Disavow links established in 2009??
-
Sorry for the length, but I believe this is an interesting situation, so hopefully you'll enjoy thinking this one over a little. Thanks for taking the time!
Historical Information
- We’ve owned and operated printglobe.com since 2002.
- In late 2009, we acquired absorbentprinting.com and operated both sites until Mar, 2015, when absorbentprinting.com was redirected to printglobe.com.
- The reason we chose to redirect absorbentprinting.com to printglobe.com is that they were same industry, same pricing, and had a lot of product overlap, although they did have unique product and category descriptions. We saw a long and steady decline in organic traffic to absorbentprinting.com in the last couple of years leading up to the decision to redirect.
- By the way, while I understand the basics of SEO, neither I nor anyone else at our company could be considered an SEO practitioner.
Recent Information
- An SEO firm we used to be engaged with us reached back out to us and noted: “I started looking through your backlink and it looks like there has been a sharp increase of referring domains.” They included a graph that does show a dramatic increase, starting around November, 2015. It’s quite dramatic and appears anything but natural. The contact from the SEO firm went on to say: “After doing a cursory review, it looks like a handful of these new links are the type we would recommend disavowing or removing.”
- We do little in the way of “link building” and we’re in a relatively boring industry, so we don’t naturally garner a lot of links.
- Our first thought was that we were the victim of a negative SEO attack. However, upon spot checking a lot of the recent domains linking to us, I discovered that a large % of the links that had first shown up in AHREFS since November are links that were left as comments on forums, mostly in 2009/2010. Since absorbentprinting.com was redirected to printglobe.com in Mar, 2015, I have no idea why they are just now beginning to show up as links to printglobe.com.
By the numbers, according to a recent download from AHREFS:
- Total # of backlinks to printglobe.com through mid-Feb, 2016: 8,679
-
of backlinks “first seen” November, 2015 or later: 5,433
- Note that there were hundreds of links “first seen” in the months from Mar, 2015 to Oct, 2015, but the # “first seen” from November, 2015 to now has been 1,500 or greater each full month.
- Total # of linking domains through mid-Feb, 2016: 1,182
-
of linking domains first seen November, 2015 or later: 850
- Also note that the links contain good anchor text distribution
- Finally, there was a backlink analysis done on absorbentprinting.com in April, 2013 by the same firm who pointed out the sharp increase in links. At that time, it was determined that the backlink profile of absorbentprinting.com was normal, and did not require any actions to disavow links or otherwise clean up the backlinks.
My Questions:
- If you’ve gotten through all that, how important does it seem to disavow links now?
- How urgent?
- I’ve heard that disavowing links should be a rare undertaking. If this is so, what would you think of the idea of us disavowing everything or almost everything “first seen” Nov, 2015 and later?
- Is there a way to disavow at the linking domain level, rather than link-by-link to reduce the number of entries, or does it have to be done for each individual link?
- If we disavow around 5.5k links since Nov, 2015, what is the potential for doing more harm than good?
- If we’re seeing declining organic traffic in the past year on printglobe.com pretty much for the first time in the site’s history, can we attribute that to the links?
- Anything else you’d advise a guy who’s never disavowed a link before on this situation?
Thanks for any insights!
Rob
-
Just because it says "first seen" by aHrefs, doesn't meant that Google hasn't been looking at it for years. Google, could have seen and discredited any of the value those links passed long ago. First seen in aHrefs, simply means their crawlers (significantly less resources than google, and maybe link was built before they even had crawlers out there) are just now getting to that page on the web.
For your specific questions:
- If you’ve gotten through all that, how important does it seem to disavow links now?
Given the "impending" Penguin update, I would strongly urge you to do an audit and cleanup anything that looks nasty. You don't want to get stuck in some filter because of old crappy links, waiting until the next Penguin rollout to "unfilter" you. That being said, if you survived this long without getting a Penguin slap, then you might be okay assuming they having further "dialed in" the thresholds with the upcoming release.
- How urgent?
See above regarding potential Penguin update. Only issue is we still don't know when. Google claimed by end of year, then by end of Q1, and now most recently "when it's ready". So the sense of urgency is always there.
- I’ve heard that disavowing links should be a rare undertaking. If this is so, what would you think of the idea of us disavowing everything or almost everything “first seen” Nov, 2015 and later?
Disavowing links is the step you take under one of the following circumstances:
- You've tried to get webmasters, unsuccessfully, to remove links identified as potentially harmful, and you do not wish to receive credit for them. This could be part of any proactive link monitoring approach.
- You have a penalty, and part of showing you don't care about those past paid links, is "taking the hit" and disavowing them.... note: you should have tried removal for these as well.
If you don't have a penalty/filter... typically, you don't need to disavow links, as some level of "crap" builds up for everyone. The real question is if you are noticing a pattern of low-quality backlinks or links from sources you know to be in violation of Google guidelines, and obviously or algorithmically so... and you want to minimize your risk.
- Is there a way to disavow at the linking domain level, rather than link-by-link to reduce the number of entries, or does it have to be done for each individual link?
You can disavow entire domains/subdomains.
- If we disavow around 5.5k links since Nov, 2015, what is the potential for doing more harm than good?
Fairly large. You don't want to blanket disavow anything. This should only be done after careful consideration of the value that link likely passes to your site, as well as a consideration to the risk is poses. You don't want to disavow links that could be supporting your existing authority/rankings. Disavow is not a tool to be taken lightly, and it is much easier to do more harm than good.
- If we’re seeing declining organic traffic in the past year on printglobe.com pretty much for the first time in the site’s history, can we attribute that to the links?
If it is a steady and gradual decline, it is likely not link related, but rather site quality related... whether in the quality of the site/content itself (read: panda?) or in the experience of users (e.g. pogosticking, not clicking through on serps, etc.)
- Anything else you’d advise a guy who’s never disavowed a link before on this situation?
Since you are doing this proactively, I would recommend you closely review all of the links in question and only disavow the link if you look at it and think "ugh, spam".
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
-
Does redirecting a duplicate page NOT in Google‘s index pass link juice? (External links not showing in search console)
Hello! We have a powerful page that has been selected by Google as a duplicate page of another page on the site. The duplicate is not indexed by Google, and the referring domains pointing towards that page aren’t recognized by Google in the search console (when looking at the links report). My question is - if we 301 redirect the duplicate page towards the one that Google has selected as canonical, will the link juice be passed to the new page? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Lewald10 -
So many links from single site?
this guy is ranking on all high volume keywords and has low quality content, he has 1600 ref domains check the attachment how did he get so many links from single site is he gonna be penalized YD2BvQ0
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SIMON-CULL0 -
Help in Internal Links
Which link attribute should be given to internal links of website? Do follow or No follow and why?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Obbserv0 -
Http, https and link juice
I'm working on a site that is built on DNN. For some reason the client has set all pages to convert to HTTPS (although this is not perfect as some don't when landing on them). All pages indexed in Google are straight HTTP, but when you click on the Google result a temp 302 header response to the corresponding HTTPS page for many. I want it changed to a 301 but unfortunately is an issue for DNN. Is there another way around this in IIS that won't break DNN as it seems to be a bit flaky? I want to have the homepage link juice pass through for all links made to non HTTPS homepage. Removing HTTPS does not seem to be an option for them.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MickEdwards0 -
Links from new sites with no link juice
Hi Guys, Do backlinks from a bunch of new sites pass any value to our site? I've heard a lot from some "SEO experts" say that it is an effective link building strategy to build a bunch of new sites and link them to our main site. I highly doubt that... To me, a new site is a new site, which means it won't have any backlinks in the beginning (most likely), so a backlink from this site won't pass too much link juice. Right? In my humble opinion this is not a good strategy any more...if you build new sites for the sake of getting links. This is just wrong. But, if you do have some unique content and you want to share with others on that particular topic, then you can definitely create a blog and write content and start getting links. And over time, the domain authority will increase, then a backlink from this site will become more valuable? I am not a SEO expert myself, so I am eager to hear your thoughts. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | witmartmarketing0 -
Are links safe from friendsite.com?
I have just checked my backlinks in Majestic and was shocked. It appears I've gained 1500 back links in 1 day all from the domains friendsite.com. I checked a few of the links and the links to my site have disappeared. Looking at friendsite.com, it seems that peopel can bookmark a site, and when they do it appears on the "latest bookmerk" section which is site wide. So my concern is that: 1500 links have appeared in one day from one domain 1500 links disappeared the next day Wouldnt both of these cause Google to get suspicious? What should I do? Should I ask friendsite.com to remove the links?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JohnPeters1 -
Do nofollow links affect link profile?
I've read that it's good to keep a natural link profile. Some naked links, some links going to our company name, some with anchor text, etc. Do nofollow links affect this link profile, or is it only followed links that are taken into account?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lighttable0 -
Google is not Indicating any Links to my site
We built a new store on another ccTLD and linked to it from some of our other domains in a few locations. I am noticing that with the Google operator command "links:" we are seeing nothing linking to our site anywhere. Some things to clarify: These are not no-follow links These pages linking to our new domain are indexed The pages being linked to on our new domain are indexed This is not a flash site or heavy in JavaScript The links existed the day the site was launched so when the new pages were crawled they existed. "Site:" command in Google shows me that my new site is indexed. What could potentially be causing this? I am trying to get these newer ccTLD's to begin ranking and I understand that I need to get links going to these pages since they are fairly new (2.5 months) so I can outrank the .com in the SE's in those locales. (Like Google.co.uk)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DRSearchEngOpt0