Forum Moderators: open
One of my competitors who does very well on all the search engines has an interesting structure. The site has the same template throughout, i.e. the background color and graphics template is the same on every page.
Depending on what link you click on, you could end up at any of four different domains....although you would never know it from looking at the page...they all have the same feel and design but the url in the address bar is different. All the domains are similar and related.
All the content is unique and it is a very good site. I'm wondering why they did this. My guess is, improved pr through Linking and multiple entries in the serps so more opportunities to get hits.
Is this okay with google and others?
Is this a good idea, splitting the site with different doamins?
Thanks.
What possible reason would there be for splitting the domains other than to gain links from each domain and position each domain higher in a search?
It is a spam trick trying to trick Google.
I would consider this a link farm and submit a spam report if I came across these sites.
#1 [something]Motors.com
#2 [something]Chev.com
#3 [something]Lex.com
#4 [something]BMW.com, etc.
But if they were breaking it out to different domains for car seats, stereos, wheels, etc., then it looks like they are cross-linking for inappropriate reasons.
[edited by: ciml at 7:39 am (utc) on May 24, 2004]
[edit reason] Generalised. [/edit]
---------------------------
I don't agree with that.
Using that train of thought, you could take a site that sales, widgets and break it out for each brand of raw product that goes into making that widget. The search results would quickly decline.
If those domains all lead to the main car dealership with that being the contact point then their product is cars, why not just have those as subdomains of the main one.
The only reason is to gain PR and position each one for that brand of car.
I would still report something like that and let Google make a determination as to whether or not it is spam.
[edited by: ciml at 7:39 am (utc) on May 24, 2004]
[edit reason] Generalised. [/edit]
Having 32 pages spread across 4 domains linked together should be similar to having 32 pages of unique content on the same site.
Now I could be wrong about the difference between internal link weight and external link weight, and if I am someone who knows please jump in.
I also wouldn't think is spam, provided the content is different on all the pages / sites.
What possible reason would there be for splitting the domains other than to gain links from each domain and position each domain higher in a search?"
There are perhaps reasons that might not be obvious to a casual observer. Perhaps the owner has different partners or owners with each site that all want their own direct domain. For example: property1.com; property2.com; and property3.com all owned by different investors but managed by the same general partner and webmaster.
Having 32 pages spread across 4 domains linked together should be similar to having 32 pages of unique content on the same site.
I would tend to agree with you on this one. If PR is indeed calculated per page (seems to be the concensus here), then why would it matter where the page resides?
It would certainly be the fairest way (IMHO) to handle inbound links.
All the content is unique and it is a very good site. I'm wondering why they did this. My guess is, improved pr through Linking and multiple entries in the serps so more opportunities to get hits.
If this is the case google will have NO problem with the sites. There are very good reasons for having multiple domains for related content. If the seperate domains are used to categorize unique content they will do fine.
One example has been given. The other is say they were regional domains like:
NewYourkDomain.com
DallasDomains.com
LosAngelesDomains.com
There are great benefits to this structure. If you are targeting each cities keywords like "New York Keyword", "Dallas Keyword" and so one you have a great advantage. you can get people to link directly to each of the domains main pages, and it is easier to get people to put "New York Keyword" in a link to a new york domain then if they only had one domain that was "CatchAllDomain.com".
The could be numerous reasons why this has been done, and I'll give you the example of my work site...
Our main site is based in Taiwan and started life about 4 years ago. It is on a real barebones hosting package, and anyway the host provider does not support php, mysql, or shopping carts, just cgi (which we used extensively). When we decided to open an online store we looked around and found a good offer and ready-to-go package from xyz-host.com. So we put the store there and then linked across to it from our main site.
Next, we needed to improve our technical response proceedures, including a HelpDesk, Download area, poster/image bank, etc. Most of the scripts we found were mysql/php scripts, but when I checked with xyz-host.com I found that they charged USD9 per month for php, and USD9 for each mysql database.
As we were going to need several databases so I just decided to setup the "technical" part of our website on another host - the same one I use for my personal website... as they offer free php and 10 free mysql databases.
So we have three domains working together, and working quite well. I know we could have consolidated all the three areas under one domain, but that is just how it grew. Nobody here has the time of the patience (or skill) to now consolidate the sites under one domain... with getting all the cgi paths figured out, etc. That is hell.
Now you, Mr Guy, might come along and say ahha... SPAMMER! But it's not the case at all, and in fact I have never given any thought to the crosslinking "benefit" issue until I read this post.
I think there must be lots of good reasons why people CHOOSE to split up a web service over several domains that have nothing to do with "tricking" Google. I've only been reading this forum for two days (and have found a wealth of great information here), but I think some of the guys/gals take some things way too seriously. Another thing is I'd reckon some are so quick to suspect others of "spamming" and "tricks" because they have some experience with such tactics, and fail to see that lots of people are just naive plodders.
SE spam originated because sites were showing results that had nothing to do with the search phrase, they did it with redirects or cloaking or whatever ... but the problem wasn't that they had the top spot ... it was their page had nothing to do with the search.
I found a site last night that had 17 printed inches of keywords stuffed at the bottom of their page ... did I think it was "spam"? No, it was 100% related to what I had searched for, were they using BS techniques that should get them banned, sure ...
I guess my point is a LOT of people complain that google doesn't act on spam reports, my guess is almost none are filed by searchers all are filed by webmasters below the offending site ... if everyones knee jerk reaction is to file a spam complaint to google no matter what the site is doing it's no wonder they can't act on them
I'm glad to know that Google isnt' as trigger happy as some of the posters here.
In my opinion, if these sites are all cross linking, then it is being done for the sole benefit of gaining PR from links.
What possible reason would there be for splitting the domains other than to gain links from each domain and position each domain higher in a search?It is a spam trick trying to trick Google.
I would consider this a link farm and submit a spam report if I came across these sites.
Rubbish! :)
In fact if you actually sat down and drew a diagram out of the total site(s) architecture... you will find that few pages are actually cross-linked... if done properly.
Some examples of this is Macromedia and Shockwave, Apple and Quicktime, Adobe and Acrobat and many, many more... and I think we can agree that none of the fore-mentioned sites are considered "spam trick trying to trick Google" and I doubt very much that you would ever "consider this a link farm and submit a spam report if you came across these sites."
Yes, there are naïve people out there but there are also people who are quite proficient at spam.
I know spam when I see it and really only report blatant spam tactics. Hidden text no matter what the reason is spam according to Google, not me. If it has to be hidden, what purpose does it serve to the visitor? None, it is there strictly for the search engine.
I guess there could a reason for multiple domains as long as each of those domains did not cross-link every single page of each site.
The industry I’m working in has a company that has created 8 sites. Each of those sites have pretty much the same content, the contact point all goes to the main site, and every single page of those sites have links to each other, giving the main site over 1900 back links and a PR of 7. That is pure spam trying to out smart the algorithm of Google who must of agreed with me since the last dance brought the main site a loss of over 700 back links and reduction of PR to 6. I’m sure there is more to come.
I’m not a killjoy and each case has different merits. The idea that a little bit of spam won’t hurt is BS. A little turns into a lot and before you know it you have an index much like Alta Vista or Inktomi that is riddled with it.
Google’s TOS can be vague in some areas but is quite plain in others. As long as you follow it, you have no reason to sweat every time the dance occurs.
Yes - crosslinking can be done just to develop to artifically induce PageRank/Link Popularity because the site(s) can't get quality links.
It can also be done by those who know not what they do (a little bit of information can be quite dangerous).
But it can also be done to develop complemtent brands much like the examples previously given.
A single domain will usually get a maximum of two positions in the Google search results, with one indented. Things get into spam territory when several domains are used only to dominate as many positions as possible on a given keyword.
We should probably make a distinction in our conversation between link farms and domain farms. If multiple domains are used to help sort out the Information Architecure for the visitors, then they would not all show up at the top of a given search very often, except perhaps for the most general keywords in that area.
I once got into messing around with a company's branded domain. I started introducing new domains for the same brand, etc., splitting off content and trying to take over all the spots 1 through 10, you know?
I didn't catch a penalty for my cleverness, but that was just dumb luck, I now think. Plus, I'm not sure that visitors appreciate a company that dominates that way. If you're always getting in the way when people search, then they start to not like you. It's just not a good image for anyone who likes long term, repeat business.
When we backed out of that strategy and brought everything under one domain again, the home page went from PR5 to PR7, with lots of high PR6 pages. I'll take that any day over what we had before - and now there's no worry about disappearing from Google, and we can be very free with internal links.
Unless you're working with throw away domains in hyper-competitive areas, I think the only sane resolution is not to go after SERP domination. Just focus on delivering quality content to your visitors (whether carbon based or silicon based) in a highly usable fashion. That keeps everything healthy for the long term.
I want to use a remote hosted tracking//analysis
program/company to track all my hits and it's
getting too expensive as my visitors increase.
I'd rather only track (and pay for) some of the pages
GracedPoet
I have noticed a LARGE numbe of competitors breaking off pages into new domains. I am not going to do this for the main product / service on my site (because it has good listings and ratings for both "arms" / sub domains. But I wondered if I should break off the smaller things, *simply* to get more PR going (from having more sites cross-linked) and to get more / better search returns for different areas.
Not only does Google say this OK, but to what extent. What I mean is breaking my widgets and thingys site into one widgets and one thingys site. But also whether I should have separate sites for blue widgets and red widgets.
Anyone (GG included of course) know?
I have one competitor who has broken pages off and now has a one page domain - which means an extra cross linked and topical domain to help his real site.
I did not know Google said it is OK to create sites stictly for increasing PR and gaining position in the SERP's. As a matter of fact, here is their official word staight from their site on creating sites for that reason:
--Don't create multiple pages, subdomains, or domains with substantially duplicate content.
Avoid "doorway" pages created just for search engines, or other "cookie cutter" approaches such as affiliate programs with little or no original content.--
This goes back to my original statement, if your doing it to strictly gain rank or PR, then it is spam and if I come across it I'll report it to Google and let them determine what to do with it.
Thanks, but I was not saying making duplicate content. I was talking about breaking off widget holders from my widgets and thingys site. Making a site with a new domain for widget holders, and then changing it from internal to external linking.
That's not duplicate content, but what I need to know is it acceptable according to Google. And to what extent? For example. If I have a widgets and thingys site, is it ok to recreate it as a number of sites, such as;
site 1) widgets and thingys - a reference site
site 2) blue widget sales site / domain
site 3) green widget sales site / domain
site 4) pink widget sales site / domain
site 5) yellow widget sales site / domain
site 6) widget holders site / domain
site 7) widget insurance site / domain
site 8) light thingys site / domain
site 9) medium weight thingys site / domain
etc., etc.
As this is clearly happening on other sites and it seems to PR and themed benefit. I wish it were not true, but it is.
Your right, I see spam happening all the time and I report it all the time. Some of it gets removed or penalized and some of don’t. I think eventually it all will over time.
I know instead of worrying at dance time about whether or not my site is going to get penalized or even banned, I instead anticipate seeing how much my hard work over the month has paid off.
If your going to create doorway sites and treat them as separate sites maybe giving a link or two to each site, then I don’t see what that could hurt and Google probably would not do anything because your going to have to work that much harder on each site to get them to rank as seperate sites.
If lets say you’ve created your duplicate site and it has 100 pages and you put a link to all the other sites on each of those 100 pages, then that is spam and I’ll turn it in every time. Google does remove sites like that.
Are there sites like that out there, of course. I am battling one right now. They command 4 of the top 10 searches on my industry. I could join the club and do exactly what they are doing, instead this month when my PR increased to 6 and theirs fell from 7 to 6 with a loss of 700 links, I felt pretty good and I’m sure they felt pretty bad because now they are on Google’s radar and I placed above all their duplicate sites.
If we all spammed, then there would be nothing but spam out there and people would start going elsewhere much like they did with AltaVista.
I don’t know if GoogleGuy will comment on this or not, since what your asking is clearly spelled out in their guidelines.
The old adage two wrongs don’t make a right really does hold true.
You have to decide on whether or not every month at dance time you want to have high blood pressure worrying about whether or not your sites get booted.
Every body has an opinion about his and ultimately, you’re the one who will pay the piper should Google view them as doorways and ban them if they get picked up or your competitor turns you in.
I'm in the process of moving part of one site to a new domain, and people who click links at my current site will often find themselves moving between the two domains, though they will not notice it unless they look at the address bar.
There's nothing spammy about what i'm doing, nor can i think of any benefit. Frankly, it's a pain in the butt.
But diversity and top level topical areas like "travel" (anywhere), "science" {every field), "software" (every kind), "education" (every level) are something are these levels where the credibility of "all emcompassing" adds weight the trust -- a potential visitor can appreciate you better without needing to look.
The topical array of subject matter complement the domain name structure without sheer domination on one particular area.
Bear in mind - a single domain can achieve this as well -- with and without the use of sub-domains.
"since what your asking is clearly spelled out in their guidelines."
Please show me where it says not to do this, and to what extent. As I can not find such a statement. Having, say topics such as "travel insurance" and "hotels" are clearly different. So is that Spamming? I have no problem if it is, but then I want to know for sure.
I gave the blue, yellow, etc. widgets as a question "how far can you go?". As having a site for town a hotels, another for town b hotels might be a bit much (based on how many hotels there are per domain I guess).
I need an exact qualification as I need to know where I can tread (if I need to), and also where I should be reporting as Spam. I have sites that bear splitting up given their size. And it appears to be helping people when they separate off even a single page on travel insurance for example, onto a separate domain. I think that is spam, but I want to see it specified as this by Google. If it were, say, a 30 or more page affair, maybe that is different.
I would not separate off one page and make it a domain as they have, but should I report it as Spam?
Any way, here it is straight from the Googles mouth:
Now remember, it was said "to be done to increase PR or influence ranks".
Google terms of service: (excerpt from link at)
[google.com...]
• Avoid tricks intended to improve search engine rankings. A good rule of thumb is whether you'd feel comfortable explaining what you've done to a website that competes with you. Another useful test is to ask, "Does this help my users? Would I do this if search engines didn't exist?"
• Don't participate in link schemes designed to increase your site's ranking or PageRank. In particular, avoid links to web spammers or "bad neighborhoods" on the web as your own ranking may be affected adversely by those links.
Now, would you do what it is your wanting to do if there was no such thing as Google? If so, then go for it!
If not, then do so at our own risk.
The key to Google's guidelines is 100% this -- "Does this help my users?
Define your site(s) by that statement and you can't go wrong.
Everything else is just woppidy-splash! :)
Sorry, but that is nothing to do with anything. It is certainly NOT specific to what I have been asking. It is a generic statement from Google.
So, you caution people against splitting sites into different domains as it is for the search engine's benefit. So, let me ask you if you used css files and off page javascript to help your users! Phooey you did. You did it for the search engines! So that makes you a Spammer by your definition. So please drop those css files and put all those luvly font tags back in please.
Does anyone know what the official word on what is acceptable in splitting sites into different domains. It clearly has an advantage with the search engines. But when does it become Spam?
Maybe Google need to put some specifics on this in their guidelines, as they do with cloaking and linking. I think they are needed.
So, you caution people against splitting sites into different domains as it is for the search engine's benefit. So, let me ask you if you used css files and off page javascript to help your users! Phooey you did. You did it for the search engines! So that makes you a Spammer by your definition. So please drop those css files and put all those luvly font tags back in please.
Rubbish! ;) clean shorter code w3c.org approved - if you don't like it that your business, but it doesn't mean your right.
Does anyone know what the official word on what is acceptable in splitting sites into different domains. It clearly has an advantage with the search engines. But when does it become Spam?
Rubbish! ;) Google.com, .ca, co.uk, etc. Some folks stretch to the edge, others go beyond. Sometimes it makes logical sense. How many web sites does NASA have... according to you it's just SPAM!
<added>hmmm... GrinninGordon I actually mis-read this part, sorry. I'll leave my original comment but add this... when your topics have grown beyond "widgets" as a product and you add a directory of everyone elses widgets, the art of designing and manufacturing, widgets in other countries, a discussion forum, and possibly a virtual library of historical widgets with a search engine function then you probably have too much in one place... but widgets is a bad topical area (too small)
Maybe Google need to put some specifics on this in their guidelines, as they do with cloaking and linking. I think they are needed.
Agree here - you clearly need more information, IMHO.
[edited by: fathom at 10:30 am (utc) on Mar. 11, 2003]
Right this thread has me worried now [SPAM] does this to me! :)
I have a site with mydomain.com, mydomain.net, mydomain.info & mydomain.biz all pointing to the same site all with exact content; can I be penalized for this? (Some say no some say yeah) does anyone know the exact answer, as I would remove the others if this were the case :(
Many thanks,
-gs
