wasn't ranking.
Fast forward 13 days to today and I now see Interflora ranking not only for their brand but also for flower delivery London etc etc...
How is it possible that they managed to get back in the SERPs so quickly? Is it normal to get a penalty and be back up and running at position 1 in less than 2 weeks? Is that normal for a penalty?
I was under the impression that being caught gaming Google to the extent where they delisted you was something far more serious and had much longer term repercussions?
-
"All" was probably a poor choice of words. Sorry.
Do any of us really know what blackhat SEO is anyway?
-
Your comment " All these big brands know black hat SEO and know they can get away with it so they do it." seems to broadly attack branded SEO work. Not all brands know black hat SEO. In fact, I've found more brands doing black hat and not knowing it was black hat. SEO is a mystery to brands.
Brands want results so it is on the part of the SEO or agency to educate on risks etc. I'm guessing most folks don't educate their bosses.
-
I didn't say there weren't?
-
It's not all the big brands. There are ethical SEOs working at brands.
-
They're a big brand. That's it. They knew what they were doing, got caught, got out. Very simple when you're a big brand. Same thing with iAquire. They were buying links, knew they were being naughty, got caught, got out. Big brand with big connections. Same story with most big brands. I actually just talked to a guy from Dunn & Bradstreet about this. All these big brands know black hat SEO and know they can get away with it so they do it.
-
People keep talking about how Interflora is getting favor because they're a brand, but I think it's possible that this could be no different than any other website with an unnatural links penalty.
If the penalty was due to one particular type of link (i.e. the advertorials) it's conceivably possible that they were able to get these removed very quickly and then file for reconsideration.
I've had reconsideration requests come back successful after only 3 days.
-
Or maybe they sent some flowers to Matt Cutts - Sorry that was terrible humour
-
Provided what I read was true, interflora were aware prior to the penalty that they were in trouble and were taking steps to remedy the situation by getting the links removed. It could be that their recovery is part of a settlement of sorts, they are a big brand, they took quick action, and this sort of recovery is hardly unprecedented (BMW recovered in 4 days after their penalty via Nick Wilsdon (credit where it's due)).
They apparently still haven't recovered for Valentines or Mother's day, which may be the penalty that lasts, but google got their message out about advertorials quite effectively and that is probably what they were after.
In addition I would imagine that Google's Chrome marketing ad from a while back was an argument in interflora's favour. It actually features items being sent to reviewers to review and it's hardly a huge step to see interflora's blogger flower deliveries as the same thing.
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
-
Can piracy sites linking to you hurt your SEO?
Hello, Our website sells software that we have developed, but there are piracy websites that offer a crack/keygen to our software and are linking to our site. From an SEO perspective, are those sites hurtful to us if their spam score is below 30 and their DA is not 1? We'd like to understand if there is any action we need to take from an SEO point or if our site's SEO is not affected by it. Thank you!
Link Building | | marynau0 -
Heavy Weight Backlink not Showing in Google Webmaster Tool
Hi Mozzers I got a nice backlink from Huffingtonpost already a couple of months ago from this page to coinstackr.com: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/25/mt-gox-bitcoin_n_4854095.html However, the link doesn't show in the Google Webmaster Tools. Is that common? Cheers, Chris
Link Building | | Diderino0 -
Getting free search engine traffic and monetize it with google adsense
Hello moz comunity, I have a couple of websites with 10-30 articles on each, 700+ words, images and so on.Which steps I need to take in order to see a faster free search engine traffic?All of these articles I optimized with seopressor and all in one seo pack.I want to know how much time and money I need to put in the traffic process for each site.I mean, how much it takes to see 500 visitors/day in my analytics for each website. I want to monetize that traffic with Google Adsense and amazon links+skimliks.Thank you !
Link Building | | Sebastyan220 -
App SEO: do backlinks to your google play app help?
I have an app in the Google Play store and I am trying to improve it in the play store search rankings. I was wondering if back-links to our play store URL help? If so do today's rules around back-link quality matter or its it about volume? Any other advice would be welcomed. thanks
Link Building | | surfeasy0 -
Google still allows massive link building in my country.
This is really messed up! I've been investigating this issue for almost a year now. I had discussion about this in SEOMoz before and people told me that my site was not optimized for SEO. However, I've finally come to conclusion that massive back link building is still the best way to rank in Google Turkey. Many high PR content websites do not seem to get their unique content ranked here because some shitty website can be ranked on the top by using back links with targeted anchors for the keyword they want. I've spent a lot of money for content but no it does not get listed unless I provide back links for each article. This does not happen in the US anymore. Google catches you for massive back link building and penalize you. SEOMoz authors suggest using social media more but it seems to have no effect whatsoever in Google Turkey. I really want to open a ticket for this in Google but don't know how to do it. Think about searching "urology" keyword in the US, would you see an informative website about urology or a site that contains a small article and wants to sell a bullshit product to you? If anyone knows how I can contact Google regarding to this, please let me know. Thanks.
Link Building | | mertsevinc0 -
How Would Google Approach Devaluing Infographic Links?
How do you think Google would go about devaluing infographic links? Suppose the infographic image itself is not hyperlinked to the creator's site but there is a paragraph that mentions the creator and links to their site. How would Google distinguish the infographic creator's link from other external links on the page?
Link Building | | ProjectLabs0 -
5th failed Google reconsideration attempt, can you help? (are scraper/related news sites the issue?)
(sorry for the long question - I thought it would be useful to give the background!) I am really struggling a Google's reconsideration request for my site, and although we thought we had removed almost all the 'bad' backlinks I am still getting no-where... We are really wanting to focus on building our brand, and establishing our site as an authority but this penalty is really holding us back. The latest response from Google: There are still many inorganic links pointing to your site. At this point, we believe we’ve evaluated these links appropriately, and no further action from us is required. In order for your site to have a successful reconsideration request, we will need to see a substantial, good-faith effort to remove the links, and this effort should result in a significant decrease in the number of bad links that we see. We do not recommend that you submit another reconsideration request until you have been able to make a good amount of progress. Once you’ve been able to get the links removed, please reply to this email with the details of your clean-up effort. My Website: http://bit.ly/KXg8y1 History: This is a new domain - approx 6 months old Old domain received a Google links warning We decided to start a new website, launch a new brand and start from the beginning We 301 re-directed the old domain so we didnt lose customers We then got a Google links warning for the new site We assumed this was related to links from the old site and so removed the 301 redirect on the 20th August Our old sites links still show in Google webmaster tools Reconsideration History 1st re-consideration request: Explained the 301 redirect had been removed, assured we would now be focussing on high quality content/brand building and after 2 weeks received a standard message to say that still had inorganic links 2nd Request: Went through the new sites links (using open site explorer, AHREFs, SEO Majestic and GWM) and removed those we identified as low quality (mostly directories built by an SEO company we had started working with). We complied a spreadsheet with all the links in it (including 301 redirect links) and explained which had been removed, webmaster contact details etc. We also uploaded our template email and screenshots showing contact with webmasters. 3rd, 4th and 5th Request: We went through the new site links and were able to remove a few more links which were thin or could be seen as inorganic, and the end result is that apart from 6 links we have removed all those we have identified as inorganic. Links The old site had some pretty poor links We have done no paid linking, no blog networks, no spammy web 2.0 sites on this site. We've added good quality content to our blog, focussed on social media, published an infographic, and are committed to long-term brand building The links mostly come from guest blog posting. An SEO company (who told us they were 100% content based) built some directory links - but 99% of these have been removed There are some links from Scraper/related news sites (ones that have related blog posts or scrape images etc) Press releases which were picked up and re-published (some of these include anchor text) My Question/s: Do you think Google is still seeing the links from the previous 301 redirect in Google webmasters and including these still? Are these scraper/related post sites causing the issue? (organic links - but some dubious sites) Are sites re-publishing our press releases causing the issue? (organic links - but includes some anchor text I really appreciate your time on this one, I have tried really hard to identify and remove links, but am now struggling! Many Thanks
Link Building | | twhite0 -
Does Google use link CTR as a factor?
Been wondering for a while if Google might be using CTR of links pointing your site? Anyone run any tests or have any clues?
Link Building | | Crunchii0