We’re getting early reports that BestDealInsurance have fallen victim to another SEO penalty. They are still appearing for their domain name but have been dropped for many of their key terms in the Google results.
Hat Tip to Creased, one of our regulars here who left a comment
Bestdealinsurance.co.uk was launched in March 2003 and is dedicated to ensuring that not only do their customers get the best deal, but that they actually understand in full the terms and conditions of the product that they are buying.
As we can see from the graph below, their SEO campaign has focused on getting inbound links from a variety of sources. Their number of links has increased from unique sites so they are pushing for a few links across a large selection of the internet*.
* Just take a look at some of these linking sites:
BestDealInsurance IBLs
| Rank | Inbound Link Site |
|---|---|
| 1 | http://www.mycutelobster.co.uk |
| 2 | http://www.sirblogger.com |
| 3 | http://mybabybay.com |
| 4 | http://ravemails.com |
| 5 | http://gadgetsexpose.com |
| 6 | http://100tophomebiz.blogspot.com |
| 7 | http://www.ecgame.org |
| 8 | http://www.klubovefilmy.net |
| 9 | http://www.beautyfashions.net |
| 10 | http://www.indiaonvoip.com |
Now let’s look at the anchor text they have been going for (basically the terms for which they want the Google #1 position):
They have consistently been targeting house and home insurance (the terms for which they have been penalised), but they still remain #1 UK search for [life insurance]. Therfore unlike the gocompare ban, it has been a selective keyword penalisation.
Capital One
Credit Made Clearer
lovemoney
Relationship with Your Money
CashQuestions
Personal Finance Problem Solver
Life Cover
Insurance Made Easy
{ 37 comments… read them below or add one }
BDI have been either 1st or 2nd for most key terms such as “home insurance” for the past months. They are now ranking on the 6th page in Google for “home insurance” and “car insurance” (10th yesterday).
It is certainly not a site wide ban, they are still visible for terms such as “life insurance” where they are ranking top. And as you say their domain still appears.
Also – for all you moneyexpert fans out there – they seem to be having another crack at “car insurance” via the DP network which still works so well for themselves and many in the mortgages, loans and credit cards sectors – why on earch haven’t G cracked down on that one yet… the DP network I mean.
Another strike for Google, I was a little miffed myself that BDI’s text link banner on hundreds of irrelevant websites seemed to enable them to rank well for such a competitive term. Check out one great example in the footer here:
http://www.parisbeaverbanks.com/
That banner x 10000 on equally irrelevant websites and you have yourself a top 10 ranking (until Google catch up).
Likewise, I wonder when/if the Digital Point network will fall. If the Google algo is so good, why does it let people manipulate it so easily? Do they rely on manual penalties or was this a
[snip]..do they rely on manual penalties or was this a a sign that Google can catch this automatically?
I have to say that I did have an eye on these guys for a month or two. First noticed them on no1 for home insurance and after a bit of digging also found the text banner links. I have to say I’m not supridsed at the ban and I expected it a bit sooner
They have been kicked, but not that hard. They are still ranking for lots of their keywords mortgages, secured loans, health insurance. I can only see a penalty on home, house and car insurance. If this is the reply then it sure makes the link buying game very attractive, especially if you can plead your site back in like some of the real big boys can.
This was a definate hand job, I don’t think google is anywhere near stopping it by any other means.
I don’t think I fancy a Google Hand Job.
@Creased – not when so many use the phrase “The Big G”!
@George – you’ve surpassed yourself with graphs. Good work.
It gets a little frustrating when you continually submit spam reports to Google and you get nothing. You see the big guys fall, then re-appear – no commercial punishment there. Then you see manual intervention – although a good thing, it makes you really want to be able to tap into that to level the playing field once again.
Great graphs guys – what software do you use to make them? They look way better than Excel!
comment
Reported the spam by BestDealInsurance to Google many, many months, possibly years ago – just tumble weeds in reaction. **BUT** Do you realise it’s worse than it looks…they are super-spamming with multiple sites on the first page
AKA as:- ww.insura.co.uk/ AND ww.housemouseuk.com Rated no. 3 and no. 6 on Page ONE of search for Life Insurance. How’s that for SPAM GOOGLE!! (Please note they all used to be cross-linked, but that has been cleaned up, as far as I can tell..)
The links were obtained through something called ww.betterthanbanners.co.uk who used to offer Amazon vouchers if webmasters put a link on their home and 2 or 3 other pages – hence all those weird links. So for evidence:-
BestDealInsurance are at 33 Sheep Street Wellingborough, Insura at 7 Sheep Street …hmm.. I smell fish.
Housemouseuk.com are registered to the ISP Gradwell.com, so are Betterthanbanners… hmmm.. a coincidence??
Ah the clincher:
Here is the email (edited slightly to protect the investigator i.e. me) that links ALL THREE together once more – take a look at the backlinks to these two other sites – Look familiar?? Sorry, it’s a lot of text, but I put it there to ensure accuracy…. for what it’s worth I still have the original email from when I signed up with BTB to test my theory in JANUARY 2007 – did I say AGES ago – I also removed on w out of www, ha, don’t want to give them any more links
Congratulations! You have been accepted into our Betterthanbanners network.
You are now ready to display Betterthanbanners text advertisements, advertising without the fluff!
You may login at http://ww.betterthanbanners.com/member/login/ with the following details
On this page you can select your server side code, or the HTML version if you are unable to take advantage of our server side codes. For your convenience we have provided your relevant advert code to paste on your pages, at the foot of this e-mail.
All the information you should need can be found within this section of the site. However, if you have queries, have no hesitation to get in contact with us.
Please take a couple of minutes to view our online demonstration on how to add the code to your Web pages. http://www.betterthanbanners.com/btb/cam/implement_code.html
Regards,
Betterthanbanners Team
sorry, can’t get the code they sent to go in the blog – but basically had code for ALL three sites – happy to forward the email though…
Apologies for overloading the blog…
@Bored,
Interesting discovery. Definitely worth looking in to further. Forward us the email to insidersview[spam@lot][@]gmail.com and we’ll try to post it up.
Definately seems to be some sort of link building campaign designed to get a large number of links from many different sources.
From your illustration it seems there were (are) a lot of incoming links from spammy sites across the globe.
I don’t get you people….
Who made you god?
Google makes the rules. Not Insiders View; certainly not SEO’s.
But when it comes to rules; you decide on which ones to follow and which ones to ignore.
How many of you DO NOT buy BL’s?
Thats right…you all do; despite knowing, 100% that G states its wrong.
So, when someone reaches a top spot you all cry, moan and bitch.
Its just envy. WE all break the rules.
So what you are saying is that you can break the rules YOUR way but not the way of the person who sits above you.
However evaluation of what worked and what didn’t is fine; when that evaluation begins to smack of bitterness, then G or any real SEO will regard this site like any other: a place for people ranked 2- 200 to meet and bitch.
Perhaps we should applaud those who attempt and fail.
A day as a lion or a life time as a sheep?
@Rex – firstly, thank you for your valuable contribution. It sounds as though you’ve got some real passion burning there!
Just one comment which may knock your entire rant into touch …you don’t know who we work for, what our SEO techniques are or whether (or not) we actually buy links.
At its very worse, Insiders View is a place for a few regulars and newbies alike to pick up on what other people are seeing – putting all value to our comments and opinions to one side. With so many competitors and so many products/key phrases to track, noticing changes on all can be tricky. We also post and comment on many non-SEO issues if you care to notice.
As for our views on The Big G and it’s rules – we know the rules are there for a reason …to provide it’s customers with relevant, unbias results, irradicating the power of the large marketing budget, ordering the world web pages (making millions is something they’re permitted for the service). And yes, we like people to play by those rules …as we do, since you ask
You’ll notice when you track back and read the comments left by myself and George that we have clearly stated the commercial gains of not sticking to the rules many times. We’ve also mentioned how difficult it must be for Google to recognise which links are paid for and which aren’t. We’ve also suggested that it is entirely a question of choice for everyone, knowing the long term effects and short term commercial gains.
So you see, it’s not a collective bitching session. Yes, it may help a few people to see that others are frustrated too. Yes, there may be a scent of triumph when one of the large marketing budget competitors are caught cheating and suffer the consequences. But there are always many opinions, many pairs of eyes, many techniques and many legitimate success stories for us to report in the near future – we hope!
@Rex
Forgot to mention explicitly that myself and (to my best knowledge) George do not break Google’s rules. We’re 100% SEO white hat practitioners.
Ernest by name, Earnest by nature.
I am here as I SEO for Car Insurance.
I think it is fair to assume, so do you.
Find me a site in the top 12 for “car insurance” without paid BL’s…..
I am no more or less passionate than any other SEO trying for numero uno in my field.
You are, my bet, the ONLY person on your blog who DOES NOT buy BL.
Do you see my point? We all break the rules. But we only bitch at people who get better results from breaking them than we do.
I mean christ, I’m reading here that Latitude SEO firm are responsible for banning sites from G by using all sorts of norti stuff.
If Latitude can disregard the rules, well its open season.
So who do you seo for? or is it a secret we must work out? I love a good mystery….
(ill show you mine if you show me yours)
@Rex, granted nearly everyone in the top 12-20 for the top insurance key phrases is buying links in some form or another. The complaints are (should) be aimed at all of them but it’s fair to say that some are worse than others, some achieve more success than others and some are more blatant than others.
The frustration comes from the knowledge about how much those positions are worth and the fact that we can all see blatant breaking of the rules. Obviously there’s an appreciation for Google’s focus on making any change to the algo extensible and futureproof and not require manual input.
Latitude get a harder deal because they have a large number of clients using the same link buying rings and frankly, they should know better. If their clients are aware of the risks, I suppose you could argue it’s simply another option available to any SEO campaigner.
And they’ll be no showing of anything – this is a family friendly blog (most of the time)
Welcome aboard. Good to have a few different opinions floating around.
If “latitude” and dp network are how to get listed in Google, but they’re bad, how do you do it? we can’t all afford TV etc
Alan***
I would argue that using latitude may not be the best way to get “listed” as you put it.
And as far as DP is concerned, i think all major SEO’s will tell you it can be dangerous for a brand name (like i push).
Its the same as all things:
If you cant beat em, join em.
Ernest***
Do you agree with the following:
1) Buying links is against G TOS and in general seen by G as “manipulation”?
2) 99% of all major terms have the top 12 sites buying links (in one way or another)?
In an ideal world, of course, the best site, with the best experience for the customer should rank No 1. But that is subjective.
So BL’s dictate that.
Buying links is any which way you look at it what we all do.
If you don’t buy links and I do believe you, then I am shocked at the least.
Never bought even one??!!
@Rex, never bought one …but no-one said I’ve had any success
Hahaha!
It’s a case of long term reputation damage and that’s a significant risk to carry. How long/will GoCompare return to the listings?!
It also depends whether you’ve got faith in The Big G being able to automatically detect these sorts of links in the future. If you don’t, then I suppose there’s nothing holding you back …or you believe there’s a recovery strategy which will restored your reputation.
Rex, do you believe there’s a way to rebuild a black hat reputation such as the one which the guys at GoCompare are now living with? (without being MoneySupermarket – Google’s single largest revenue generating client in the UK)
See, my point Ernest is simple.
In any commercially valuable SERP’s, link buying is endemic in the top listed firms.
My gripe is always that we all snigger at Go Compare and Latitude for getting busted being naughty; jump on the band wagon and say Google should ban this firm or that firm. All the time WE are all attempting our own hike up the SERPS by buying links.
Bottom line is…. no matter how many spam reports, how much noise in a forum we all make; its not our call.
i think we should applaud those who are top spot not critisise them for it.
That mate, is my point.
Now which one are you? ; 0 )
“Rex, do you believe there’s a way to rebuild a black hat reputation such as the one which the guys at GoCompare are now living with?”
What reputation? one for being top for the hardest keyword in the UK during the busiest period (Jan/Feb).
My thoughts of them, are that they are savvy and commercially sound.
Better have one month number 1 than have 12 months number 25 in my opinion.
No one other than SEO’s worry or are bothered about black, grey or white hat.
They just want results.
Thats what Go Compare gave them.
Remember mate… day as a lion or lifetime as a sheep…..
@Rex, oh Rex! The point is that we have two different opinions. There’s no middle ground that you can get me to meet you on and I’m not jumping over to the black hat side. As I’ve mentioned, I don’t buy links. I’m aware others do. I’m aware of the results they get. I’m aware of the money they make. I choose not to buy links. I know you’re on the other side.
This blog is full of people who do buy links and moan about other people’s success, those who buy links and have success themselves, those who don’t buy links who generally moan about how unjust the situation currently is. As I mentioned before (many times), buying links requires a budget and that’s something which not everyone has access to. Therefore, the results cannot be completely unbias.
Before you counter that point, I know the economic pressures and returns on buying links so no need to repeat the circular arguement there.
The reputation I was referring to is not as a brand for customers or the industry but in the eyes of Google. Answering my point directly, do you think GoCompare can rebuild their reputation and return to something like their previous standings? If so, how do you think they will go about this?
Okay Ernie, feel like I’m conversing with the SEO equivalent of Mother Teresa!
Okay lets get something straight from the outset: Google are not the internet Police. They are a Search Engine. A good one, to be fair; but still a search engine.
They make guidelines for people to rank well.
Some people do and some people don’t abide.
The fact remains that Google does not decide whoese site is the best, which offering is the strongest, who gives best customer value…..WE DO.
And as far as white hat or balck hat is concerned its baloney…all of it.
Its either effective hat or not effective hat.
Which one are you?
….and to reply to your question regarding Go Compare.
WHo cares what G thinks of them! As if they care. They still take their PPC money from them!
They were in nowheresville for the term. then they went No 1.
They made some money, then they got their bottom smacked.
Within 2-3 months, they’ll be back for their brand Im sure.
In the meantime they have lost nothing. They can still be found through PPC for brand. So no sweat.
Who cares what Google thinks?!
Now if Google stopped your PPC then THAT would be a penalty…..
However how can they tell if the links pointed at them from all those blogs were not malicious?
So….Go Compare…I applaud you.
You made great money for two months, while everyone else looked on and tutted. You learnt from it.
Google cares not.
Your customers can find you.
However Latitude…you were naughty. You can’t pretend to be a large SEO firm yet play on the dark side. Love your silence btw!
Greenlight…now there’s a firm….!!
“However how can they tell if the links pointed at them from all those blogs were not malicious?”
Because they had publicly accessible pages up describing what they wanted written and how much they would pay! It wasn’t even subtle and it exploit the emphasis Google puts on blog posts over other web pages [at a guess].
“They were in nowheresville for the term. then they went No 1.”
Would your position change slightly if you had something to protect? i.e. if you were in halfwaythereville naturally [discounting upthereville because you'd argue - possibly fairly - that's not achievable]
And, still after that direct response! What would you do to get yourself back in the game following a penalty such as GC, BDI and the like?
Christ Ernest….I cant believe that you have NEVER bought a link. Do you operate in the car insurance market? If so do you really expect to rank by being the Mother Theresa of SEO’s? Or are you simply not bothered about ranking?
@Stan B, as I mentioned before …no I don’t buy links, I’ve never given an indication about how successful I’ve been or not, whether I’m trying to compete for competitive insurance search phrases or not. In fact, come to think of it, I’ve never even suggested I work on an SEO campaign at all!! We’ve purposely not given our employer’s name(s) so that all comments and opinions on here can be impartial. Unfortunately, that would be the only way of showing my hand – and we’re not going to do that.
I’m interested though Stan B – I assume by your comments that you do buy links. Do you have a strategy in place for a day when the rug is pulled from underneath you or do you think it’ll be such a gradual process (if at all) that you’ll just adapt your strategy to suit along with everyone else?
I’m reading here how not to do it.
So, how do you do it?
Build useful content ‘innit
NOT every one pays for links – however tempting when G ‘rewards’ the spammers.
The point is (a) there are rules, so (b)they should be applied because if (a)&(b) are not true it sends out the wrong signals from G and positively promotes spam – if you see it working for others that must mean G implicitly approves (or at least ignores) the actions, so to stay in the game people think they have to do the same and that’s sad.
The alternative is to let the law of the jungle apply – full on open season – at least that’s an even field – now that would be a a fun ride.
I think the bestdealinsurance penalty has been lifted.
Looks like bestdealinsurance are back for house and home insurance and in the 30s for car insurance. It also looks like a lot of their backlinks have had their PR reduced making their rankings look more reasonable.
Everyone has to pay for links in competitive keywors or we would not rank simple as that