Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

57% of businesses I surveyed either agreed/were very interested in Negative SEO

         

Shai

2:45 pm on Feb 2, 2015 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Just to move away slightly from the possible/not possible argument which we hear so many times on so many forums. A couple of months ago, I was talking to a very well respected online marketer friend of mine who is based in the US and we got into a little discussion about the willingness of businesses to carry out negative SEO attacks on each other. His argument was that if it was handed on a plate and complete anonymity was guaranteed, many businesses would be very eager to launch such an attack.

I was of the opposite side of the argument. At one point, growing slightly weary of the bad Skype line we were chatting on, I tried to finish the conversation on top by using a bit of a cheap shot. I said with my tongue firmly in my cheek "Maybe in the US that's true but not here in the UK". Yes I know... terrible thing to say and before you all jump in, our arguments tend to be quite lively and we make a point of always resorting to cheap stereotypes. If it makes you feel better he also has the occasional dig about my supposedly British trademark of being overly polite and apologising all the time even when its not deserved.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, I decided to carry out a little test which is on my blog if you want to read the details (Mods? can I put a link here?).

We sent out 84 emails offering guaranteed negative seo service for £250
61 responded
2 told me to xxxx off.
11 Politely rejected the offer.
19 Wanted more information.
29 Wanted to go ahead.

So a 79% of people wanted to go ahead or were very interested. I have to admit that really did surprise me. Am I the only one surprised by those results?

Mods Note: Changed the title to better reflect the math. 19 interested responses + 29 go ahead responses divided by 84 businesses contacted = 57%

[edited by: goodroi at 6:16 pm (utc) on Feb 2, 2015]

Nutterum

7:23 am on Feb 9, 2015 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



@JAB

While I like what you said John, you and me both know that this is a pipe dream. The one and only big downside of the current evolution of search engines is that they can`t automatically determine whether a link is a spammy grey hat SEO, negative SEO or a honest white hat SEO attempt, or if it is SEO at all.

That is why we have lago updates that do not distinguish but just cut you down. If you are an honest business owner - you will do the work to remove the links. If you are spammer you will remove the links regardless because you got caught. Either way you get punished.

Hence why we have NSEO (short from Negative SEO in case anyone is scratching his head). You nuke someone with links (well it does not work exactly like that but I will not go into details) and Google algo punishes his website sooner or later. And I fear the more people are not willing to pay the ever steeper price of SEO and content creation (because lets face it - nowadays both go hand-in-hand) the more they will themselves open the market for NSEO practitioners, to the point where it will become a real problem.

And I am saying all this with the hope of never seeing it myself, although I doubt it.

tangor

8:16 am on Feb 9, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Ranking by negative SEO alone is highly unlikely. Without any positive ranking (SEO or not), what's the value of negative SEO? And if a site is ranking the ordinary way, why chance the consequences of negative SEO for a short term benefit? That's the web reality side.

The other side, as the OP suggested, is that it appears folks would jump to the dark side IF THEY WERE PROMISED there was no downside. This merely reveals the ethics of the responders, not the value of negative SEO. And makes a promise it can't keep.
This 32 message thread spans 2 pages: 32