Negative SEO OFF-Page Factors


SEO OFF-Page  Factors

Brief Note

Traffic Buying Have you paid a company for web traffic? It is probably low quality traffic, with a zero conversion rate. Some providers of traffic for traffic’s sake may be considered “bad neighborhoods”. Can Google discount your traffic (for true popularity), because they know it’s mostly phony?
Have you read about Traffic Power?

Temporal Link Analysis


In a nut shell, old links are valued, new links are not.
This is intended to thwart rapid incoming link accumulation, accomplished through the tactic of link buying.
Just one of the sandbox factors.
Zero links to you – BAD You MUST have at least 1 (one) incoming link (back link) from some website somewhere, that Google is aware of, to REMAIN in the index.

Link-buying – BAD

Google patent – Google hates link-buying, because it corrupts their PR model in the worst way possible.
1. Does your page have links it really doesn’t merit?
2. Did you get tons of links in a short time period?
3. Do you have links from high-PR, unrelated sites?

Prior Site Ranking

Google patent – High = Good
Cloaking – BAD Google promises to Ban! (Presenting one webpage to the search engine spider, and another webpage to everybody else.)

Links from bad neighborhoods, affiliates

Google says that incoming links from bad sites can’t hurt you, because you can’t control them. Ideally, this would be true.
However, some speculate otherwise, esp., when other associated factors are thrown into the mix, such as web rings.
Rank Manipulation by
Competitor Attack

(1. Content theft causing you to get a duplicate content penalty, even though your content is the original – Google has problems tracking original authorship. People are still stealing my content, but nobody trumps me (in Google) with my own content – hats off to Google.)

Examples –
Site-Wide Link Attack
302 Redirect Attack
Hijacker Attack

Impossible by Google definition (except for a few nasty tricks, like making your competition appear to be link spammers)
Ideally, there SHOULD be nothing that your competition can do to directly hurt your rankings.However, an astute observer noticed that Google changed their website to read :
Old verbiage = “There is nothing a competitor can do to harm your ranking …”
New verbiage = “There is ALMOST nothing a competitor can do …”
An obvious concession that Google thinks that at least some dirty tricks work!Of course, there will always be new ones!A huge topic is now “negative SEO”.
Bouncing Ball Algorithm At least 2, and often 3 identifiable Google Search Algos are currently in use, alternating pseudo-randomly through the data centers.
G moved to a daily dance in 2007. Multiple changing factors are applied daily. GOOD LUCK NOW on trying to figure things out!IN ADDITION, some the above factors are being “tweaked” daily. Not only are the “weights” of the factors changed, but the formula itself changes. Change is the only constant.An algo change can boost or demote your site. I put this in the negative factors section, because your position is never secure, unless of course, you are huge (PR=7 or greater). If you simply cannot achieve top position, your only alternative to first page SERP exposure may be Google Ad Words (you pay for exposure).Today, I searched for an extremely competitive “2-word term”, and I found that NOT ONE of the top ten Google SERPs had even one of the words on the page.
Today’s theory – when it doesn’t matter, anybody can get #1 in a second, if they know the on-page rules. BUT, after a certain “commercial competitive level”, the “semantic analysis” algo kicks in, and less becomes more. The keyword density rules are flipped upon their noggins. I think that we are witnessing the evolution of search engine anti-seo sophistication, right before our very eyes. Fun stuff.
NEGATIVE Off-Page Factors
Link Velocity Links acquired too quickly = UNNATURAL (Penguin)
Link Schemes ANY kind! Don’t do it! (Penguin)
Circles, Directories, Farms, Purchased, Reciprocal, etc.
Bad Reputation Does the author have lots of negative press on the Internet?
Anarchist? Liar? Troll? Spammer? Repugnant personality?
Negative Google Comments in Forums Does Google penalize the sites of those who make negative comments about Google on webmaster forums? IMHO, yes. Keep in mind that Google sees and knows all. That may have been what got me, and rendered me irrelevant in Google’s eyes.NO MORE PERSONAL OPINIONS will be expressed in any forums by me.

It has come to my attention that certain Google Webmaster Forums have sweet deals with Google. If you post something negative about Google, it can disappear quickly. It has personally happened to me. I have seen it happen to others.

In life, honesty is great for you personally, but NOT when dealing with Google. Shut your mouth, and suck it up, or pay the price. You don’t criticize Google, and get away scot-free. Blind obedience and acceptance is required, if Google is paying you money.
Wouldn’t you do the same?
So, get a clue, and STFU. There may be NO recovery for glib tongues. This is my best guess at my continuing demotion, because my Google Compliance Level is extremely good.

Unknown Negative Factors There is subjective speculation, expressed by some webmasters.

– You have become “collateral damage”, because
– Google’s ranking system has become too complex, and tosses out the baby with the bath water.

Or, maybe
– A Google Quality Rater took you off a white list.
– A Google Quality Rater put you on the black list.
– A Google Quality Rater degraded your status.
– A Google Quality Rater makes $16/ hour, and has the ability to bury you and render you irrelevant, with the click of a mouse.

Or, maybe
– A Google employee doesn’t like you.
– A Google employee’s friend doesn’t like you.
– A Google employee is competing with you.
– A Google employee’s friend is competing with you.
– A Google employee doesn’t like your politics.
– A Google employee doesn’t like your looks.
– A Google employee doesn’t like what you said.
– A Google employee saw you made 2X what he did


Unlisted Factors I believe that there are AT LEAST 100 more ranking factors, which are not listed here. Even the most diligent student of Google may NEVER get wind of some changes, because nobody has talked.

For these factors, use the logic test. Would it be logical for Google to include such a factor, if it made them more money? If the answer is yes, then they are PROBABLY already doing it. Or soon will be.