Are their recent ban on GoCompare.com (actually a +50 penalty) GoCompare.com are back in the Google SERPs for [car insurance]. They were given a penalty for what appeared to be very unsubtle blackhat link building. GoCompare used the PaidPosts technique to pay for inbound links on blogs across the internet.
After a stern beating from Google (the penalty lasted about 2months), they’re now back.
Capital One
Credit Made Clearer
lovemoney
Relationship with Your Money
CashQuestions
Personal Finance Problem Solver
Life Cover
Insurance Made Easy
{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }
@Kevin from GoCompare,
Out of interest, did you file a reinclusion request? If so, how long did it take to work?
IMO it was a two month penalty fullstop.
No reinclusion required.
And back in at # 5.
Not bad.
Gotta be happy with that.
Top spot during Jan and Feb. Two months nothing (same as everyone else 5th – 500th) and now back in 5th.
Good job GoCompare (and Latitude for having the balls to have a go)
I’d be very happy if I were Hayley.
‘Good job GoCompare (and Latitude for having the balls to have a go)’
Yes Rex I agree, well done GC and L for having the balls to purchase countless spammy sponsored reviews and blogs, most of which seem to have about as much relevance as my arse, while most of the rest of us struggle along in a somewhat vain attempt to do things ethically, what chance have we got!
I bet we’ll see Kevin at GC make a dramatic comeback now also!
Makes it difficult to argue the ethical route when Google puts them back in – although it was longer than the 10 day disappearance of MSM last year.
You’ve got to say that GoCompare won’t have lost a lot commercially from this in the long term, despite missing out on a lot of the peak car insurance traffic in the short term.
And I wouldn’t exactly say that Latitude had balls or did anything particularly clever which requires congratulating. The activity was blatant and obvious, and it’s not their livelihood their playing with – it’s Hayley’s and her colleagues. The lack of PR coverage of Latitude signing up GoCompare meant that the most they stood to lose was one client.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens with BestDealInsurance and KwikFit now.
I seriously doubt Bestdeal will reappear, their backlink profile was pure unadulterated banner spam. When you submit a re-inclusion request to Google you need to remove your spam linking first. In Bestdeal’s case, their whole SEO campaign was a load of nonsense and they will have to remove all the banners and start from scratch virtually.
**DAVE**
SEO’s like you are what makes SEo’s like me love SEO!!
Google are not the Police.
They have guidelines, not laws.
We are in it for money, not glory.
” somewhat vain attempt to do things ethically”
Yes, Dave, VAIN attempt.
Say what you like about how EASY it was to get countless spammy links….but GC were #1 for two of the busiest months of the year.
They had two months down (but could ppc and could find them through that via brand search, nothing lost) and now rank a cool #5.
So, good on them.
As long as there continues to be enough VAIN attempts, there will always be work for a good SEO.
BTW. my definition of a good SEO is simple:
“one who ranks highly full stop”
Position talks. Everything else walks.
(oooh sorry Ernie just spotted this nugget from you matey: “…and it’s not their livelihood their playing with – it’s Hayley’s and her colleagues.”- Yes and i’d be thanking them now for the money I’d made. Its commercial, not emotiaonal folks. You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette.)
Now…
Best Deal Insurance.
I like it….
Ranking well, making a few quid. Good service, nice site.
Bravo I say.
(let everyone else struggle along in somewhat vain adn you cream it BDI)
So, Dave, ever bought a link?
Hey Ernie,
How about a little IV survey?
How many people buy links as part of their SEO strategy.
{includes pay per blog, individual ‘high quality links, and paid for news stories}
Wow – the Latitude PR machine is out in force isn’t it!
Rex, you will notice if you manage to listen to anything I’ve written over the last few days that you’re writing exactly the same points are I’ve outlined. I’m agreeing with you that it makes complete commercial sense to spam the search engines. If they’re not clever enough to pick out paid for and natural links, they’re the ones not providing the service. You make money by ranking highly and the punishments we’ve seen don’t deter people enough.
PLEASE LISTEN/READ a bit before you wade in.
On the other hand, I have also outlined that this is bias towards those with larger budgets because they cannot compete against the large companies when it’s a “how links can you buy” sort of game. This is not ethical and goes against Google’s principles. It makes it hard for any of the small guys to compete – with or without link buying.
Just to set the record straight on your comments about Best Deal Insurance – they aren’t ranking for their best key phrase and they definitely don’t offer a good service. From memory, they either use rebranded Endlseigh products or sell your data into a lead generation network where you’re spammed to high heaven. I must stress that I haven’t used the site for a good few months so that last opinion may be unqualified.
Ernie,
Morning mate.
1) Please READ my title header. It was to **DAVE** I was answering some of his points. You are not the only opinion on your blog ; 0 )
2) You should be the last person assuming people’s position or identities chap. (you are wrong I am neither Latitude OR a BIG budget SEO firm) I bet latitude want this story to die down not liven up pal!!
Apologies Latitude for my new mate Ernie’s jibe.
3) Im glad you agree with me regarding this is commercial not an ethical crusade/jihad (depending on yr religion of course)
4) BDi – i have had a look at their service, you are right its average at best (subjective).
5) However they do rank Number 1 for “Life Insurance” – I’d argue thats quite lucrative.
6) How about that survey then? (something I posted, that you ignored again to conduct a lengthy rant ; 0 )
7) Now my turn for an assumption: stay of the beers before you post on your own blog eh??!
(or invite me out for a few next time)
Cheers Rex for your sensible and balanced reply, yes I agree Google are not the Police and do not make the law as such, however as much as we would all hate to admit, they are so dominant that what they say goes, the last few months seem to show that they are finally starting to crack down on anyone who steps out of line.
I have to disagree regarding GC being no1 for 2 of the busiest months of the year, just to be picky Dec is dead so the 28 days at no1 in Jan is not really that wonderful (IMO)
As for link buying, yes I have purchased quality, relevant links in the past when this was deemed to be the correct way forward, who didn’t?
As for BDI, no Ernest the site is no better and neither is the service or lack of that they provide.
Agree with you Dave.
Buying links eh. Against the TOS but we do it.
So do ALL the major firms.
Sometimes we get cought, sometimes we don’t.
A bit more solidarity from SEO’s would work wonders IMO.
Anyway…wonder if Ernie’s hangover has kicked in ; 0 )
11am and I’m on the drink again!! Poor assumption I’m afraid – just not a 9-5 chap unfortunately
And yes, I did read your header. I was referring to the many posts you’ve added in the last few days. But, despite all the handbag throwing and pigeon holing, I think we agree on the reality but disagree on the way we both approach this SEO game. Would you agree with that Rex?
As BDi are still ranking no.1 for life insurance, that will indeed be very lucrative. That partly why it’s a point of interest. Whereas GoCompare got hit from the domain upwards, the BDi penalty appears to be more selective. Well, that and they’re not a big consumer brand either – whether that makes a difference or not.
As for the poll. Your request wasn’t ignored. In fact, I’ve been off doing some research and my findings are quite conclusive …I can’t be arsed! I think we pretty much know the reality is that most people buy links. Still, I’ll see if George can be bothered. Might find out something useful.
Dave, unfortunately I’ve got to pick you up on this (or at least I’m interested in what you’ll say): “when this was deemed to be the correct way forward” – when was it deemed the right way? I may be naive in this respect or it must have been a long time ago.
I would just like to clarify my comment regarding the purchase of links,
‘As for link buying, yes I have purchased quality, relevant links in the past when this was deemed to be the correct way forward, who didn’t?’
‘have purchased’ not do and ‘who didn’t’ not who doesn’t. All in the past tense
Yes Ernest, I am very old so it was rather a long time ago.
“Yes Ernest, I am very old so it was rather a long time ago.”
Haha
If you’re in the ‘do not buy links’ camp, have you achieved any success or note? What are your tactics – concentrating on content, news syndication, link bait etc. or just settling for niche key phrases.
Performing well on niche terms, trying to make sure we have regular fresh content and exploring news feeds and what they are able to offer us.
They are currently 10th on the first page. Not done to bad from buying tons of links. Google is a pu55y.
Just posting a follow up link from Hitwise that follows up from the GoCompare banning, and estimating how much it has cost them. Question is: did the banning cost them less or more than the money they made from paying for links?
http://weblogs.hitwise.com/robin-goad/2008/04/how_long_does_it_take_to_recover_from_a_google_blacklisting_gocompare_update.html