Search
Compliance
Saturday 21 April 2018 08:43 PM   Your IP: 54.80.185.137
Structural SEO
Home       SEO Enterprise Blog       Search Compliance       Structural SEO       The Semantic Imperative       About re1y.com       Contact Us      

Enterprise SEO Blog

re1y roll
Gaming Google In The Gaming Industry
Bob Sakayama
2013-03-23 18:27:43
2012 SEO Disasters | Solutions
Bob Sakayama
2012-12-16 14:03:29
Google May Be Quietly Acknowledging Negative SEO
Bob Sakayama
2012-08-30 15:29:12
Unnatural Links Warning
Bob Sakayama
2012-07-25 17:05:11
Penguin Inadvertently Makes Paid Links More Valuable
Bob Sakayama
2012-04-29 14:01:46
Occupy Google
Bob Sakayama
2011-11-04 12:57:49
Google Has Lost The War Against Paid Links
Bob Sakayama
2011-05-07 16:33:19
Google Penalties Now Called Manual Actions
Bob Sakayama
2011-04-23 16:27:14
Google Bomb Today
Ryan Urban
2011-04-11 17:05:11
Penalized Site Seeks Help: papofurado.com
Valmir Fernandes
2011-03-17 17:56:06
Did The Hammer Come Down On Content Aggregators
Bob Sakayama
2011-03-02 22:22:24
Enterprise Search Manipulation
Bob Sakayama
2011-02-19 19:12:08
Google Has A Huge Cloaking Problem
Bob Sakayama
2011-01-21 20:33:20
A Sorry Tale of a Google Penalty in Action
Dr. Marc Pinter-Krainer
2010-12-13 11:46:50
A New Google Penalty
Bob Sakayama
2010-11-28 21:49:40
The Archive Link Magnet
Bob Sakayama
2010-08-12 20:39:05
Coping With The Loss of Link Metrics
Bob Sakayama
2010-07-25 03:10:26
usachatnow.com Penalized
dirtsgood
2010-07-22 15:19:42
Automating Compliance Via CMS
Rev Sale
2010-07-15 22:43:15
Caffeine May Have A Hidden Cost
Bob Sakayama
2010-07-08 11:35:34
Google Penalties And Nuked Domains
Bob Sakayama
2009-11-28 21:09:30
When Google Doesn't Like Your Business Model
dirtsgood
2009-11-09 12:41:20
Search Compliance For Subdomains
Jabaloni
2009-11-09 11:51:10
Google Penalty Solutions - An Example Unwind
Bob Sakayama
2009-11-04 21:21:01
Maintaining Search Compliance via CMS
OneInAmelia
2009-11-03 22:35:15
Still Reeling From The Affiliate Slap
dirtsgood
2009-11-02 22:47:01
Most Popular Penalties
Bob Sakayama
2009-11-01 22:06:52
Link Obfuscation Necessary On New Sites
Rev Sale
2009-11-01 21:46:56
Latest
By: Bob Sakayama
2009-11-28 21:09:30
There's a new role for forensics in the web environment - determining the risk of failure of a newly purchased domain, and the need for pre-purchase forensic examination is there whether the domain was pre-owned or not.

Because of our penalty work, we are aware of the numerous kinds of rank loss issues that businesses experience. They are all disaster stories, but some are compelling because of a unique circumstance - the domain was just purchased. We consider any site purchased within the year of the suppression to qualify for this class of penalty. We have also seen sites that have been taken down quickly by inappropriate behavior of the new owners, but in this case we're only discussing penalties where the purchaser is an innocent.

Too many times, the previous owner ran a successful black hat strategy just prior to sale, inflating the rank value while undermining future performance. No one can prevent this from happening, and as in all purchases, caveat emptor.

In that spirit, one of the relatively new services we provide to businesses that buy websites and domains is a pre-purchase analysis of the domain in question. While it's obvious that you need to check out any business you buy, perhaps especially an internet business, it may not be as obvious that you can just as easily get screwed by simply buying an available domain, without a background check.

I did just that in 2006. I purchased a domain that was listed as "available" in the APlus.net domain search tool, and started development on a sophisticated data driven listings site. Note that go-vacation-rentals.com does not rank for "go-vacation-rentals". Site has easily $100,000 worth of dev costs alone. When I first discovered the site wasn't ranking, I thought we triggered a penalty during dev work - we had a lot of indexed redundancy.

But 3 years of changes later the site is still penalized. By elimination, we are now confident that the site's suppression is triggered by outside forces, probably links, that we never posted. Supporting this, we can see inbound links in Webmaster Tools from the previous owner's other sites. On the last reconsideration request, I posted only the homepage without any links to content, so it's just a one page site with no links. I also pleaded with Google to simply be informed if the site was harmed by the previous owner, so we could stop paying for renewals in the hope of extricating it from rank hell. Of course we only get automated messages telling us the site has been reviewed, and the penalty persists.

This disaster resulted in a new awareness that has saved clients from repeating this mistake. I'm putting up a permanent post on the main site on this topic and will include any relevant comments or experiences. If you have any experiences with newly purchased domains that were later found to have been nuked, please comment.

Blog_id: 10 | Posted: 2009-11-28 21:09:30 | Views (6,960) | Comments (2)  
Comment By: dirtsgood
re: Google Penalties And Nuked Domains
(posted 2009-11-28 22:33:22)

Assuming you're using archive.org and the Wayback Machine for these forensics, plus linkdomain: searches in Yahoo to see if backlinks exist. And whois for legacy ownership records. Anything else?

Response By Bob Sakayama
in response to thread started by
dirtsgood
(posted 2009-12-01 22:39:13)

There's a lot more you can do in just the public search. Not going to give away all our secrets here, but one very simple and obvious thing you left out: use ALL the search engines.

Latest
Home       SEO Enterprise Blog       Search Compliance       Structural SEO       The Semantic Imperative       About re1y.com       Contact Us      

re1y.com
Enterprise SEO
Google Penalty Solutions
Automation & Search Compliance

Looking for SEO enabled content management systems with structural, semantic optimization built into the cms? You're on the right site. Research identified targets are implemented within the markup, content, and filenames to enable the site to rank as high as possible based upon semantic relevance. 34789366G off site content requirements