|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
| |
||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
| |
||
|
|
|
| |||||||||
 |
|
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
SEO Chat Forums Sponsor:
|
|
|
|
#16
April 25th, 2007, 04:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
a new developement
New movement on this, the new domain www.ocean-finance.co.uk has had exactley the same pebnlaty palced on it as the original domain.
This leads to believe that Google has manually gone after these guys, and is continuing to do so.
__________________
Christian Missionairies - Port Elizabeth, South Africa
|
|
#17
April 25th, 2007, 04:15 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I am not buying it mate  Can u clearly explain what you mean by this ? What u are saying is like the myth SEDD (Search Engine Deliberate Deranking)
__________________
SEO FAQs - You might find your answer here. SEOchat Forum Rules - Read Before You Post **Do what you feel in your heart to be right- for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't.**
|
|
#18
April 25th, 2007, 04:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
This is case study is making me think google is placing manually penalties on sites.
What is the trigger for these penalties is another question all together, and this is what I am trying to find out.
|
|
#19
April 25th, 2007, 04:30 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
hmm .. it is interesting that they don't come top for their brand terms.. it could be that Google has discounted ALL their links and not just the dodgy ones.
__________________
channel5's SEO A to Z, nuggets of SEO knowledge in 26 topics from A to Z. How to rank in Regional Googles
|
|
#20
April 25th, 2007, 04:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
but would they have done that for the 2nd new domain, that they registered and got ranking in the last week too?
I think its a manual penalty, but I can't think the aggressive links alone could get this kind of penalty on a site.
|
|
#21
April 25th, 2007, 04:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think this harsh on money supermarket, They are an online brand who has made the transition to TV and they have been a strong player in there area of the web for a while.
There link building campaign is much more ethical than what ocean, asda and few of the other people penalized recently have done. No I don't do the work for supermarket either. I just have heard how they do things recentley. Quote:
|
|
#22
April 26th, 2007, 03:38 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The home page has got a lot of styles in its head tag. Although this probably had no effect on whether it got banned or not, placing your styles in an external style sheet is always a good idea.
|
|
#23
April 27th, 2007, 05:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
You're right, it's not. Else I could point masses of links at your site to get YOU banned. A friend of mine runs a massive porn network, i could get some really nasty links. But that's the point, google can't let someone ban someone else! IF they've been banned it's got to be for something they've done, I see duplicate content - perhaps that's it? The reason I say IF is I see their site, they have page rank, no greyed out bar or anything nasty. Plus pages from their site are in the google index...So imo they're not banned.
|
|
#24
April 27th, 2007, 05:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
forums.seochat.com/showpost.php?p=403601&postcount=4
As you said yourself Quote:
|
|
#25
April 27th, 2007, 05:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Are you sure this site has been banned i checked the site its having a pr of 5 and it has been cached on 23 Apr 2007.
|
|
#26
April 27th, 2007, 08:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
i dont think the site is banned at all.
I tried the following
If a site is banned you will never get response to these queries. However, the site seems to be under some penalty. The links that Google shows for them are not at all related to their sites however, the fact is that they do not link to those sites. Now keeping Google's philosophy of "Do no evil" we got to believe that these links should not be the cause of teh penalty. However, if these links are all a part of a network that we are unable to detect manually-- can that be the cause ? I found there are some sites that are common on all the sites that link to this site. I dont think any of us have cared to look into the who is info or IP data to see if these sites also belongs to Ocean. Probably they were trying to keep the main site (Ocean) clean and used other sub sites to gain links for it and Google have detected that. this is just an assumption but i cant see any better option at this point.
__________________
SEO Consultant India, Kolkata | Free Website Review at PR 2 Blog | Beijing 2008 Olympics Picture Blog
|
|
#27
April 27th, 2007, 11:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ok we have over 2000000 incoming links (yahoo reported) from the digitalpoint network?
Is this enough to get a site a penalty as serious as this one has picked up, ( they currently rank 14 for www.oceanfinance.co.uk )
|
|
#28
April 28th, 2007, 08:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
One would hope not, or those using the dp network have a weapon.
|
|
#29
May 13th, 2007, 05:36 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
For all those that thought moneysupermarket.com were not using spamming techniques to gain SERPS...
http://www.insiders-view.co.uk/moneysupermarket-banned-by-google-for-spamming/0045 They have had something happen to them for the term car insurance... I am wondering what other terms they will lose placement for next!
|
Del.icio.us
Digg
Google
Spurl
Blink
Furl
Simpy
Y! MyWeb
