| 11:46 pm on Mar 7, 2013 (gmt 0)|
I see a similar situation.
5 results in the top ten belonging to the same company using 3 different sites on different IP's. Same contact number, T&C's, company reg number etc. Each site uses a different template, adds different chunks of keyword stuffed content which seems to be enough to differentiate them.
Difficult to compete when one company locks out half the results.
| 11:55 pm on Mar 7, 2013 (gmt 0)|
A not for profit I do work for has their site, a site themed on a late Q4 event and a site themed on a late Q1 event.
They all are typically in the top 6 in the period of Q4 to just after Q2 starts. Been on 1st page the last few years with one or two shifting to page two depending on keywords and date.
| 5:28 pm on Mar 8, 2013 (gmt 0)|
|Is Google okay with this? Do they penalize something like this? |
There's no policy against it. There are some queries where three or more of my sites rank (because they're relevant to the query) If they're not relevant or of poor quality, then eventually (presumably) an algorithm change will knock one or more out.
There is no "fair" in search. It's survival of the fittest.
| 4:13 pm on Mar 10, 2013 (gmt 0)|
|There is no "fair" in search. It's survival of the fittest. |
Fully agree there netmeg!
| 11:57 pm on Mar 10, 2013 (gmt 0)|
Are we talking about brands? ;)
Some brands are getting sneaky now that they think/feel Google believes they can do no evil.
| 2:22 am on Mar 11, 2013 (gmt 0)|
I haven't seen a "rule" against it and I haven't seen a more recent update, so when it comes to brands Vince seems to apply: [youtube.com...]
I guess my best advice is: Have fun with it, but if they all "tank" on the same day don't be totally surprised Google changed something and it's no longer "cool" or a "good" thing to do, cause they can and they may, but there's really no telling.
| 11:16 am on Mar 11, 2013 (gmt 0)|
If you have identical content it may be a problem. Google show/should show diversity in search results. Make something different on those pages.