Another Client Victimized By Unethical Link Building

In past posts I’ve discussed how damaging it can be to engage the services of an unethical SEO who engages in link spamming activities.  My old posts are titled “You Too Can Rank In India” and “Amazingly Awful Link Building.” I’m sure you’re familiar with all the goings-on at Google about links lately.  If not, I’ll sum up: Google hates unnatural links and will penalize sites that have them, they provide a disavow tool for people to use to beg for forgiveness from said penalty but before you use that tool they want you to go through a link removal process with the sites where you got the unnatural links.  That’s created a bit of a problem for some webmasters because some of the sites where they got “free” links are now wanting money to remove the links.  Someone recently posted on WebmasterWorld about how they can’t afford to go through the process of removing bad links.  The poster says the sites that have the bad links are directory websites, presumably spam directory sites.  These spam directory sites charge anywhere from $20 – $500 to remove each link.  The poster totaled up all the fees to an astonishing $12,210.00!!

I’m not mad at the spam directories.  I’m mad at the people who claimed to be SEOs and got him into this mess.  The spam directories have to employ someone to go through their directory to handle each removal request.  They can’t do that for free.  It’s a little predatory and quite un-cool, but that’s for discussion elsewhere.

It’s another reminder of how easily people who claim to be SEOs can get you in a world of trouble. If you employ an SEO to deal with your website you MUST know how they develop links for you and you MUST understand what that means!  I have a new client who employed a firm to promote their site (I won’t even call them an SEO firm because they are so bad).  The company sent the client regular reports about what they were doing to “promote” the client’s site.  Had the client known anything about what they were seeing they would have been furious.  Here’s why…

This company my client contracted was creating spam links and it looks like they were outsourcing to an Indian company and never supervising the process at all.  Either that, or they’re just plain dumb.  They were submitting [presumably] automated listings to tons of free directory sites.  Free directory sites that are complete and utter spam.  In fact, it’s so bad I’ve placed a screenshot of one month’s submissions below.  Note that this is ONLY one month and total submissions equals 1,255 directory listings.  This client is likely in for a surprise at the next penguin update.  It’s terrible timing because they are a brand new client for us and we might have two more months (at most) of decent rankings before they get nuked because of the links from these spam directories.   If I’m honest, I’m surprised they’ve gotten away with it for this long.

Lifetime submissions - 1,255! AHHH!!   Click the image to see the full list of spam.

Lifetime submissions – 1,255! AHHH!!
Click the thumbnail image to see the full list of spam directories.

A big clue about how terrible these links are is the text I found on one of the websites when I went to check it out.  There was no doubt in my mind that it was a spam directory because it’s named “seoconfused.”  However, I think even a novice could read their footer statement and know that something fishy was going on.  Check out the statement:

Spam Directory's Footer Statement.

Spam Directory’s Footer Statement

I decided to check a couple more directory sites to see if the previous company had any plausible deniability about their link building efforts.  They don’t.  A 30 second audit would have revealed the level of spam being perpetrated.  In fact, some of the directory sites show the malware warning in Chrome when trying to visit them, and many of the pages just plain old 404.

Malware warning I get when I try to visit a spam link directory.

Malware warning I get when I try to visit a spam link directory.

The worst part, this is only about 10% of the spam directory links that the company got for them.  This doesn’t include the horribly terrible junk bookmarks and other spam links that are contained in the report.  I’ve lost a client in the past because their rankings continued to drop due to the previous company’s crappy link building.  I hope I don’t lose these guys because of the last company’s sins.

I said it before and I’ll say it again.  It’s YOUR responsibility as a site owner, or outsourcer, to 100% understand what is happening with your site.  Take 10, 15, or 20 minutes to really understand what’s going on.  Make whoever is working for you explain what is happening.  In the end, it’s your company, your website, your reputation – no matter what third-party company ruins it.

Google Tests Results Without Instant Preview

Today I noticed that Google is testing some results in my browser.  Two main things I noticed is that there is a little drop down available on all results with some more options.  The options are “cached”, “similar”, and “share.”  I don’t see “similar” on all results, just on a few first place rankings.

More importantly, I noticed that in this test the instant preview option is not available for organic results, only for PPC results.  I’m sure Google likes the idea because instant previews cover up right-side PPC ads.  I don’t like that the option is still available to PPC advertisers.  It’s just one more thing to make the free organic listings less impactful.

The small drop down next to the URL offers some options, but more importantly the instant preview option is gone.

The Instant Preview option remains for PPC advertisers.

Is PPC Campaign Tracking Breaking Your Links?

Not too long ago I reviewed a site for a client and discovered that all of their PPC campaign traffic was landing on 404 pages. It was happening because the links used in their PPC ads were broken. Their campaign was setup by another consultant who does PPC work. During the process, the consultant had created custom tracking URLs for the campaigns but somehow had forgotten to use ampersands to separate parameters! Instead of a properly formed URL like this:

http://examplesite.com/page.aspx?categoryid=1&productid=2&color=green&utm_source=Google
&utm_medium=ppc&utm_campaign=whatever

Their URLs were all formatted like this:

http://examplesite.com/page.aspx?categoryid=1=productid=2color=greenutm_source=Google
utm_medium=ppcutm_campaign=whatever

This oversight broke every single link and each PAID visit landed on a 404 page. This was true across hundreds of ads and thousands of keywords and wasted a ton of my client’s money.

The moral of the story: test your URLs!

Why I Just Don’t Give A Bing

The chart below is a great way of illustrating why I don’t worry too much about how my clients rank on Bing.  Bing has been a hot mess for months with constant flux in their results.  The blue line below is how much Bing’s top 100 results change over time.  Look at the wild swings compared to Google’s relatively steady line.  You never know from one day to the next how, or more importantly, why your site ranks in Bing.  Because Bing’s share of search is currently about 16.7%, and tactics to rank are so opposed to what works in Google (with 67% share of search), it’s just not worth the effort to me.

Bing's results are all over the place!

This screenshot is from http://serpmetrics.com/flux/
I encourage you to make it one of the start tabs in your browser!

Another important factor in why I don’t care too much about Bing is because the results are highly susceptible to spam.  This was especially apparent when I took Bing’s taste test.  I tried very hard to do it as impartially as possible.  The taste test allowed you to enter different queries and then compare two sets of results and chose your favorite.  I chose Google nine times out of ten.  Bing’s results were chock full of lead gen sites and link spammers.  Google was not.  Here’s a little taste test I just did on my own on the results for “kansas city internet marketing.”  I’ll let you be the judge.  (No secret here which set of results comes from which search engine.)

Google / Bing Taste Test

I offer my own little taste test between Google and Bing. Bing fails pretty miserably in my opinion. (click for a larger version.)

As much as we like to bash Google, they are doing a great job of keeping spam in check.