Should we Have Our Anchor Text Changed?
-
Unfortunately, we used a SEO company to do some link building for us and they used a lot of marketed keywords as anchor text instead of branded. About a month into the project, we saw a drop in ranking for those keywords. From what I've read, Google is cracking down on marketed keywords in anchor text (when it is done in a spammy looking way). I have contacted the company that did the work and they said they could update the anchor text. So my questions are:
- Should we asked them to change the anchor text to branded keywords or should we just leave them?
2) If we do have them changed, do you think Google will look at that as another spammy move?
Any input would be great. Lesson learned not to used a reputable SEO company and for us not to monitor how they were submitting links.
Ron
-
Again, thanks for the input from everyone. One of the things that I have noticed is that they did some link building to some specific categories on our website with specific anchor text and they ranked well at the beginning and the dropped off the face of the earth while some of the other categories that they didn't do link building on have continued to rank ok. Also, about a week ago we noticed our organic search results drop significantly. Could that be an identifier that Google has penalized our site due to those potentially spammy looking links?
-
I agree with Mat. I think it's just depends how much of an effort it is. Think of it like this, what if these links were not created by you...but a competition trying to beat you. Could you do anything then ? Not much. So if you think from that context, time and resources (and money) is better spent on building better content and links vs trying to remove links.
-
Not everyone will agree, however I'd say leave them for now - unless you are seeing anything particularly worrying.
Bad links could case a ranking drop for two reasons: On one hand you could be getting a penalty - even without a warning in webmaster tools. On the other it could just be that you are not getting the benefit from those links that you were.
The second is the most common. The remedy to that is "build more, better, links". That same remedy solves a lot of other problems too.
If a link is poor quality you may as well get it removed rather than changing the anchor. However I'd still rather put resources in to new links rather than removing old ones unless you are particularly concerned.
-
We haven't received an unnatural link warning message from Google in our webmaster counsel yet. Just don't want to take the risk of getting one.
It is a pretty high number if exact match anchor text. I think it is around 20 links per key word anchor text and around 15 sets of matched keywords. They look like a lot of directory submissions and I don't know if they are related. I don't know how they can get them changed (I'm almost afraid to ask).
Thanks for the input.
-
Ron 1. Is it a considerably high number of links ? 2. Are these sites related ? 3. Are they all similar kinds of links ? If not, how can they control them so easily ? If there are any visible patterns of artificial links and if they are not related, you could essentially keep a cleaner profile by removing the links completely. Did you also remove a un-natural links warning ? If yes, then definitely consider removing the links. If not, and the links are good quality, you could maybe tweak them to brand, brand + anchor and so on...just not too many exact match anchor text links. Just do a complete audit of your link profile and act accordingly. I hope this helps.
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
-
What is the difference between anchor text and external links?
I understand you 'Pro's' may fins this a silly question. But I'm a visual learner and I can't seem to grasp this. I've read the pages MOZ has provided on anchor text and external links and my question is, how are they different? And which one is more important to seo? Can someone who has a great ability to simplify things, please help me understand this. They seem very similar to me but, I know there has to be more to it. External links: External Links are hyperlinks that point at (target) any domain other than the domain the link exists on (source) **Anchor Text: **Anchor text is the visible characters and words that hyperlinks display when linking to another document or location on the web. Thanks is advance, Lauren.
Link Building | | MissThumann0 -
Is anybody else noticing a dramatic change to their 'links to your site' section in Google Webmaster Tools?
Hey,
Link Building | | ChrisHolgate
Over the last six months or so we've been going through our backlink profile and cleaning up links from poor quality sources. Week by week there have been small changes in our Google Webmaster Tools 'links to your site' section to reflect this. I logged on this morning however and there has been a dramatic shift in the information displayed. Pretty much every bad link has been removed from the list including sites I know for a fact are still linking to us as they didn't communicate at all to our removal requests. Additionally, rather than showing the top 1000 links to our site as it used to, WMT is only showing 73 linking domains. The remaining 73 domains are good natural links from high quality sources. I'm guessing Google are just in the middle of an update and that the remaining linking domains (including the bad ones) will reappear shortly. This isn’t a request for advice or help but I’m just curious as to whether anybody else is seeing anything similar?0 -
Text link to root in footer template
Hey Mozers, My first post here, I look forward to contributing what I learn and collecting knowledge branches (github joke) from you all. How valuable is a text link in the footer template to your home page (root)? My guess would be that it sends the on page link juice back to the home page. I don't believe this link should use keywords though (post penguin world). I realize we should have a pyramid architecture (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/internal-linking-strategies-for-2012-and-beyond) but should every page link back to the homage page? What variables does this effect?
Link Building | | phdosf0 -
Anchor Text Distribution and Link Profile Best Practices
Hi, Since Penguin is about regulating link building, here are my questions: How many percent of a site's overall links should be branded terms? How many percent of a site's overall links should be related to the site? How many percent of a site's overall links should have nofollow? Any recommendation on anchor text distribution? Lastly In your opinion, which e-commerce site you think has the best link profile? Thanks!
Link Building | | WizardOfMoz0 -
Remove links or change anchor text?
I am currently in the process of cleaning up the link profile for a website that has been hit by Penguin thanks to loads of links from free directories with exact match keyword anchor texts (about 200 root domains from total of 300 root domains). I was wondering whether it's best to remove these un-natrual keyword anchor text links altogether, or change the anchor texts to brand (domain name, domainname.com, www.domainname.com, http://www.domainname.com)? I am currently trying to remove these links but was thinking it would be quicker to get to a healthier link profile (in terms of brand/commercial anchor text split) by altering the anchor texts and not removing them. Some of these directories are the worst of the worst on the other hand. Also note that I'm only really getting about a 30% response rate from the owners of these directories. Any thoughts? Many thanks in advance.
Link Building | | ec9awp0 -
If I write a PR release on a site such as PRweb with anchor-text links that is picked up and published by other news sites, do the engines consider this duplicate content or additional, beneficial links?
I recently wrote a news release on PRweb that was picked up identically by 8 other news websites, with the same anchor-text links as the original. Is the reproduction of duplicate content and links across different websites like this to the benefit or detriment of SEO and ranking power? Some of the links are: http://www.mynewsdesk.com/uk/view/pressrelease/eventa-new-eventa-christmas-parties-website-is-launched-648923?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=Alert&utm_content=pressrelease http://www.prweb.com/releases/christmasparties/neweventasite/prweb8562064.htm Many thanks!!
Link Building | | RobertHill0 -
New links for Internal Anchor Text
If pages get moved and 301s are in place is it still important to update the anchor text links to the new page url? For example would it be optimal to go through old blog posts and change the urls for the anchor text if the old anchor text url redirects to the new page url.
Link Building | | jmansd0 -
Longer Tail Keyword for URL and Anchor text
Hello If I am trying to rank for the term blue widgets as a primary, and also the term shiny blue widgets , and big shiny blue widgets as secondary - would the url /blue-widgets or /shiny-blue-widgets or /big-shiny-blue-widgets be better (all else equal) Would the word shiny / big dilute or affect of KW in the domain for the rankings for blue widgets (all esle equal) Regarding anchor text of inbound links, if the anchor text is shiny blue widgets, is that going to help me rank for both queries "blue widgets" and "shiny blue widgets" equally? (all else equal), or would including shiny, affect my ranking for "bliue widgets" Or is it better to keep the anchor text as just blue widgets (of course we could vary it) but Im trying to get a feel for how that would work as we are builfing some links I can control the anchor text. I hope this was clear enough Thanks Sam
Link Building | | Impact-2015550