Competitor has three different stores, all the same content

Different Company in Whois – Same address

[juniperwasting]

A strong competitor in the serps of inktomi, fast, teoma, and google owns three of the stores in the top five.

example:
widgets-direct.com
widget-therapy.com
widget-accessory.com

Each site is superficially different, the first table has a different logo and intro, but after a minute you can tell it is the same content. I ran a quick whois on all three, and two were held by one company, the third by another. Problem is the address is the same for both companies, right down to the suite in the office building.

In essence this is the same store appearing up to four times in the top 5 for this fairly competitive keyword. The company(ies) involved also compete against us in Overture for the same term.

As far as I can tell this is a spammy trick that is working perfectly, and I do not know what to do about it. Has anyone seen this before? If so, what was your response?

Thanks,

j

[IanTurner]

Not spammy - how many high street stores are owned by the same holding companies?

[WebGuerrilla]

Yes, we have seen it before and we have also had this discussion many times before. It isn't spam. It's diversification. The best thing you can do is pay attention and learn.

[worker]

Overture does not allow a single company to bid on the same term more than once, so you may be able to get Over to kick out one of them (if they are bidding on terms more than once to take several top positions). If the companies are truly separate companies, Over may allow it, but my guess is that you can make a strong case by showing the address.
Overture has to protect their 'top three' positioning model in order for their advertising model to work, so they are not lenient when anything can disturb that.
As to Google, I'm not sure how they would react, but it sounds like you can make a case for duplicate content.
The examples you gave indicate that the company doing this is clever and willing to spend the time to do what they need to do to get the best placements, so don't be surprised if they find a way to get around things if and when they are slapped.

[SEO practioner]

Diversification... like not putting all your eggs in the same serp's basket...

[juniperwasting]

hrmm, well thank you for the replies. On the note of diversification, I completly understand. Our company acutally owns many different specialized sites all under the umbrella of our network, and we make that clear on each one. But those are all different stores with different products. My beef is that one company is dominating a particular niche with false pretence of being different operations. I really don't understand how this could be diversification if it is the same thing over and over.

j

[4eyes]

juniperwasting, this is exactly the same technique used Soap Powder manufacturers et al - many different brands, same manufacturer.

Its not a fair world, we just have to live with it.

[sun818]

I'm with you juniperwasting. It is spam. It clogs up the search results with identical content. Think of it this way. It would like having www.bluewidget.com and bluewidget.com being indexed twice except the 'look' is a different. If you ran these sites through Sim Spider [searchengineworld.com] - they all appear the same content-wise. Only one domain should be indexed and the rest given last rank. This would benefit end users more than the current situation.

[stever]

juniperwasting, what would your reaction be if you got two or three top rankings for (say) "baby widgets" from your many different sites? Would you take them down as a service to the end user? Deliberately un-SEO them? Stop your PPC campaign on all but one?

[Napoleon]

>> My beef is that one company is dominating a particular niche with false pretence of being different operations <<

So what? If the content varies you have no issue. Frankly it sounds like you are fishing for an excuse to complain to Google or just whinge (no offence intended).

How about looking at your own site and trying to beat them? Look at the positive, instead of bleating that the other guy has this and that.

>> Our company acutally owns many different specialized sites all under the umbrella of.. <<

And if they all happen to come up side by side for a particular search term (and I bet they do for some)? What's the difference?

There's is FAR too many people looking for reasons to attack the competition rather than build their own positions and sites. Generally that's the stance of a loser... it's certainly the position of someone who deserves to lose.

[sun818]

Napoleon, your tone is uncalled for. juniperwasting has stated

Each site is superficially different, the first table has a different logo and intro, but after a minute you can tell it is the same content.

Content does not vary. And that is the issue. Didn't anyone read the first post? :(

[dvduval]

I have built a site for a national distributor and then set up sites for individual stores throughout the country. They all use the same product database (in some cases even pulling from the same SQL database).

It's simple yet powerful and I highly recommend this strategy.

If it's the same company with the same physical address and the same products, I would say on a personal level that it is spam. However, if the company were to organize each of the sites around a theme, then I think it would be a little more acceptable. For example, if they sell trading cards on the hub site, but then create sites devoted to hockey, baseball and football on other sites, I think that would be OK.

[juniperwasting]

I posted this to get advice on a situation I had not faced before. Obviously there are other who have, and those comments I appreciate. As to "looking for an excuse to compain or whine", I do take a little offence. I have never logged a spam report, or contacted google (or any other SE for that matter) to complain about a competitor. I have taught myself, and learned from others (especially this forum) everything I know about SEO, and have had success by just working hard and creating the best site I can.

So it seems my answer is this is totally legit, and I should look through it for other tips.

j

[stever]

Nothing is "legit" - they are just using the same tactic with more success than you (selling the same products on different sites). So your conclusion is probably a sensible one, but not necessarily a "safe" one.

[Napoleon]

>> Napoleon, your tone is uncalled for <<

What tone? I had no tone at all when I typed that (honest). I was simply trying to be helpful, as ever.

Don't YOU not believe that too may folks come on here whining, whinging and moaning about other people's sites? I'm not suggesting anything about this particular post, just observing a general and disturbing trend.

I personally like to see the positive in humanity: encouraging others; promoting a common good; offering a helping hand where possible; etc.

It upsets me deply when I see posts intended to: denegrate competitors; attack other people's sites; encourage the great Google to issue penalties and hurt other people; cause harm to other webmasters who may well frequent WebmasterWorld; etc.

It's also negative and unhelpful, and really demonstartes a darker side that most people do not wish to see.

I certainly don't wish to see it and tend to post mild admonishment when I see a post inviting negativity.

C'mon.... keep to the positive... eh?

[pageoneresults]

As far as I can tell this is a spammy trick that is working perfectly, and I do not know what to do about it.

The only thing you could do if you feel there is a problem is report it to Google. Once that is done, it's back to work as usual.

Has anyone seen this before? If so, what was your response?

I see it almost regularly. If it occurs in an industry where I am actively promoting a client and they somehow managed to knock us down a spot or two, I then look at my page relative to that search query to see where I might tweak and put them back in their place.

Believe it or not, these types of strategies are usually short term and don't have the longevity. Google will clean it up eventually. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but it will eventually find its way to the bin.

[juniperwasting]

<<<<selling the same products on different sites>>>>>
Not happening.

As I said "But those are all different stores with different products" My stores. I do not want to play double-up with my customers, I want them to come back for anything they need. I do this with at least 2 sometimes up to 5 paragraphs of good content. Content generated by researching each product, and trying to become an expert.

I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but I wish a couple of you would have read my posts before replying. I have noticed two distinct tones coming from this forum lately. The people who do whine, and the people who want to jump on those who do.

I thought I had a legit question about something I have no experience with, and I came here to ask the people whom I have grown to respect. Hey, maybe I just caught a couple people on bad days.

I hope you are right Pageone~ Something about these companies just smells sleazy.

Thanks,

j

<edit>Blasted Fingers</edit>

[pageoneresults]

juniperwasting, I wouldn't worry about it too much. The board has been rather edgy lately with all the happenings at Google.

About two years ago I had a holiday campaign that I was promoting. I was up against a competitor who had 24 sites that were all identical in content but totally different designs. Out of the 24, 14 of them were occupying the top 14 spots at Yahoo! It was a real pain but we managed to do extremely well during that season. I can just imagine how well they did! ;)

I ran a quick whois on all three, and two were held by one company, the third by another. Problem is the address is the same for both companies, right down to the suite in the office building.

That's what tells me that they will soon end up in the bin. We might even see them stop by here to find out why they've been penalized. ;)

Their message might start off like this...

Can someone tell me why my sites were banned? We have three properties out there that all have unique content and now all three are gone.

There will be 10-15 replies all with educated guesses and none of us will ever know that they were three identical sites.

[sun818]

I always think of as text being the unique content on a web site. I'm guessing some people think layout changes equal "unique content" as well?

[juniperwasting]

I really was not trying to lodge a compaint here. Lord (and a few others know) I am not perfect. Let me sum up.

Saw site with 3 ACTIVE INDIVIDUAL DOMAINS, very little unique content.
All in the same SERPS, all in the top.

Thanks,

j