Will Google penalize for redirects related to a company merger?
-
Company A is set to acquire Company B. As part of the merger agreement, Company A will be redirecting the linking domains of Company B's website (over 1,000 links) to company A's website.
Will Google penalize Company A for redirecting Company B's 1,000 linking domains to Company A's website at one time? If so, would it be better for Company A to redirect Company B's 1,000 linking domains in waves?
-
Thanks for your help on this question Ryan, irvingw and Gianluca.
Being that I am still an SEO newbie, looking back at my original question, redirect probably wasn't the correct word to use and my example could have been clearer and more concise, my apologies (still learning).
There's nothing black hat going on here, so no worries; but thanks for the words of warning. The links being discussed are from sites like Wikipedia, and other public profile pages. We're making sure that those public pages point to the correct URL. And since Company B was acquired by Company A, those public profile URL's should no longer point to www.CompanyB.com. They should all be pointing to www.CompanyA.com, instead.
-
No one knows what Google's algorithm metrics are, and even if they did the algorithms receive 500 changes per year.
As I shared, it depends on how many links the site already has established. If your site has a million linking domains then 1000 more is not even a thought. If your site has only 1000 linking domains then doubling the links overnight will surely set off algorithmic alarms.
It is my best guess Google would look at patterns. If a site has existed for 2 years and has 1000 linking domains, that averages to 42 new linking domains per month. I would feel comfortable doubling or tripling that number in a given month, but not going to much past that point.
I would also caution if you truly have control to 1000 unique linking domains, you need to have an extremely sophisticated black hat operation established. That would require 1000 unique domain registrations, 1000 unique c-block IPs, 1000 unique web designs, each site would have to earn unique back links, etc. The overwhelming majority of people who attempt to set anything like this up are caught and the entire network is categorized as an attempt to manipulate search engine rankings, and all links from all sites would be devalued.
-
"If you are talking about generating 1000 unique links to Company A's site from 1000 linking domains, there is a concern about having such an unnatural growth in links. It is dependent on the Company A site. If the site has a million links, then no problem. If the site has only 1000 links and you double overnight, that can possibly trigger an algorithmic penalty."
Actually, this is exactly what I'm talking about. What then would be the ideal number of links to redirect so as not to be penalized?
-
Well... yes, they are quite a lot.
But that agreement means also the disappearance of the site B? Or the merge of site B in site A.
Because if it is the second option, you could redirect all the site B (better if you take care of page similarity and not just 301 to the site A home page).
Then in GWT of site B you can advice Google that Site B is moved to site A. That way you are officially saying to Google: "Hey Matt, I'm moving and also my links are moving with me; therefore don't take wrong decision, because nothing black is happening :)".
Check this old Q&A for more infos about this procedures: http://www.seomoz.org/q/co-uk-to-com-transfer-of-domain
-
If I am understanding you correctly, you would be redirecting Company B's website to Company A, correct? If so, you are welcome to redirect the entire site whether it is 10 pages or a million pages. It is a normal part of the internet and there is no penalty involved.
When you refer to 1000 linking domains it sounds like you are not referring to Company B's website, but the many domains which link to Company B. Normally a company does not have direct control over the sites which link to it. For example, it is possible for 1000 people, companies or SEO websites to link to this Q&A thread. SEOmoz has no control over who links to the thread. If SEOmoz wished to move the thread, they could do so and 301 redirect the thread, but they cannot go to the 1000 linking domains and force them to change the URL.
I believe you are simply referring to redirecting Company B's website in which case there are no concerns. If you are talking about generating 1000 unique links to Company A's site from 1000 linking domains, there is a concern about having such an unnatural growth in links. It is dependent on the Company A site. If the site has a million links, then no problem. If the site has only 1000 links and you double overnight, that can possibly trigger an algorithmic penalty.
-
You can redirect them all with no issues if the companies websites are compliant. That is they are not penalized domains, and also not overly interlinked to each other.Too many websites for one company is against Googles rules, you're only supposed to have one horse in the race.
My suggestion would be to look at each site one at a time and vet it for compliance, once you have determined that it's a healthy site with no bad link building done on it, it would be safe to 301 redirect it to your new site.
This is just being super cautious though, because theoretically you have no control over who 301's a site to your domain. If Google penalized a site based on that then competition would take penalized spam domains and 301 them to the competitions sites in an effort to get them penalized. That being said, I wouldn't want any penalized sites to be 301ing to my site just to be on the safe side.
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
-
Redirect 301 multiple url to frontpage
I have a lot of /dummy.php/xxx pages that i would like to redirect to the front page. /dummy.php/100
Link Building | | Morten-Hjemmesider
/dummy.php/101
/dummy.php/102
..... redirect 301 /dummy.php/WILDCARD http://www.domain.com I can not figure it out?0 -
Reputable High Quality Link Building Company
Hi We are looking for a reputable high quality link building company. Can anyone recommend any and how much would we expect to pay? Thanks Andrew
Link Building | | Studio330 -
Should I re-update Google webmaster disavow when bad neighbor republish my Feeds?
Hi all! I have a self hosted, WordPress blog. Today I accidentally found a one bad site republish my blog feeds in its sidebar. This blog has cracked software download links, software serial numbers information as well as few legal contents. I think it's is a bad neighbor. And it will cause future SEO issues. That blog hosted on Google blogspot. Then try to contact the site admin to remove my feeds from the sidebar. But I can't find any contact information. This site doesn't have any social networking profiles/pages. How do I block that site re-publishing my feeds? It uses a blogspot.com sub domain, therefore I can't find any who is information. If I use Google webmaster disavow link feature, what happen when I publish new blog posts? Then I have to re-update the webmaster tools disavow links? Thanks!
Link Building | | Godad1 -
5th failed Google reconsideration attempt, can you help? (are scraper/related news sites the issue?)
(sorry for the long question - I thought it would be useful to give the background!) I am really struggling a Google's reconsideration request for my site, and although we thought we had removed almost all the 'bad' backlinks I am still getting no-where... We are really wanting to focus on building our brand, and establishing our site as an authority but this penalty is really holding us back. The latest response from Google: There are still many inorganic links pointing to your site. At this point, we believe we’ve evaluated these links appropriately, and no further action from us is required. In order for your site to have a successful reconsideration request, we will need to see a substantial, good-faith effort to remove the links, and this effort should result in a significant decrease in the number of bad links that we see. We do not recommend that you submit another reconsideration request until you have been able to make a good amount of progress. Once you’ve been able to get the links removed, please reply to this email with the details of your clean-up effort. My Website: http://bit.ly/KXg8y1 History: This is a new domain - approx 6 months old Old domain received a Google links warning We decided to start a new website, launch a new brand and start from the beginning We 301 re-directed the old domain so we didnt lose customers We then got a Google links warning for the new site We assumed this was related to links from the old site and so removed the 301 redirect on the 20th August Our old sites links still show in Google webmaster tools Reconsideration History 1st re-consideration request: Explained the 301 redirect had been removed, assured we would now be focussing on high quality content/brand building and after 2 weeks received a standard message to say that still had inorganic links 2nd Request: Went through the new sites links (using open site explorer, AHREFs, SEO Majestic and GWM) and removed those we identified as low quality (mostly directories built by an SEO company we had started working with). We complied a spreadsheet with all the links in it (including 301 redirect links) and explained which had been removed, webmaster contact details etc. We also uploaded our template email and screenshots showing contact with webmasters. 3rd, 4th and 5th Request: We went through the new site links and were able to remove a few more links which were thin or could be seen as inorganic, and the end result is that apart from 6 links we have removed all those we have identified as inorganic. Links The old site had some pretty poor links We have done no paid linking, no blog networks, no spammy web 2.0 sites on this site. We've added good quality content to our blog, focussed on social media, published an infographic, and are committed to long-term brand building The links mostly come from guest blog posting. An SEO company (who told us they were 100% content based) built some directory links - but 99% of these have been removed There are some links from Scraper/related news sites (ones that have related blog posts or scrape images etc) Press releases which were picked up and re-published (some of these include anchor text) My Question/s: Do you think Google is still seeing the links from the previous 301 redirect in Google webmasters and including these still? Are these scraper/related post sites causing the issue? (organic links - but some dubious sites) Are sites re-publishing our press releases causing the issue? (organic links - but includes some anchor text I really appreciate your time on this one, I have tried really hard to identify and remove links, but am now struggling! Many Thanks
Link Building | | twhite0 -
Will online PR with optimized anchor-text hurt my SEO efforts?
With Google's recent phishing expedition and increased focus on natural link profiles etc where does this leave PR distribution with optimized anchor-text? Using the pai for PR distribution services has always been a great way to build backlinks but I just wonder whether these will be considered over-optimised in future?
Link Building | | jamesq0 -
Anything to bear in mind when setting up a related 'family' of sites with linking between them?
We've spun out content from a single finance related news/analysis site (running for about 2 years) into several topic-specific sites on individual topics (markets, investment etc etc). They're all on the same server, use the same CMS (using a multisite setup), and share largely the same codebase, though obviously with customisations for the site names, and we've made sure each has a distinct identity. At the bottom of each page, we're linking to 'latest posts on the network', aggregating the 5 most recent posts from all the sites and displaying them in the footer. We've obviously made sure the actual content is completely unique on each site though. Just wondering if anyone has any tips about ensuring we don't dilute our SEO too much. and how to maximise our effectiveness?
Link Building | | topnotch180 -
Link Building Management Tool That Syncs Sweetly With Google Analytics
Hi, I would like a link building management tool that syncs with Google Analytics, so that I can Easily see traffic referrals from link acquired sites Easily see traffic from keywords that were anchored in the link acquisition Browny points for the tool to be a CRM as well. Raven Tools cant do this. Does anyone know of a tool? Or do I keep building custom reports in Google Analytics! Thanks.
Link Building | | DigitalLeaf0 -
Does google extract out keywords from links that use the url as the anchortext?
If someone formats a link like so: http://www.somedomain.com/keyword1-keyword2/keyword3.php Would you still get a similar anchor text benefit to this link as if it was formated like so: somedomain keyword1 keyword2 keyword3 what i mean is, does google extract out keywords from links that use the url as the anchortext?
Link Building | | adriandg0