joined:Nov 28, 2001
I would love to hear your thoughts on this :-)
I have been brought in by an agency to see if I can help their clients who were being serviced by another agency. Most clients were hit by Penguin 2.1 in October and have not significantly recovered.
The "old" agency did a round of disavows (no link removals) and has been extremely focused on creating solid content for the sites. All sites have been reviewed from a UX perspective, copy (content is being targeted to visitors, trying to give them everything they need in terms of information and also contain calls to action) and page layouts.
There are still "toxic" links to these sites (using Link Research Tools) and their inbound link profile is completely reversed to what is recommended (in some cases 80% of incoming links are comprised of target terms rather than brand).
We are talking many many sites here, each with many, many links - link removal is not on the table for the "old" agency and certainly not for me.
Is all this focus on content going to do anything to return traffic to pre-penguin levels without tackling the link issue? They have stopped building crappy links but crappy links that were built in the past remain.
Will disavowing remaining links that are not relevant to the websites make a difference in conjunction with all the content work that is going on?
Will cleaning up the NAP in conjunction with the above play much of a role, if any?
In case it is important, all of the sites are small businesses and had pretty relevant content on them - think garage door repair, roofers, plumbers, lawyers... On average websites are 10-20 pages and were doing ok until Penguin 2.1.
I know that the ideal situation is to remove all the "bad" links. What is the next best option?
Thanks for your feedback!