I am a corporate seo and link builder – I am far from what I would call an expert in affiliate websites. This post is about what I think I have observed making the transition from corporate seo (my livelihood) to affiliate seo (my beer money).
When I started playing about with affiliate websites last year it’s kind of apparent that some sites that should rank, don’t.
For Example
I built 6 NEW test sites with exact match web addresses RECENTLY.
5 of them do well in organic rankings – very well. One of them is nowhere in Google, after months, and after getting some real links to the site too. (EDIT – The same site is Number 1 in Yahoo for it’s main keyword after a few months).
The performing sites are affiliate sites, made in much the same way as the underperforming site – but notably, these sites are NOT in a crowded space.
The underperforming site is a pure affiliate site in a very crowded (seasonal) space, with uncloaked affiliate links to suppliers, and discount codes and vouchers slapped all over the place. In short, I made no effort to hide it was a 100% affiliate site.
I did think we’ve made a nice niche site though – informative and easy to navigate for the user – better, in my opinion, than the competition. There is a lot of competition in this space, mostly spammy, and from the analysis I did, I thought it would be able to break into pretty quickly. I had 200 pages of content hand written too, to make the descriptions completely unique.
It all looked so good……
Top Rankings – Then ZZap! Nothing!
Much like the mythic Google sandbox some folk go on about, the site burst into the rankings and shot right to the top of Google. Then the site virtually disappeared for months (it still is nowhere – I have purposely let it be to see what happens to it). It almost looks like there’s a rankings short circuit. It’s as if Google is ignoring page relevancy within the site, and the page that should rank, is completely ignored, and as a result, another page on the site ranks on (for example) page 15. The pages that should rank within the site, do not.
Corporate SEO
As a corporate seo, I NEVER experienced a sandbox effect, even launching new sites – obtaining credible links from trusted sites always had an impact within months if not weeks.
Affiliate SEO
As an affiliate seo, I think I see this sort of sandbox (for want of a better word) as a phenomenon in some industries.
Google believes that pure affiliate websites do not provide additional value for web users, especially if they are part of a program that distributes its content to several hundred affiliates. Because a search result could return multiple sites, all with the same content, they create a frustrating user experience.
Hmmmm… well, that is exactly the type I built lol – no matter how well I built it.
It certainly looks as though Google has reacted and:
- identified it as an affiliate site, in an already ‘spammy’ industry with products already syndicated to a LOT of websites
- penalised it, or ‘sandboxed’ it – ‘for later’
Why should Google do this? To stop seo like me just wandering into it’s index, probably. Didn’t Google recently say they don’t think a site should rank JUST because a good seo is at the helm?
More Corporate?
I’ve spent my corporate career trying to make my sites not look spammy. Perhaps affiliate sites need to look more corporate.
Maybe Google just doesn’t want another site like yours – and mine – in this space? Well, there ARE hundreds, if not thousands. IT IS a “frustrating user experience” if I take my marketer hat off and put my searcher hat on.
Wether or not this is the case, I’m certainly thinking more about making my affiliate sites different to all the competition…. easier said than done of course.
That is actually what Google wants you to do:
If you participate in an affiliate program, there are a number of steps you can take to help your site stand out and to help improve your rankings. Affiliate program content should form only a small part of the content of your site. When selecting an affiliate program, choose a product category appropriate for your intended audience. The more targeted the affiliate program is to your site’s content, the more value it will add and the more likely you will be to rank better in Google’s search results and make money from the program. For example, a well-maintained site about hiking in the Alps could consider an affiliate partnership with a supplier who sells hiking books rather than office supplies. Use your website to build community among your users. This will help build a loyal readership, and can also create a source of information on the subject you are writing about. For example, discussion forums, user reviews, and blogs all offer unique content and provide value to users. Keep your content updated and relevant. Fresh, on-topic information increases the likelihood that your content will be crawled by Googlebot and clicked on by users.
Do You Have The Wrong Type Of Site?
I see a lot of folk in forums bemoaning how their rankings are terrible, they are ‘sandboxed’, or they have lost previous good rankings. If you look at Google’s advice, you can see, Google actually warns you about building sites they, well, just don’t need any more:
Pure affiliate sites consisting of content that appears in many other places on the web is unlikely to perform well in Google search results and can cause your site to be negatively perceived by search engines. Unique, relevant content provides value to users and distinguishes your site from other affiliates, making it more likely to rank well in Google search result pages.
Do you have the exact same type of site as the current competition? Do you have the same affiliate links as most of the competition? If the answer is yes, and you want to compete for free google traffic, perhaps you need to think about the actual site you are building, rather than just the marketing of said site.
Just Get More Quality Links? Really?
I see a lot of advice from seo in forums and they seem to all mention at some time the same seo advice:
get more quality links
You know that advice on getting quality links to your website is sound, but what if Google has identified your site type as one it does not need in it’s already crowded index? What if this advice is from corporate seo, and not affiliate seo?
If this is the case, then you might be swimming upstream as far as good google rankings are concerned, and quality links won’t always rescue the site (in time for what you need it for).
It’s not as if quality links are that easy to come by these days anyways lol
For Discussion
Do let me know what your thoughts are especially if you are an affiliate seo – this is ONE site, and usually I wouldn’t blog about ONE site underperforming, but I thought it worth DISCUSSING as if Google is identifying particular types of site this aggressively, perhaps it’s a pointer of what’s to come (or is happening) in other verticals.
I have seen the arguments in this space FOR A LONG TIME. ‘There is a sandbox’. ‘The sandbox is a myth’. ‘Google hates affiliate sites’. ‘No Google hates crappy affiliate sites’. What I am saying is perhaps, in some scenarios, they are connected.
PS Check out Google’s advice on Affiliate Websites here. I’ve never really discussed affiliate websites on the Hobo blog, so I thought this might be a decent place to start….. even if I am way off with my theories, it’s probably useful to highlight what Google recommends about affiliate websites. :)
Interesting stuff. I’ve recently been building affiliate sites, but ranking the site 1st then slowly adding the aff links in later. I’ve have experienced the ‘sandbox’ on a client’s site – it was a job site with duplicate jobs all over the web. It look 6-8mths to get anywhere with the same type of links that would get other sites going in 2-3mths.
The penalisation you’ve experienced seems more like a manual review to me than a sandbox effect, if you were in a fairly competitive niche then it makes perfect sense that someone may have came along and given your site the “its an affiliate site” tag and as easy as that your gone. I really don’t think this is a myth, there is a lot of evidence supporting Google hating affiliate websites, their manual review guidelines specifically mention it too. Do you have the logs for the website? If it didn’t get a huge amount of traffic you should be able to track down the culprit Google manual review if there was one, fairly easily? One of my favourite affiliate sites is moneysavingexpert.com they’ve got a HUGE following, on what is primarily an affiliate resource – gold!
I HONESTLY don’t think manual reviews are THAT common. For me, it ‘smells’ algorithmic. PS – This site would have passed a manual review. It’s clean as a whistle.
[...] Google Sandbox? Or Do You Just Have The Wrong Type Of Site To Compete In Organic Results?, Hobo [...]
See I build the site, add a FEW posts, chuck soe low quality link and THEN see how the site does, like you, I am a corporatee SEO and dable in affiliate stuff when bored – some do OK, and some just suck… I linked to a new one I have been messing about with, in a failry competitive niche, nothing awesome, but just a playground… BTW – see you at thinkvis! Not sure what you look like, but do say hello!
Rishil – that’s sort of what I am doing. I will definitely catch up with you for a beer :)
Buried in Google’s litter box http://www.hobo-web.co.uk/google-sandbox/ by Hobo_Web
RT @SebastianX: Buried in Google’s litter box http://www.hobo-web.co.uk/google-sandbox/ by Hobo_Web
I think you’re spot on with the theory ‘though I’m not sure ‘sandbox’ is the term I would have used; ‘dungeon’ might be a more appropriate phrase when it comes to what I believe Google do with some (most?) affiliate sites.
Thanks Shaun.. A good way to tell if you are in the sandbox is by searching for “title of your post” “yourdomain.com” … if you don’t come up, but do come up for site:yourdomain.com , then you are 99% likely sandboxed. It’s a method I have used to check… it’s a pain if you get there though because they take their sweet time fixing it.
You never heard of the Google Honeymoon Period? Oh please – try Googling for it, that’s what gave you your initial exposure. Cloak your affiliate links, get some authority links which shouldn’t be difficult as you’ve got all that original and hopefully actually useful content, and you should be away. You should have cloaked your links from the off as a matter of course, IMHO. BB
Of course, with retrospect, I’ll be cloaking every affiliate link in future – we’re building a price comparison engine at the moment and believe me everything we know is going into it :)
Bill, how much attention do you think i have been paying the last ?? years lol :) Of course I’ve heard of the honeymoon period. Again, I’ve not experienced such a thing in corporate seo and in other sites I have built (that weren’t built just to be affiliate vehicles).
Well from Google’s point of view, and Affiliate site is not what their searchers are looking for. People using Google do not want to hit some site that’s the equivalent of getting spam mail. I would think that in the extremely saturated markets, Google (and the other SE’s) would most defiantly have people manually checking sites and doing a very fast review. Imaging those guys that do the blog posts for 100 posts for a tenner also being paid by Google to “tick” or “cross” websites for them. There’s no reason why Google should not make use of the production lines their pagerank created :) On a side not, do any affiliate marketers ever argue that their sites bring value to the average searcher in some way?
I guess your observations do sum up the whole unique, quality content argument (cue ‘swelling of head’). I tend to use unique content (syndicated, backlinked, etc) to pull in the page views and then direct the reader to a page containing affiliate links (redirected through a php array and noindexed) using bold images/text plus I’ve started experimenting with pop unders. This approach has worked very well for a number of my smaller sites (product model/grouping). Admittedly, I don’t employ the following method on my primary money site which is something I need to seriously look at.
Great post. @ William, you’re right with Money Saving. But is also reassuring that affilate sites won’t be penalised if they provide good user experience and content, that if not unique, is useful, as Money saving expert is the go-to site for bargain hunters. Good thinking material. it is getting to a point where more than onpage, more than backlinks, oine should only think of how to create great experiences for users. ( I hate affiliate websites too )
The key with affiliate sites is to be genuinly useful. Just putting up some written content (even if it’s unique) isn’t going to cut it in the long run (or even the short run in many cases). A good affiliate site isn’t just there to hijack a user in the SERPS and bridge them to a merchant, a good affiliate site will provide a service to a user to help them make an informed decision, and in most cases this isn’t just some content about a product, it’ll be tools such as sortable and filterable price and feature comparisons, availability information, tarif calculators, genuine user reviews and large communities. Look at any really competitive area and look at the high ranking affiliates, all will be providing a real service, not just thin affiliate content.
Thanks for the comment :) You certainly seem to know what you are doing. :)
Thanks :) Been an affiliate for over 6 years now, maybe catch you at Think Vis and I’ll let you see some examples of what we’ve successfully put into practice.
Cool :)
As a newb and SEO beginner, this is the great site to learn. Thanks for the valuable info, Shaun! =)
i don’t believe in the sandbox when your site is not getting indexed it’s just because google didn’t find your site yet, or found something about your site and /or the links its getting they don’t like and then they just don’t index your site, but they really don’t take the effort to keep a sandbox and about affiliate sites; I know several affiliate ‘guru’s’ who had all the pages of their affiliate sites de-index AFTER a manual review from google!! this is not an assumption, I have seen it many times!
Good points Shaun. I’ve launched a lot of new sites for customers recently. 2 of them behaved the exact way you described them. Why? Because the site had some affiliate links. Even though they were my acquintances so i even pointed some links toward them, the sites were just not close to where they are supposed to be. I guess it’s just something different that ‘sandbox’, when google actually thinks that your site is not worth showing in the serp’s. Because one of my inner pages just dropped to 30th page while it was around 2nd page for months…
Interesting stuff! I currently have some thin(ish) affiliate sites on some quite decent generic domain names. They only get a trickle of traffic but make the odd sale which is fine for now. My worry is that I could be “damaging” the domain names? If I was to rebuild the sites from scratch, turning them in to good content rich site, with good seo, do you think it is possible that they will still struggle in Google because that domain name was previously sandboxed for being a pure affiliate site?
I don’t think anyone can give you an answer on that. Ultimately, if you build a useful site and get some good links to it, within time, Google will PROBABLY RANK it. Hmmmm I sound like Google lol :)
Hi this may be off topic so apologies, a friend has a site hydroponic-supplies.co.uk/ his front page ahs totally disappered from google. he used to have some affilate links pointing to this site, but says not anymore, is it possible his homepage has been sandboxed? Steve
Er…. Steve I think that site has other problems lol
While all replies seem to be from people competent in SEO / SEM / SMM, I’m not. I’m a website owner and I normally pay for SEO / SEM / SMM. When I dialog with the SEO / SEM / SMM specialists I work with I sometimes get the odd feeling that SEO / SEM / SMM is a bit of a magicians domain. Where mere mortals really have no place and the great grand daddy search engine playing ‘Gotcha’. I felt compelled to reply because I think this Blog post is brilliantly written. You’ve delivered what you are doing and the results that you’ve experienced in such a simple straight forward way that even I (non SEO creature remember) can understand exactly what you are saying. I’m going to tweet this URL as well. I’m sure a few others from my neck of the woods would love to read and enjoy its contents. It’s not often that I get the opportunity of reading a Blog post so lucidly written, with crystal clear intent. Thank you.
Thanks Ivan – I was trying to put into words for visitors here who, like me, are new to 100% pure affiliate sites, or, other affiliates marketing their site, who might not realize Google is actively pushing against their site. I was talking to an affiliate today (100% income via Adwords) who makes a good living, and wasn’t even aware of these guidelines from Google I highlight in this post, in regards to organic seo.
I have a curious situation much the same. I have an affiliate site with about 10% original written articles. Pretty informative in nature. The rest of the site is for amazon sales where I have a picture product review etc. straight from amazon. My URL is a keyword rich product that has a lot of affiliate sites. Not competitive which is why I chose it. It is, however, affiliate dominated because it is a product and only those that are searching it are probably looking to buy it. I was at number 7 based on URL and some minor RSS submissions. I started a back-link campaign and did the dance and went to #4. I was selling some of the product and could see the potential to make decent money. I kicked in an aggressive linking campaign and now am no where to be found. What is funny is that I am still selling some stuff based on the links I have created. (Side benefit to link-building, it is not all about SEO). So my question has been do I sink in more time to create an informative site that will make me money if ranked? Is my site now just dead because Google decided it didn’t like it? Not sure what to do but decided it was worth the effort. I am doing a series of long informative posts that are completely unique and linking directly to them. I am hoping to bring it back and will let you know.
Hmmmm….. I wonder where it went wrong….
I like to think I would have kicked off an aggressive ‘quality’ linking campaign these days, but we’ve all been there David :)
LOL, shouldn’t assume it wasn’t a quality one.
Heh I see what you did there :)
If I were to write an algorithm to determine whether a site is an affiliate, I’d look at the outgoing links as the strongest signal. So cloak them sure, but also have a “natural” outgoing link profile. Lots of quality sites nowadays use URL shorteners, nofollow, etc – for some of their links.
Andy hope you can join in in an upcoming blog post – about that specifically :)
@Aaron, gave what you said i try..most of my posts were not sandboxed but a few were..can someone tell what i missed?
You can see if someone from Google has been on your site in analytics by checking the Service provider in Analytics, go to: visitors -> network properties -> service providers -> search “google” I’ve had 8 visits in the last month, I’d say that’s pretty high for a mid-traffic website (~10k visits p/day).
hi Sean, could you elaborate please
Steve, the site is keyword stuffed to the max – did you check the bottom of the page in question?
Yes Shaun, I have passed on your info to the site owner. Many thanks