How NOT to Start a Network of Sites
A WebmasterWorld thread discusses a great case study which should be shared with as many webmasters as possible to warn them against the screwed start. Here’s what it is about:
- A guy decides to create a network of 100 sites following ALL Google guidelines;
- Each site has only one page and almost no content;
- The sites are NOT interlinked (as this is against Google rules);
- Each site targets tiny keyword all in the same niche;
- All the sites are on the same host and C-class IP;
- All the sites are verified with the same Google Webmaster Tools account;
- Some of the sites run Amazon ads;
The guy thinks he doesn’t break any rules and plans to moderately grow each site after all 100 one-page sites have been launched.
A day comes (after 6 months of huge work) when he finds all his 100 sites penalized…
So what was wrong with this plan?
- Google doesn’t want sites like this in the top of its SERPs (simply because they do not provide any quality) even if they do not break any official rules;
- The whole network looks like spam and it will be very difficult to make it believe they aren’t
- Most of these 100 domains are now red-flagged and mostly useless for growing new (quality) sites on them.
The conclusion? When you plan to grow a network of sites, better start with a few quality ones and add new ones step by step to look natural.
21 Responses to “How NOT to Start a Network of Sites”
Leave a Reply
Yes webmasters should have in their mind that following the official guidelines to be done. They should keep in mind that we target users and keep the websites user-friendly and the content is good. Its obvious that our ultimate aim is driving quality traffic to us and retain them, referring to new ones. Because for this fact we target search engines since its the most common way that people can find websites. So websites must keep users in mind first than search engines.
[Reply]
Bang on, Ann. We are working on a network, setting up five sites at a time. Each one is a complete site. Each one has different sets of backlinks. They are all on the same server; if they were on separate servers with identical Whois data, that would look fishy.
[Reply]
Obviously one page websites will not do well in the SERPS, but the whole notion of being penalized for having a network of sites on the same server is fear mongering. I have had no problem with this, and when it was brought up at SMX Advanced many others have had the same experience I have had…
[Reply]
@David, Brian,
True, I don’t mean to say that same servers = spamming. But having 100 sites all poorly managed and hosted together does look like spam. That said, it’s a combination of various signals that come into play.
[Reply]
This is terrible to hear. I don’t know this guy but it sounds as though he was trying to play by the rules and was penalized for it. Isn’t the best part about doing what we do is trying stuff out to see what works and what doesn’t?
[Reply]
Shame to hear of the time he has lost, but the one key “rule” he broke was one of ethics…offering quality content to google search customers. If he launched the sites with zero content rather than steadily building, then this is where he clearly came unstuck.
[Reply]
I’ve seen many Real Estate websites all hosted on the same IP. I was wondering about penalization. They are all different Real Estate Agents but they all go through the same hosting company. They don’t link to each other and about a handful of them have quality content beyond the listings.
If Google does penalize do they ALWAYS penalize the whole IP or do they penalize specific domains on that IP address?
Great post!
[Reply]
I have been asked to produce a report on the social, ethical and legal implications of social network sites I.E.(vle, portals etc). The report needs to be based on facts and have appropriate referencing, with no more than 3 web sites and no less than 3 books or journals. I have found websites but am struggling to find books.
[Reply]
DOH! I learned a lot from this post - thanks!
It was my impression, that when setting up “microsites” like this, they should NOT be on the same server, because it would look “fishy”?
Great post!!
[Reply]
Uhm, Great writing… i dont know it’s risky before
[Reply]
Agrees with Ian and others. Content was the issue. We cannot feed on external content and make a great website, unless we have a great usable mashup concept.
One interesting thing in the actual discussion thread is that the Guy has most of the answers in his posts and admits he stepped over.
I have seen networks with few 10s of sites (10-30) linking to each other and still performing well in Google SERPs. The sites were specific to a geographical location and domain names were of the format place+keyword.com. But they did have lots of original content. May be Google liked their bold disclosure by interlinking. LOL.
[Reply]
nice post I want to start a social network site for people to make new friends, not find old ones like facebook is for?thanks.
[Reply]
coool I was wondering about penalization. They are all different Real Estate Agents but they all go through the same hosting company.thanks.
[Reply]
nice post The report needs to be based on facts and have appropriate referencing, with no more than 3 web sites and no less than 3 books or journals.thanks.
[Reply]
nice post but they should NOT be on the same server, because it would look “fishy”?thanks.
[Reply]
We cannot feed on external content and make a great website, unless we have a great usable mashup concept.thanks man keep it up.
[Reply]
Hey Ann, Sorry but I don’t agree with the points made in the post.
1. No Idiot will just launch 100 sites just like that, I am sure he must be knowing what he is doing.
2. He can use different names in whois, spread them across different cheap hosting providers and also on some free hosting servers.
3. The most important question again would be why is he creating this network.
a) building more links to his money site ? (which is not clear).
b) a bunch of total unrelated sites and non interlined just cannot be taken down like that.
Sorry Ann, just bought a blackhat side to your post and Ann I am a big fan of your posts from SEJ.
[Reply]
yeah we are waiting all of you over here! We’ll Rock!
[Reply]
I have 250 sites and they were all launched on the same server at the same time, then we added content afterwards (and blog on regular intervals). They are not interlinked and have unique content, why would they be seen as spam even though we are not selling anything, just being affiliates? The answer is the content. The guys sites would never perform anyway unless he had some good fresh content. If they filled the black listed sites with 800 word articles on everyone regarding the subject of the site, then removed all the external linking, they would be back up in 6 months.
[Reply]
Great article, but what would be the action that could lead Google to penalize all the net? Same IP? Same registration in Google Webmaster Tool? (I tend to believe that this is the most risky of all) Same similar targeting? Amazon Ads? (This also might be the reason, cause Google could read the sites as affiliate pages from a common spammy source).
This article will make me rethink some ideas that I was worthy on putting in practice. Thanks
[Reply]
very good superr thank you adminn
[Reply]