If our link profile is too "blog link" heavy, will that be all that bad?
-
We own a site that lends itself extremely well to getting boat loads of links, only down side is that those on the boat are all bloggers.
We are selling a product that retails for $6.89 per unit. They are for women. Our target market is any woman/girl who is between 14 and 50. Even better, our cost per unit is only about $0.40. So what we've been doing is sending them out by the hundreds to legit fashion blogs all the way down to blogspot mommy bloggers and the reviews have poured in, literally all of them positive.
Moral of the story, we have a good product, and no shortage of bloggers that would be willing to write us up a legit, human written (by a red-blooded American none-the-less) on almost exclusively legit blogs. We're not trying to manipulate what they say, how they link to us, what anchor text they use or anything. We're just sending them product, asking that they do a review and give us a link and that's it.
Our worry is that given the nature of the site and the product offering, it's going to be easy to get these legit blog links, but more difficult to get links that "aren't on blogs".
Is this going to hurt us, or will Big Google be kind and realize this isn't shady manipulation. It's legit part of our ongoing effort to get the word out.
Further evidence that our campaign isn't to manipulate (although we all know we're in it for the links) is that so far 75% of our sales have been driven by these reviews. A few of the bigger sites that have done reviews have each directly resulted in 10+ sales from that single review.
So what are all ya'll's thoughts? I suspect we'll be OK, but wanted some others to provide their views.
-
Good stuff--sounds like you're on the right track then, all around.
-
As I said, we're only approaching, legit blogs, mommy or otherwise. So that isn't a worry. I was just worried that the bulk of our links are going to end up being blog reviews. And I'm also not worried about the passing of strength in theory, because in the end it's really more of an "ad campaign" than anything else.
I'd say around 1/3 of the reviews done so far just happen to be blogspot blogs, but that's just because they were quicker to respond. When the dust settles, 70% will be from unique domains, while about 30% will in fact be blogspot blogs. But that's the nature of the beast. Mommies love free blogs.
-
While it doesn't matter whether the linking sites are blogs, there are a couple of things you need to be aware of:
- if tons of them are at the same root domain (e.g. *.blogspot.com), you're not getting as much link power as if they're from different root domains
- some mommy bloggers can be really, really spammy....if you're getting lots of links from sites where the blogger is clearly getting paid to write "fluff" articles to link to car insurance, viagra, online poker, mortgage refy, replica watches, etc., you may end up with a suspicious-looking link profile and that could result in a manual penalty
-
So it turns out, we aren't in fact "requesting" the link. At the bottom of the email we put a "relevant" links section that includes a link to our home page, our "product application" page which shows them how to apply the product, as well as links to the product page of the items we sent them. We make no mention of "requesting" the link formally, so sounds like we're all good. And thus far 100% of those that have actually done the reviews have provided links and I've been surprised at the anchor text some of them have used. It has worked out very well so far for us, and the industry is very competitive.
Thanks for the 2nd thoughts. It's what I thought myself but it's always nice to get confirmation from others.
-
Oh you'll be fine. Google isn't necessarily going to differentiate a blog page versus just a web page. To the Google bots they see an HTML page and that's it that's all. If the sites themselves are relevant, the anchor text isn't all the same keyword, and the links aren't appearing 1,000 at a time you will be just fine.
Basically if your links come naturally then you're good. And this is a pretty natural way of gaining them. Some will say that sending out free product in hopes of a link is potentially against webmaster guidelines but I disagree with that. The fact of the matter is you are gaining sales from these reviews and that's all that really matters. So good job! Sounds like you're kickin butt, keep it up!
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
-
Is it necessary to have unique H1's for pages in a pagination series (i.e. blog)?
A content issue that we're experiencing includes duplicate H1 issues within pages in a pagination series (i.e. blog). Does each separate page within the pagination need a unique H1 tag, or, since each page has unique content (different blog snippets on each page), is it safe to disregard this? Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | BopDesign0 -
Where does Google finds "Soft 404" and "Not found" links?
Hi all, We can see very old links or anonymous links of website suddenly listing under soft 404 or 404 in GSW. As per Google, some of them are some script generated ignorable links. Other are actually the ones which were deleted but not redirected. I wonder how Google get these years old links even though there are no source links available for these. These must be fixed even though they are not linked anywhere from our internal or external pages? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Best way to handle outdated & years old Blog-posts?
Hi all, We have almost 1000 pages or posts from our blog which are indexed in Google. Few of them are years old, but they have some relevant and credible content which appears in search results. I am just worried about other hundreds of non-relevant posts which are years old. Being hosting hundreds of them, our website is holding lots of these useless indexing pages which might be giving us little negative impact of keeping non-ranking pages. What's the best way to handle them? Are these pages Okay? Or must be non-indexed or deleted? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
How Google's "Temporarily remove URLs" in search console works?
Hi, We have created new sub-domain with new content which we want to highlight for users. But our old content from different sub-domain is making top on google results with reputation. How can we highlight new content and suppress old sub-domain in results? Many pages have related title tags and other information in similar. We are planing to hide URLs from Google search console, so slowly new pages will attain the traffic. How does it works?
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Links to category pages unnatural?
If people are linking to your site, it would seem natural that the vast majority of those links would point to the homepage, product page, or a article/content page. Let's say you have 100 links pointing to your site, and 40 of them are pointing to category pages. Would this seem unnatural? Does Google or other search engines have a way of determining this as a factor in ascertaining whether the links are natural or not? Is there a rule of thumb when it comes to the pages that are linked to on your site?
Algorithm Updates | | inhouseseo0 -
Clean up of Links, What to get rid of?
We have been cleaning up our back office and preparing our .com domain to take all our future traffic and have got into a debate about how far to clean up the old past links. We have not ever had a penalty on the site as far as we know, but did once get the site taken offline by Google as they thought it was a malware site back in March this year. They put it straight back up and running in 5 hours, but was very strange as it is an amazon-webstore retail site. We are not sure why Google thought (edit: typo) this, so just in-case we have been combing through the historical links and now started to disavow any links we cannot get removed manually. So far just a couple of sites that have no relevance to our retail business. However, the debate we have been having is around Directory listings: Should we get rid of these too? Gut reaction is Yes, based on the need for quality relevant links for the end user, but then some are passing proper links to relevant sections of our site albeit in a directory format. Dmoz comes to mind Any thoughts? Bruce.
Algorithm Updates | | BruceA0 -
Canonical from NOINDEX,FOLLOW pages - Bad idea?
Hi, We have an extensive online shop in Magento - to ensure that some of the pages with query strings are not indexed, we implemented a conditional NOINDEX,FOLLOW so that it will stop indexing any pages that have querystrings on it - We do need to use Canonical also - for other reasons - so my question is: If you have a page that is NOINDEX,FOLLOW and it has a rel canonical pointing to original, would it transfer that NOINDEX,FOLLOW to the main original page causing it problems? Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | bjs20100 -
Should I Wait Until the "Dust Settles" on the Algorithm Update or Get Busy Now?
We were hit hard on both of our sites yesterday and can't afford to wait for the dust to settle, as some folks are advising. We have been attempting to work off a penalty on one of our sites by undergoing a massive (and expensive) link removal project over the last four months. We are on our third reconsideration request and, hopefully, this last round of link removal will have done the job. I'm hesitant to go in and "de-optmize" the site by changing title tags and changing the anchor text until the penalty is removed, but I'm not sure if that's the right plan of action. I am, however, going to dig into the non-penalized site and change some title tags and anchor text. Any thoughts on this strategy would be greatly appreciated.
Algorithm Updates | | rdreich490