14 replies to this topic

[atako]

We currently host and maintain approx 40 websites offering the same health related service across various states in the US. I would like to know what you think the best way to cross-link them would be? Since the websites are highly relevant and legitimate, I believe that cross linking them will help improve rankings. However, I am afraid that if I add links to each site in the footer area of every page, this may be considered as "excessive" cross linking. Is there a specific strategy you can suggest to implement this? Please keep in mind that each website owner may be reluctant to link out to the other sites from within their actual content but are willing to give links either on a "links" page or in the footer areas. Regardless, I would like to know what you think would be the ideal situation regardless of any limitations, and what you recommend as well given the limitations.

I thank you in advance for your kind advice, and please keep up the great work!

[Randy]

So you've basically created your own little island of dozens of web sites that are essentially the same, except that they deliver the same product/service to different states. That's how the search engines are going to view the situation.

You've basically painted yourself into a box where you need to do 40 times the work when you could have instead put up one web site that had sections that served different states. It's exactly the reason I've always recommended multiple sites only when there was a legitimate business reason to have multiple sites.

What will the search engines think if you suddenly start linking all of your micro sites together? They'll probably consider those links to be dubious at best. Which is exactly what they should do IMO. I doubt those cross links would hurt you all that much with Google, as they'll often simply discount the links to the point that they have no SEO value. As long as there are enough other quality links pointing to each of your sites you'll probably still be okay with Google. You just won't gain any value from the links from within your own network of sites.

Yahoo on the other hand may see it in a different light and slap a penalty of some sort on all of the sites in your little network. They've been much more agressive in taking action against such cross linking schemes.

[atako]

No. Let me clarify. Actually, all 40 or so of these websites are DIFFERENT, UNIQUE companies with their own websites. They all look different. There is no domain name similarity. They are not copies of each other. Each website has it's own unique content, design etc. And they all serve their own respective markets. In light of this, could you please let me know your thoughts?

Thanks!

[Randy]

I think it's going to depend upon a lot of factors that you've not mentioned.

Is the Whois record of each of these domains the same or similar? Are they hosted on the same server or same network of servers? Do they use the same or similar nameservers? Are they all truly independent, standalone sites with no dupication? (pretty hard)

One way or the other there is going to be a network. You can either make this plain to the search engines and let them deal with it as they see fit, or you can try to fool the engines into thinking they're not part of a closed network in hope of gaining an unfair advantage over those folks who may have only one site.

There is some risk either way. If you're going tor long-term success I wouldn't advise trying to hide the connection at all. I'd simply put it out there, make the connection plain-as-day and let the search engines treat those links however they choose to treat them. Without expecting any sort of advantage in cross linking the sites.

[atako]

OK I think we are getting somewhere. Here is some more information. They all have different registrant and admin whois contact records, but the same technical contact which is me. They all have truly unique content, which is written by the website owners. They are hosted on 3 different servers, so I guess you could say 15 sites on each server at different locations.

On each site, I am contemplating the following:

1) leaving the sites as is, and not linking at all
2) making a page called "Out of Town Providers" and listing all the other websites on that page, complete with a paragraph about each
3) adding a footer on all the pages of all the site with all the links.
4) there might be other ways to do it as well, which I am not aware of, such as selectively adding links, or making sure they are in certain parts of the code etc.

Any advice would be much appreciated...The last thing I want is to get penalized, but I do realize there is a cross-linking potential I am not using here which could give our sites an advantage if properly implemented. I am just not sure what the best way to do this is to get the best link/PR value out of it.

Thanks again and again.

[Randy]

Personally, I'd go with a variation of #2.

[torka]

What (if anything) in terms of linking would be useful to the sites' human visitors?

For instance, if they sites are geographically based, would it be useful for visitors to know of "other providers in this region" with maybe links to the other providers in bordering states? I can see where this might be helpful if you have providers serving parts of metro regions that span more than one state (think Philadelphia, NYC, Boston) or something like that.

I wouldn't just link them all together without having a good human-centric reason for doing it, though. Not only because it might raise a red flag with the SEs (which it well might do), but because it will also look goofy to the human visitors.

My

--Torka

[Jill]

Don't do it or think about it in terms of how it will help you with link popularity. As Torka said, you have to think about what the best way to present these other sites are for your actual site visitors.

Once you think about it that way, the answer will be pretty clear. Pretend the search engines don't exist. Which of the other sites would be helpful to each other, and where does it make sense to showcase them?

[glengara]

I'd go for 1, but then I'm the nervous type.

"..there is a cross-linking potential I am not using here which could give our sites an advantage if properly implemented."

Sometimes it's safer not to maximise potential, in this case since all 40 sites are "offering the same health related service" I'd be particularly nervous.

If it HAD to be done I'd agree with Torka and only link to the neighbouring states sites......

[jehochman]

Create site 41 and make it be a useful directory. "Find Lederhosen Designers in 40 different states."

This network isn't necessarily spammy. I could imagine a hosting company or web developer who specializes in, for example, real estate agencies. To avoid conflict of interest the developer may work with one client in each region. Why not create a directory that can eventually rank for generic search terms without a geographic modifier, and then direct the visitors to an appropriate local provider? This could even turn into an additional revenue stream.

[nethy]

One way or the other there is going to be a network. You can either make this plain to the search engines and let them deal with it as they see fit, or you can try to fool the engines into thinking they're not part of a closed network in hope of gaining an unfair advantage over those folks who may have only one site.

At the extreme end of the making it plain spectrum you might be percieved as just one large site.

I could imagine a hosting company or web developer who specializes in, for example, real estate agencies. To avoid conflict of interest the developer may work with one client in each region.

Or a network of collaborating businesses or franchises.

[omahonydonnelly]

I do sites for different property agents in different parts of the country. At the bottom of a page of listings I put a link to relevent sections of other site - 'See more' then a link like Commercial Property Limerick. It helps build link popularity for internal pages.

[nethy]

I do sites for different property agents in different parts of the country. At the bottom of a page of listings I put a link to relevent sections of other site - 'See more' then a link like Commercial Property Limerick. It helps build link popularity for internal pages.

Seems reasonable enough. Alternatively you could go with the diretory site mentioned by jehochman & have one link to a relevent directory page. 'Irish Commercial Properties' with links to agencies in other counties.

[GregOne]

I'd also go with a directory site, maybe where each of the 40 sites link back on their main page with a little message, part of the *health related service* directory/network sites, even make a little logo for the directory/network site linking back to it.

[btreloar]

What (if anything) in terms of linking would be useful to the sites' human visitors?

...

I wouldn't just link them all together without having a good human-centric reason for doing it, though. Not only because it might raise a red flag with the SEs (which it well might do), but because it will also look goofy to the human visitors.

--Torka

I agree, but there really []is[/b] a value to the human visitor. A client of mine installs and repairs hardwood floors in New Jersey, and that geographical limitation is made clear on his web site. Not long after being optimized, he called me and asked "What can I do about all these people from Kentucky who keep calling me?"

A geographically limited business whose web site is well optimized is bound to attract visitors from beyond their own service area. Why not provide a section on Providers In Other States for those visitors? And what if those other providers returned the favor? Especially if there's no connection among the listed web sites in other locales, I would expect such cross-linking to be not only useful to site visitors, but to also to help with link popularity.