Search ranking for a term dropped from 1st/2nd to 106th in 3 months
-
Hello all,
Just a couple notes first. I have been advised to be vague on the search term we've dropped on (in case this page ranks higher than our homepage for it). If you search for my name in Google though you should be able to figure out where I work (I'm not the soccer player).
While I am looking for an answer, I've also posted this question on a couple other forums (see https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4934323.htm and https://productforums.google.com/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!msg/webmasters/AQLD7lywuvo/2zfFRD6oGAAJ) which have thrown up more questions than answers. So I have posted this as a discussion.
We've also been told we may have been under a negative SEO attack. We saw in SEMRush a large number of backlinks in October/November/December - at about the same time we disavowed around 1m backlinks (more on this below) but we can't see this reflected in Moz. We just got off a call with someone at Moz to try and work this out and he suggested we post here - so here goes...
On 4th October for the search term 'example-term' we dropped from number 2 to number 9 on Google searches (this was confirmed in Google Search Console).
We also paid an external SEO consultant to review our site and see why we are dropping on the term 'example-term'.
We've implemented everything and we're still dropping, the consultant thinks we may have been penalised in error (as we are a legitimate business and we're not trying to do anything untoward).
In search console you could see from the graphs on the term we used to rank 1st and 2nd (you could go back 2 or 3 years and still see this).
The thing we do find confusing is that we still rank very highly (if not 1st) for 'example-term + uk' and our brand name - which is very similar to 'example-term'.
Timeline of events of changes:
-
2nd October 2018 midday: Added a CTA using something called Wisepops over the homepage - this was a full screen CTA for people to pledge on a project on our site helping with the tsunami in Indonesia (which may have had render blocking elements on).
-
4th October: we added a Google MyBusiness page showing our corporate headquarters as being in the UK (we did flag this on the Google MyBusiness forums and both people who responded said adding a MyBusiness page would not affect our drop in rankings).
-
4th October: dropped from number 2 to number 9 on Google searches (this was confirmed in Google Search Console)
-
4th October: Removed the Wisepops popup
-
5th November: Server redirect so anything coming in on / was redirected to a page without a /
-
12th November: Removed around 200 junk pages (so old pages, test cms pages etc that were live and still indexed). Redirects from any 404s resolved
-
19th November: Updated site maps and video site maps to reflect new content and remove old content. Reviewed the whole site for duplicate meta tags and titles and updated accordingly with unique ones. Fixed issues in Google Search Console for Google search console for 404 and Mobile usability. Removed embedded YouTube video from homepage.
-
11th December: Removed old content and content seen as not useful from indexing; 'honey pot' pages, old blog, map pages, user profile pages, project page ‘junk pages which have little SEO value’ (comments, contact project owner, backers, report project) from indexing, added ‘no-follow’ to widgets linking back to us
-
3rd January 2019: Changed the meta title from to remove 'example-term' (we were concerned it may have been seen as keyword stuffing)
-
7th January: Disavow file updated to refuse a set of external sites powered by API linking to us (these were sites like example-term.externalsite.co.uk which used to link to us showing projects in local areas - our SEO expert felt may be seen as a ‘link farm’)
-
11th January: Updated our ‘About us’ page with more relevant content
-
15th January: Changed homepage title to include 'example-term' again, footer links updated to point to internal pages rather than linking off to Intercom, homepage ordering of link elements on homepage changed (so moving external rating site link further down the page, removing underlines on one item that was not a link, fixed and instance where two h1 tags were used), removed another set of external Subdomains (i.e. https://externalsite.sitename.co.uk) from our system (these were old sites we used to run for different clients which has projects in geographical areas displayed)
-
18th January: Added the word 'example-term' to key content pages
We're at a loss as to why we are still dropping. Please note that the above changes were implemented after we'd been ranking fine for a couple years on the 'example-term' - the changes were to try and address the drop in ranking. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
-
-
Thanks for the info! It's good to get a bigger picture of the nefarious 'globe' network which seems to link to every site on the entire internet, with absolutely zero value-add whatsoever for end users. It's interesting to see that you guys got hit by some variants of that pure-spam domain, which didn't seem to hit us. Clearly the problem is far more widespread than we had at first anticipated
We also disavowed a whole load of non-globe related domains, those weren't in our export
What I'm talking about in terms of the 'targeted' methodology, is not the deployment of the disavow - but the decision making process before the disavow file was compiled. We really made sure that, we got a very granular view of each and every link before deciding whether to disavow or not. We had rows of metrics against each link, before we decided whether to keep or disavow any particular link
In almost all situations, once we reached deployment we used to domain-level disavow directives. There were only 1-2 exceptions, where the client had good editorial pieces on a site - yet also spammy banner / sidebar links from paid advertising. In such situations we used a mixture of disavow directives, to try (as hard as we could) to let to good links through the net. That being said, very few people will be in that same situation. In the majority of cases, if you don't want one link from a domain - you don't want any!
-
This is really useful thank you. We've reviewed our spammy backlinks and noticed we also have a load of links from the Globe network also.
Looks like a few of the urls we're seeing were not in your disavow list, so I've listed them below so you can update your disavow file if needed.
earth.firm.in
theglobe.shop
advertisewebpages.org
searchingweb.org
accent-rugs.search-web.us
search-web.us
theworld.gen.in
globe.clothing
the-seek.net
theglobe.ru
www.search-internet.net
theglobe.capital
theglobe.co.za
theglobe.insure
theglobe.rocks
the-internet.co
www.internet-advertising.us
www.internetads.us
advertise.country
advertise-web-pages.org
internet-seek.org
the-web.in
theworld.capital
advertise.loans
acne.search-web.us
ad-net.net
advertise.contractors
advertisewebpage.net
arizona-mortgages.search-web.us
globe.video
jitensha.seek-web.net
online-seek.com
seekinternet.net
submit-urls.org
theglobe.exchange
theglobesearch.com
the-globe.today
the-globe.tv
theworld.diamonds
theworlds.marketing
the-world.tv
web-advertisement.com
websearch.world
www.advertising.recipes
www.earth.shopping
www.web-page.org
www.websearch.cz
www.web-seek.net
advertise.cologne
theglobe.bid
web-seek.org
the-internet.in
theseek.org
advertise.cruises
kitsukekyoshitsu.seek-web.net
theglobe.education
advertising.shoes
advertise.condos
advertise-webpages.com
advertise-website.org
seek-internet.com
seek-web.org
theglobe.org.in
theglobe.yt
the-world.site
globe.ru.com
auto-insurance.search-web.us
theglobe.loans
globe.com.de
www.theglobe.ru
theworld.estate
advertise-web-page.net
globe.com.ar
globe.pe
theglobe.ee
worlds.games
searching-web.com
advertise.computer
theglobe.cn.com
add-urls.net
globe.br.com
theglobe.ae
theglobe.sk
web-advertising.net
netfind.eu
theglobe.international
theglobe.gr
theglobe.fi
advertise.jewelry
searchinginternet.net
search-pages.org
submit-page.com
submit-pages.com
submitwebpages.com
theglobe.bz
theglobe.cl
theglobe.email
theglobe.gallery
theglobe.my
the-globe.siteWhen you said you disavowed the links in a targeted way - was that doing each link or grouped domain one by one in a disavow file?
Thanks again
-
So firstly, remember that Google's rankings are a competitive environment. It might be that others are rising as the query-space has been identified as lucrative by a number of competitors, rather than that you are 'dropping'
Another factor to consider is algorithmic devaluation. If you haven't had a message from Google within Search Console saying that you have had a penalty of some kind, then Google aren't adjusting your rankings to be lower than they were before.
When sites which previously gave you SEO authority are deemed as 'manipulative' by Google, the pipe from their site to your site (which was previously sending across ranking power) is switched off, so you drop. No one has edited your rankings to be lower, it's just that previously 'suspect' links have been switched off by Google. From Google's POV those links should never have contributed to your rankings, so it's not an attack on you - it's Google balancing the table to 'how things should always have been'
I recently wrote an in-depth post on this phenomenon, you can find it here as my primary answer to the asked question. I recommend you have a read of that one!
I can confirm that at our agency, from late Summer last year to the end of the year (Autumn to Winter period) we did notice an increase in terms of negative SEO attacks. 2-3 of our client's sites were hit and on one of our client's websites, the attack actually worked and drained some of their ranking positions a little. We recovered from it pretty fast via accurate disavow work. The main offending network was this crappy one which as you can see is just a series of spam domains linked together with billions of pages listed, in Google's least-favourite manipulative 'link-list' format
For reference we purged a load of globe-related domains:
- https://d.pr/f/PLkscH.txt (list of globe-related domains we disavowed)
I'm giving you the above as our timelines somewhat converge for very similar issues, actually if you'd be open to it I'd like to compare lists of disavowed spam domains to see if it was part of the same attack
This list isn't exhaustive, we actually did a much more thorough job of the work than just that. We fetched tens or hundreds of thousands of backlinks from all relevant tools (SEMRush, Ahrefs, Moz Link Explorer, Majestic SEO, Google Search Console) and aggregated all the data. We then used Google Analytics (site-visits / sessions metrics) and URL Profiler (fetching metrics like Citation Flow, Trust Flow, Page Authority, Domain Authority, Ahrefs Rating - all from different data sources) and boiled each link down to a single 'SEO Authority' metric
Once we had that we began deciding which links were 'fake' ore 'negative SEO' links and we disavowed them in a very, very targeted way
The problem is that, when you get penalties or algorithmic devaluations, Google won't explicitly tell you which links are the problem. If you get too aggressive and do the disavow work in a non-data-led, non-targeted way, you can end up disavowing some links which were giving you some SEO ranking power. That makes you dip down further
Even with out solid tools and methodology, we _still _usually experience slight dips from disavow work. But after it's done, limiters on performance are removed and then you can begin to see it trend up again. Especially if you replace some of the bad links with good ones (or compensate for having less authority by introducing better content), you very quickly start to see the site recovering
IMO it sounds like you have had:
- Spammy inbound links and / or negative SEO
- Which led to algorithmic devaluations, not a penalty
- Which was then back-plated with low quality disavow work
- Which then hit you harder than was necessarry
- Which then nullified your content efforts
I'm not a gambling man, but if I had to roll some dice - that's what I'd say
This is the kind of lengths we were going to, in order to get an accurate disavow which killed negative links whilst preserving decent ones:
- https://d.pr/i/o4GM8p.png (screenshot of Excel)
This particular sheet has over 5,000 rows of data, but before we began our cull it had many more (into the tens or hundreds of thousands of rows of data, from memory)
A lot of the colouration is conditional formatting, designed to make stuff stand out. There were also rules saying stuff like, actually if this link is already a no-follow it therefore can't be a risk so don't disavow (basic logic)
If this doesn't look like the lengths to which your agency or freelance partner went to (with very sensitive disavow work) then the work wasn't done right
Sorry that I haven't provided a clear-cut, out of the box answer to your query. Hopefully the knowledge and resources which I have shared here, will be some use to you on your **quest for restored **rankings
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
-
Advise / Help on Bad Link Removals
Hey everyone.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TheITOteam
Im new to the community and new to backlinks - hence the question to the community today.
I would like help understanding options and work load around back links and removing them.
I have a client with over 8000 back links as a few years ago he paid someone about £10 to boost his rankings by adding thousands of backlinks.
We fear this is having a bad effect on their site and rankings organically as 90% of these back links have a spam score of over 50% and also no follows. My questions to the community (if you could be so kind to share) are:
1. Whats the best way to decide if a Backlink is worth keeping or removing
2. Is there a tool to decide this or assist with this somewhere on the internet? Ive had advise stating if its not hurting the page we should keep it. However, again...
How do I know what damage each Backlink is causing to the domain? I appriciate anyones time to offer some advice to a novice looking to clear these1 -
New Service/Product SEO and rankings
Hello, fellow MOZers. We are a web design company, and we had SEO as secondary service for years. Due to changes in the company we started pushing SEO as one of our main services about 6 monhs ago. We have separate page , targeting that service, as well as case studies, supportive information pages, even SEO Center, which is like a blog about SEO only. We are not using black hat SEO, doing honest link earning and building, don't use keyword stuffing, everything is by the book. I understand that SEO takes time, especially for a company which has a footprint as web design company, not as SEO company. We are ranking very good for web design related keyphrases, however, we don't see any improvements for SEO related keywords. It always was and is between 25-30 SERP. At the same time, competitors, who are ranking on first page for SEO related phrases are pretty bad looking. Design-wise as well as blackhat-SEO-wise. Everything is keyword stuffed, UX is horrible, prices are ridiculous. So, do you guys have any thought/advise on how we can see results / why we are not seeing results. Links: Google search result: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=seo%20houston Competitors: www.seohouston.com, www.graphicsbycindy.com Our pages: https://www.hyperlinksmedia.com/seo-houston.php, https://www.hyperlinksmedia.com/seo-houston/
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seomozinator0 -
301 redirects for 3 top level domains using WP SEO Yoast
Hey Guys I have a custom built website - and a wp blog attached to this - problem is there are 3 top level domains: zenory.co.nz, zenory.com and zenory.com.au **The issue is when I enter the domain to 301 redirect I only have to enter one domain usually i enter redirect from zenory.com/blog/oldpage to zenory.com.newpage ** For eg: I have just move Phone Psychic Readings from the blog - over to the main site. However there seems to be an issue that I'm still having and trying to clean up. I'm finding backlinks there are linking to each other of my 3 domains that end up backlinking across domains, which I was told this can look as spammy to google. For eg: co.nz links many pages to com.au. I'm currently trying to clean this up at the moment - however while im in the process of this - I find myself question when I'm creating the 301 redirects from the blog - but lets say I'm on the blog for zenoy.co.nz/blog/oldblogpost and when I click on a blog post - it redirects me to zenory.com/newarticlepost - because I have redirected it to .com - how can I redirect and make sure is going back to the right domain name to save myself from having to show this cross backlinks? Would gratefully appreciate any assistance on this tricky situation. Cheers Just
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | edward-may0 -
Not ranking for keywords. wehhh
I am not ranking for any of my keywords despite getting a number of Backlinks to my pages and mentioning them in both content and meta tags?!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Johnny_AppleSeed0 -
Determining if our ranking is due to increased competition
Hello, I'd like to give you a list of DA/PA and see if the slipping of our rank is due to competition. This if for our main keyword. Below is the top ten sites in our industry - their DA and PA for this head term. This is for the plural form of the keyword - a product term. If I don't say differently the following are where the title has the keyword in it exactly and also these are ecommerce site listings. Does this look like we are being outdone by competition or would you say that there might be some other cause: 1. DA 85, PA 38 2. DA 34 PA 34 (These guys are mostly paid links by the way) 3. DA 100 PA 55 (singular form of keyword and also informational site) 4. DA 91 PA 41 5. DA 23 PA 24 (The only thing I see about this one is that their backlink profile is very white hat and they have the nicest looking site in our niche) 6. DA 29 PA 31 (exact match domain) 7. DA 99 PA 1 8. DA 22 PA 34 (Guide including infographics - doesn't sell products themselves) 9. DA 96 PA 1 10 DA 26 PA 38 -- This is us with 57 total root domains sitewide and 43 root domains to the home page. Let me know what additional information you need.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
How cloudflare might affect "rank juice" on numerous domains due to limited IP range?
We have implemented quite a few large websites onto cloudflare and have been very happy with our results. Since this has been successful so far, we have been considering putting some other companies on CL as well, but have some concerns due to the structure of their business and related websites. The companies run multiple networks of technology, review, news, and informational websites. All have good content (Almost all unique to each website) and rankings currently, but if implemented to cloudflare, would be sharing DNS and most likely IP's with eachother. Raising a concern of google reducing their link juice because it would be detected as if it was coming from the same server, such as people used to do for their blog farms. For example, they might be tasked to write an article on XYZ company's new product. A unique article would be generated for 5-10 websites, all with unique, informative, valid and relevant content to each domain; Including links, be it direct or contextual, to the XYZ product or website URL. To clarify, so there is no confusion...each article is relevant to its website... technology website- artciel about the engineering of xyz product
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MNoisy
business website - How xyz product is affecting the market or stock price
howto website - How the xyz product is properly used Currently all sites are on different IP's and servers due to their size, but if routed through cloudflare, will Google simply detect this as duplicate linking efforts or some type of "black hat" effort since its coming from cloudflare? If yes, is there a way to prevent this while still using CL?
If no, why and how is this different than someone doing this to trick google? Thank you in advance! I look forward to some informative answers.0 -
Looking for a Way to Standardize Content for Thousands of Pages w/o Getting Duplicate Content Penalties
Hi All, I'll premise this by saying that we like to engage in as much white hat SEO as possible. I'm certainly not asking for any shady advice, but we have a lot of local pages to optimize :). So, we are an IT and management training course provider. We have 34 locations across the US and each of our 34 locations offers the same courses. Each of our locations has its own page on our website. However, in order to really hone the local SEO game by course topic area and city, we are creating dynamic custom pages that list our course offerings/dates for each individual topic and city. Right now, our pages are dynamic and being crawled and ranking well within Google. We conducted a very small scale test on this in our Washington Dc and New York areas with our SharePoint course offerings and it was a great success. We are ranking well on "sharepoint training in new york/dc" etc for two custom pages. So, with 34 locations across the states and 21 course topic areas, that's well over 700 pages of content to maintain - A LOT more than just the two we tested. Our engineers have offered to create a standard title tag, meta description, h1, h2, etc, but with some varying components. This is from our engineer specifically: "Regarding pages with the specific topic areas, do you have a specific format for the Meta Description and the Custom Paragraph? Since these are dynamic pages, it would work better and be a lot easier to maintain if we could standardize a format that all the pages would use for the Meta and Paragraph. For example, if we made the Paragraph: “Our [Topic Area] training is easy to find in the [City, State] area.” As a note, other content such as directions and course dates will always vary from city to city so content won't be the same everywhere, just slightly the same. It works better this way because HTFU is actually a single page, and we are just passing the venue code to the page to dynamically build the page based on that venue code. So they aren’t technically individual pages, although they seem like that on the web. If we don’t standardize the text, then someone will have to maintain custom text for all active venue codes for all cities for all topics. So you could be talking about over a thousand records to maintain depending on what you want customized. Another option is to have several standardized paragraphs, such as: “Our [Topic Area] training is easy to find in the [City, State] area. Followed by other content specific to the location
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | CSawatzky
“Find your [Topic Area] training course in [City, State] with ease.” Followed by other content specific to the location Then we could randomize what is displayed. The key is to have a standardized format so additional work doesn’t have to be done to maintain custom formats/text for individual pages. So, mozzers, my question to you all is, can we standardize with slight variations specific to that location and topic area w/o getting getting dinged for spam or duplicate content. Often times I ask myself "if Matt Cutts was standing here, would he approve?" For this, I am leaning towards "yes," but I always need a gut check. Sorry for the long message. Hopefully someone can help. Thank you! Pedram1 -
Sudden drop in rakings for a keyword.
Hi, A few weeks ago my homepage - http://www.linearsky.com dropped out of the rankings completely for a keyword I was promoting (web design staffordshire). I was thinking that one of the reasons could be a sudden link spike. The reason being is that I have been doing some development work (for a client) on one of my sub-domains. Now this is a Magento site with thousands of products, with my keyword rich link in the footer. From looking at the Google webmaster tools, it seams that alot of these pages got indexed accidently. Could this sudden link spike be enough to be penalised by Google? Apart from that the only borderline black hat stuff I have been doing is some reciprocal link swapping with a few websites in my niche - http://www.linearsky.com/misc/links.html I also bought a paid link on http://www.iwebtool.com/browser_details, (that I have now asked to be withdrawn) to see what kind of boost it would give me. I know this is unethical, but a number of page one competitors were also using this said link. Also it was only indexed for a few weeks. Could Google really pick this up so quickly? Any ideas of how to resolve this? Many Thanks Marcus
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | marcusuk-3041050