|
<snip>
Well, it's interesting how different SEO experts can disagree. Give us your
opinion on the "mini-me" site issue today!
"From Tagline
published by Detlev Johnson and Heather Lloyd-Martin, definitely worth
subscribing to this one!"
</snip>
Detlev,
I only have 1 question for Mr. Winters.
Why do you have to "hide" the domains on separate networks?
The reason is it is spam. ODP has mentioned this specifically
in their submission guidelines and Google does not like this
activity either. ODP states one business, 1 listing. I have
seen editor emails to a client that stated multiple sites
were found on Google by searching for a phone number.
What is the value of these sites if they are contrary to
the submission guidelines on the most important directory?
The fact that the listing on ODP provides a nice boost on
Google means that you are starting with one strike against
you on the most important indexing engine as well.
When you cross link the sites, which is also suggested,
you are definitely running a high risk of PR0 on Google.
You are now a "bad neighbourhood" which is never a good
position to be in. That is the **only** reason for "hiding"
the relationships between the domains by putting them
on separate networks. Google in particular will spot these
as spam if they are all on the same network.
You are also fragmenting your PR on Google. If you have 1
site all PR can be passed using internal linking. This isn't as
strong a strategy if you have multiple sites. Since Google
for the time being is the homerun for SEO why bunt? That's
what you are doing when you fragment your PR.
The other engines probably don't "look" for it and only find out
by someone reporting it. Whether they take action is not
known for sure but Google definitely looks for this as part
of the "Google Bomb" algo. Meaning it is detected as it results
in a similar closed loop of links.
It should also be noted that this Seo technique is touted highly
by Mike Campbell as well. Coincidently many of his sites have
PR 0. I wonder why?
Although "mini sites" are an SEO nightmare there may be
some value as a branding medium. Personally I would rather
maintain one large site than many little ones but that is my
preference others may not mind. I would caution though that
IMHO this is akin to SEO suicide so be careful about using it
in this manner.
Lastly, any technique coming from the newsletter where
this technique came from should be viewed with much skepticism!
Mr. Winters has in the past advised:
1. using invisible links to set up the dreaded hallway strategy.
Always has been, and always will be, spam of the highest order
on **all** search engines!
2. doorway pages another SEO and SE nightmare
IMHO, Mr. Winters does not always totally think through what
he advises. The fact that the two methods above were propagated
through this newsletter and are probably the most common reasons
for de-listing at present does not say much about the quality of the
techniques or the company propagating the "myths". Is it just
co-incidence that WebPosition Gold is mentioned specifically in the
Webmaster Guidelines on Google when there are plenty of other
similar software programs? I don't think so!
You may find this thread on ihelpyou forums interesting.
PageRank experiments.
Myself and some other widely known Seos discussed this technique
at length! |
