What is the best link delete service?
-
Does anyone know what is the best link delete service?
I have heard of removem and linkdelete
Which one do you think it best? Is there something better out there?
Thank you.
-
Where should I go to hire an all star SEO person? Everyone on this forum is so knowledgeable and I would really like to hire some good, professional, proactive, SEO manager.
-
I just don't want to disavow without trying to get them removed first. I thought that we should attempt to remove first.
-
This is a very nice and knowledgeable comment. I am so happy with the nice people on this forum.
-
That's a very good point. We have gotten the latter. We are working hard on it, but it's a tedious process. We also need advice on anchor text. We have some over optimized anchor text that needs to be fixed, but I don't know how.
-
Thanks a lot. We are working on it. I love the answers on here. Everyone is so nice.
-
Hi Sean,
It really depends what type of service you are looking for.
The two you mentioned are quite different services.
Remove'em uses algorithmic analysis to highlight links it thinks should be removed if you use the Self Service option. They also provide a full service option which would mean that the analysts at Virante (the company that builds the tool) would manage every element of the campaign for you. As far as I am aware there is no trial available, but there is a video tutorial which shows you how the Self Service version works - Starts with Self Service at $249 per domain.
To be honest, Link Delete doesn't seem to actually give any details as to how or what they do apart from generally helping to clean up your backlinks. Starts at $97 per month for 1 domain with a max of 400 linking URLs (3 different Plans)
Another service which provides algorithmic analysis as part of their service is Link Detox, which is part of the Link Research Tools suite. You can get started with an initial report by paying with a tweet, get Daypass access (72 hours) for 30 euros, or 2 Link Detox credits that last for a month at a cost of 50 euros.
rmoov is a link removal outreach tool which does NOT provide algorithmic analysis (because we believe good analysis = eyes on sites), but helps to automate much of the outreach process that Marie described once you have a list of the URLs you want links removed from. It has been specifically built to help those dealing with a manual spam action to manage link removal outreach at scale and to provide a level of reporting detail that will meet the Webspam team's expectations when considering a reconsideration request. rmoov allows the user to choose the level of automation or manual work they wish to do, so analysts like myself and Marie can run it as an aid to a predominantly manual process, while those who prefer can make use of automated link checking etc.
rmoov has a free Basic account which allows 1 campaign at a time with a max of 25 linking root domains and/or 250 linking URLs. This free account does not provide automated link checking or pulling of domain contact info, but does not expire. Paid subscriptions start at $49 per month for 5 active campaigns at a time with a max of 100 linking root domains and 1000 linking URLs. (4 different subscription plans). In the interest of full disclosure: I work for the company that develops rmoovThere is another service called Delete Backlinks which provides a pay per link service. This appears to be offered by a company that owns, controls or has agreements with a large number of directory sites. With this service you enter your domain and they provide a list of the links they have access to which will be removed. Pricing starts from 99 cents per link for the first 5 links with the cost per link reducing on a sliding scale according to the number of links you want removed.
Hope that helps,
Sha
-
Disavowing links is ok, but won't remove any penalty in place (if you have one). I do use it as part of my efforts to help clients that have been hit and include this in the documentation I send to google for the reconsideration request. Not had a request rejected so far...but then I've only had to do 10 or so.
-
For the sites that I work on I do everything manually. I review each link and assess whether or not they are likely to be considered natural and then I gather email addresses, whois addresses and urls of contact forms. I contact each of the sites and document my efforts to Google. It works well but takes time.
But, before you do so, make sure you have a "true" unnatural links warning. There are many lately that Google is putting out that have no yellow caution sign and say, "we are reducing trust in some of your links". For those you may not have to go through the whole process.
-
Have you received some type of warning from a search engine about your links? Have you tried contacting the sites that own the links yet? If you can give us a little more background on your situation we can help a bit more with a good answer.
-
Thanks. I am choosing to delete the links because I thought that's what Google wanted. I thought they did not like us to use the disavowal tool. Do you have a different experience? I thought the disavowal tool was the last resort.
-
Why are you choosing to delete the links? My recommendation would be to simply use Google's disavow tool to let Google know which links you don't want counted toward your site.
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2648487
Is there some reason you want them actually deleted? Using disavow is a best practice and will be much quicker and cheaper.
Good luck!
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Canonicalize vs Link Juice
I recently wrote (but have not published) a very comprehensive original article for my new website (which has pretty much no domain authority). I've been talking to the publisher of a very high Domain Authority site and they are interested in publishing it. The article will include 2-3 follow backlinks to my website. My question is should I: Repost the article in my own site and then request a "rel=canonical" from the high authority site Not re-post the article on my own site and just collect the link juice from the high authority site Which would be better for my overall SEO? Assume in case 1) that the high authority site would add a rel=canonical if I asked for it.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | wlingke20 -
Unnatural inbound links message from Google Webmaster Tools!
Hi Everyone, I just got this message from GWT(image below) This is probably a penguin Penalty. What is clear is I have to find the best and most efficient way to tackle this issue. We will probably lose tons of traffic in the next couple of weeks so I would like to get the best suggestions and maybe a guideline on how to do this in the most effective way! Thank you! 1a0X2M2a1h0A
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
[linkbuilding] link partner page on webshop, is it working?
Hello Mozzers, I am wondering about the effect of link building by swapping links between websites and adding a link partner page to the web shop containing hundreds of links. I have this new competitor coming in to the SERP of Google competing on the keywords I am targeting. The competitor has way more links than our web shop. The competitor has a page with hundreds of links to other web shops witch on there turn has a link to there web shop. (not all off them link back btw) I always thought it is no use sharing links with other websites this way in creating a huge page with hundreds of links. it is of no benefit for neighter website to do this. Still it does seems to work (?) and tis strategy is used by a lot of web shops in the Netherlands. How are you guys looking at this?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | auke1810
Witch of you guy's are using strategy like this?
Should I pick up this strategy myself?0 -
Ask Bloggers/Users To Link To Website
I have a web service that help bloggers to do certain tasks and find different partners. We have a couple of thousand bloggers using the service and ofcourse this is a great resource for us to build links from. The bloggers are all from different platforms and domains. Currently when a blogger login to the service we tell the blogger that if they write a blog post about us with their own words, and tell their readers what they think of our service. We will then give them a certain benifit within the service. This is clearly encouraging a dofollow-link from the bloggers, and therefore it's not natural link building. The strategy is however working quite good with about 150 new blog posts about our service per month, which both gives us a lot of new visitors and users, but also give us link power to increase our rankings within the SERP. Now to my questions: This is not a natural way of building links, but what is your opinion of this? Is this total black hat and should we be scared of a severe punishment from Google? We are not leaving any footprints more than we are asking the users for a link, and all blogposts are created with their own unique words and honest opinions. Since this viral marketing method is working great, we have no plans of changing our strategy. But what should we avoid and what steps should we take to ensure that we won't get in any trouble in the future for encouraging our users to linking back to us in this manner?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | marcuslind0 -
Is Guest Blogging the Next Link Buying
I like the guest blogging idea for two reasons. One, it builds links, and two, it allows me to add content to a lot of blogs that are really interested in growing a lot of good content. But I often read articles that give credit to another article, that give credit to another article. I have been offered plenty of documents for client blogs, but I am worried that at some point in the future Google will decide all this guest blogging is similar to link trading and selling. What does everyone else think of guest blogging?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | HandsomeWeb1 -
Partner Site Hit with Penguin - Links hurt me
I work for a network of international websites, the site I work on is for Canada. Our partners in Australia were hit by penguin hard because they hired a black hat SEO guy and didn't know. He was creating profiles on highly authoritative sites and keyword stuffing them. Now, they've completely dropped off the SERP. This is where the issue occurs, because we are all international partners we are all linked together on the header of every page so visitors can choose their country. Now, because they were hit hard and we have reciprocal links (not for rankings but for usability) will we be affected? It seems like we have, but I just want some opinions out there. Also, should we go ahead and stop linking our sites between countries to avoid this mess?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BeTheBoss0 -
Secretly back-linking from whitelabel product
Lets say a company (provider.com) offers a whitelabel solution which enables each client to have all of the content on their own domain (product.client.com), with no branding by the content provider. Now lets say that client.com is a site with a lot of authority, and to promote the launch of product.client.com, they put a lot of links from their main site to the subdomain. This can be very valuable link juice, and provider.com would like to be able to take advantage. The problem is, that client.com wouldn't like it if provider.com put in links on their whitelabel site. Suppose the following: All pages on product.client.com start to have a rel="canonical" link to themselves, with a get variable (e.g. product.client.com/page.htm -> product.client.com/page.html?show_extra_link=true) When the page is visited with the extra get parameter "show_extra_link" a link appears in the footer that points to provider.com My question is, would this have the same effect for provider.com as placing a link on the non-canonical version of the pages on the whitelabel site would?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seoczar0 -
Problems with link spam from spam blogs to competitor sites
A competitor of ours is having a great deal of success with links from spam blogs (such as: publicexperience.com or sexylizard.org) it is proving to be a nightmare. Google does not detect these (the competitor has been doing well now for over a year) and my boss is starting to think if you can’t beat them, join them. Frankly, he is right – we have built some great links but it is nigh on impossible to beat 400+ highly targeted spam links in a niche market. My question is, has anyone had success in getting this sort of stuff brought to the attention of Google and banned (I actually listed them all in a message in webmaster tools and sent them over to Google over a year ago!). This is frustrating, I do not want to join in this kind of rubbish but it is hard to put a convincing argument against it when our competitor has used the technique successfully for over a year without any penalty. Ideas? Thoughts? All help appreciated
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | RodneyRiley0