94% Of Google Penguin Victims Did Not Fully Recover

Jan 2, 2013 • 8:30 am | comments (64) by twitter Google+ | Filed Under Google Search Engine Optimization

A few months ago, I ran a poll asking if you recovered from Penguin, Google's link based algorithmic filter/penalty (or whatever you want to call it).

Remember, 64% were hit by the Penguin update - at least, those who responded to my poll. And of those, how many recovered since the first, second and third updates? Not many!

Penguin Recovery Poll

81% said they had no recovery while 13% claim a partial recovery and only 6% claim a full recovery. That is based on over 500 responses to our poll.

I guess we await the next Penguin update to see if anyone can climb out with that one.

Keep in mind, we now have the disavow link tool which may help in this case.

Please see our poll disclosure policy.

Forum discussion continued at WebmasterWorld.

Previous story: SEO Political Affiliation Is A Mix


Marie Haynes

01/02/2013 01:49 pm

Hopefully things will be different with the next refresh now that we have the ability to disavow links. If lots of sites don't recover then it likely means that there are a number of on page factors AS WELL as links that matter.

Michael Payne

01/02/2013 02:08 pm

It wouldn't be a very good update if most sites recovered.


01/02/2013 04:49 pm

I've been preaching it since the day penguin hit: You can't just remove the bad links or disavow them. That'll remove your penalty, but it won't vault your site back to where it was prior. The reason you ranked prior to penguin WAS those shady links. Recovering requires more than just removing the crap, you've got to replace the crap with quality stuff.

Michael Martinez

01/02/2013 05:54 pm

Penguin also went after on-page keyword stuffing. People need to stop leaving that part out. It's NOT just about the links.


01/03/2013 01:46 am

What are you basing that on? If true, then recovery could be possible by removing on-page keywords without fixing external links. How many cases of such recovery have you seen?

Brad Dalton

01/03/2013 02:22 am

The disavow tool does nothing. Makes no difference whatsoever, Gooogle is clearly favoring high DA sites


01/03/2013 06:53 am

So, this poll proves that there is no way to recover from Penguin hit and those who claim that they can recover a website from penguin penalty are making false promises.

Amit Dwivedi

01/03/2013 07:33 am

Yes, Really this article is not satisfactory because 90% penguin hit websites has been recovered and running.

Mikael Rieck

01/03/2013 08:07 am

I must admit that I am a bit curious Barry... In your poll did you ask people to only respond if they had actually tried to recover from the Penguin? If not, that might account for a substantial part of the 94%.


01/03/2013 09:15 am

Let's be honest Google don't want people to recover, they want them to buy Google Adwords, That is all they want. The content retrieved from their searches continues to be very poor and multiple instances of the same company (e.g. Yell, 192 in the UK). Bing is better but still lead by advertisers of course. Shame they can't get higher than 10% of the market :-(

Jonay Pelluz

01/03/2013 11:07 am

It happened to me, I deleted some keywords and I added more quality links and better content and now I am better than before.

El Deen

01/03/2013 11:27 am

good answer, thanks

Nick Ker

01/03/2013 12:14 pm

In addition to what RyanMJones said about bad links being the reason a site was ranking well to begin with, I think so few who answered the poll have "recovered" from Penguin is because those sites had more problems than just "bad" links - crap content, keyword stuffing, etc. I have also encountered a number of webmasters who removed about 1% of the bad links and can't understand why the situation did not improve. Panda recovery can actually be more difficult for some who are unable to tell the difference between good content and filler (copied, redundant, poorly written, etc) I have had mixed results in helping sites de-spam. Some sites that had a ridiculous percentage of obvious penguin food have "recovered" in the sense that they now appear in searches - just way down below 50 or so. But its a start. Time, and real links may help. Other very over-promoted sites (like, 3000 keyword anchored spam links and maybe 10 legit links) do seem to be permanently sandbagged. The good news is the sites which were "innocent" and had relatively few spam links from minor dabbling in cheap link building have been able to recover almost all the way to where they were pre-penguin with link pruning, new content and a few very good links.


01/03/2013 12:17 pm

People have to be realistic regarding what 'recovery' actually means in this instance. Recovery is generally perceived to be a return to pre penguin traffic and rankings when really recovery is nothing more than a removal of any negative equity relating to bad links which will NOT result in a return to pre penguin traffic levels in most cases. What this means is that recovering from Penguin is not just a case of removing the bad as that will likely remove penalties but it will also remove much of what was propping the site up in the SERPs in the first place. Recovery also has to include some more link building / earning to get back to where you were from a link equity perspective. If you had 10,000 links and 9000 of them were utter junk and you are left with 1000 okay to reasonable ones after a clean up you can't expect to rise to the top of pile. Obviously, there is always the exception to the norm and sites like WPMU which had a high profile recovery but also had lots of really strong content and organic links deserved to recover. Sites that are generally poor and were propped up primarily on manipulative links simply can not expect the same level of recovery. So remember, as well as removing the bad, you have to start adding the good!

Nick Ker

01/03/2013 12:19 pm

He didn't say it was an either/or choice. Back when the "webspam" update was announced (before it was called Penguin), Google gave the impression that ALL types of webspam were targeted - not just links. In some cases it does seem to be both links and on page issues, though it is harder to tell since different types of algo updates have been rolling out almost simultaneously. Also difficult to know for sure since most sites I have seen that had a Penguin problem, also had lots of keyword stuffing. Rather than worrying about which algorithm or which single issue is your problem, address the real sources of the problem - the site and what has been done to "optimize" it.


01/03/2013 12:58 pm

Can't we move on from these conspiracy theory comments. Surely you realise that Google can only grow from making organic results EVEN BETTER, not worse.

Bruce Simmons

01/03/2013 02:38 pm

Is it me, or is it funny we have to do Google's work to tell them about bad websites linking to us with the disavow tool? I'd think that bad websites would not have much umph, either way. But that's just my simple take on the matter. -B

Jimmy Maddox

01/03/2013 04:20 pm

Another thing to consider: If your competitor spends time and money to boost rankings ,their site may move up in rank.,...it will appear your site took a hit but really it didn't, Google just repositioned you where you organically fall. On the flip side if your competitor takes a major penalty or a hit, they will plunge in rank and it will appear that your site move up...you might think, "wow our hard work is paying off..." No. you moved up because the ones above you got pushed down. Its kind of hard to tell that's why I take notice of my SERP neighbors so that I can compare and see what really happened.

Idaho Realtor

01/03/2013 05:03 pm

I have seen about a 50% recovery but it took rewriting my whole site to make it more penguin friendly. Penguin is more about your site than back links. I say that with the exclusion that; if you were doing a lot of bad spammy, black hat, back links you can have more issues. Otherwise all penguin does is remove the link juice you use to get from low quality back links. So improve your site, make it more relevant and informational. Get your social grove on and continue to work quality back links and you can recover. Best wishes in your endeavors. Please share any tips you may have learned.

Idaho Realtor

01/03/2013 05:05 pm

After studying the relevance of penguin, I re-wrote my site to make it much more penguin friendly and within a month saw a noticeable gain. Are you using google webmaster tools?

Idaho Realtor

01/03/2013 05:09 pm

I believe that to be both true and untrue. Google does want more true relevancy and purity in searches, however they are also a business so you can't be so naive as to say they haven't thought about their profit margin in their decisions.

Idaho Realtor

01/03/2013 05:11 pm

Well it's kind of like the fiscal cliff, they are closing the loop holes. Now roll up your sleeves and go to work.

Website Sales Lab

01/03/2013 06:20 pm

Did you have a site that got hit?


01/03/2013 08:07 pm

personally? no. have I consulted for people who did? yes. Fun story, the day penguin hit I was at SMX Toronto. I was speaking, and during my presentation I fired up scrapebox and let it run building spammy links to one of my sites. 3 days later a hrefs showed that over 25% of my links were now exact match anchor spam. the rankings improved, and have stayed that way since. Maybe I should turn it back on and see if I can get it hit?


01/03/2013 08:51 pm

I had a number of sites hit by Penguin. I took Matt Cutts advice on one site and "started again". Copied the original site (eCommerce site with about 200 products) and 'modified' as best as possible the page meta title & description and product pages descriptions and republished under a different domain name (EMD). The site ranks as well as the original site did before Penguin hit it. The site has NO LINKS at all and the content is EXACTLY the same with minor text re-arranging. I have painstakingly had all the links to the affected site removed but to no effect in SERP's which backs up what a few have said in here (have left the site up as it still produces the occasional order). I am now going through the process of doing the same thing (copy and relaunch) 3 other larger eCommerce sites.


01/03/2013 09:10 pm

So you didn't 301 redirect any pages from the site that was hit?


01/03/2013 09:35 pm

@ donthe [quote] So you didn't 301 redirect any pages from the site that was hit? [/quote] No I didn't redirect - was concerned that penalty may be passed on although I have no idea if that would be the case - it is a question I have posted to Barry to ask John Mueller at AMX Israel 2013


01/03/2013 09:36 pm

@ donthe [quote] So you didn't 301 redirect any pages from the site that was hit? [/quote] No I didn't redirect - was concerned that penalty may be passed on although I have no idea if that would be the case - it is a question I have posted to Barry to ask John Mueller at SMX Israel 2013

Website Sales Lab

01/04/2013 03:10 am

Whatt!! There is so much more going on with penguin than just that. I think it comes down to variations of the word. Eg if you have SEO AGENCY. And all the rest of your keywords are about pop corn makers then that one is going to get hit. As its obvious you're just trying to rank for that one. Maybe you're site has good variations?


01/04/2013 08:46 am

Interesting that you left both sites up. I would have been concerned about the new site being viewed as duplicate content. I guess it's possible that a Panda/Penguin slapped site loses all authority and won't cause the new site to be considered a duplicate. I'm seriously considering trying this. I just bought the .net version of my domain so I don't need to get a new logo ;-)


01/04/2013 10:01 am

It is clear disavow link tool does nothing. Those sites who got infected by penguin update are still approaching for better result.

Alok Pandey

01/04/2013 11:09 am

There has been a partial recovery in case of my website but overall there is almost no improvement. SEO Delhi


01/05/2013 01:23 am

How can Google deliver the internet's most relevant, accurate search results when its penalties are based on non-content issues such as linking, keyword stuffing etc.? It can't. Just because a site is penalized doesn't take away from the fact that site may still have the highest quality content in its sector. It's a tragedy Google has webmasters worldwide chasing its tail in desperation trying to figure out Google's nontransparent, harsh, , & hypocritical game. Meanwhile, users of Google Search get served secondary results from non-penalized sites regardless if their content is substandard to those penalized.

Les Privat bpUI

01/05/2013 08:51 am

What is les Privat bpUI ?

Les Privat bpUI

01/05/2013 08:53 am

tank you for info


01/05/2013 12:25 pm

I tested and it works. But IMHO it's so f*king wrong from the standpoint of this algorithm, it's not even funny. Old, quality site with original content and some bad links - top100+. New, duplicated/copied content with no links - top 3. Way to go, google! That's what your searchers want to find, really!

Pawel Reszka

01/05/2013 02:30 pm

So what you are saying is that if you know a competitor that has been penalized (doesn't matter if it was through negative SEO or not...well Google doesn't care) you can totally screw them over by copying their content (word for word) and rank for keywords they used to rank for? Oh and without much effort? Maybe starting a mega-network of scraper sites is a good idea after all. This whole thing is just plain ridiculous. I have been hit with the unnatural link penalty and did my best to remove what I could. I have disavowed thousands of spammy looking links as well and constantly try to update the file with new links. It just doesn't make sense for me to continue on trying to chase site owners instead of building content that Google supposedly loves.You remove some of them but then next month thousands of new links pop up out of nowhere if someone really doesn't want you to recover. Hopefully the penalty will go away on its own some day. When I first got hit you know what it reminded me of? It reminded me about stories I heard from my grandma about people being sent to concentration camps during WW 2 for reasons they could not control. The only difference is that those people couldn't relaunch their lives.

Nick Ker

01/05/2013 02:44 pm

Couple of problems with what you say here: Keyword stuffing IS a content issue. What else would you call adding unnecessary and repetitive keywords to the content of a website? Please give an example of a penalized site that has the highest quality content in its niche and has not violated any of the clearly defined webmaster guidelines. You call it a "game" and this is exactly the problem. But it is not Google's problem, it is those of you who have been treating Google search as if it is a game. Do you consider your business to be a game? Probably not. So why screw around trying to find loopholes in the rules of the largest source of "free" publicity instead of running your business and website properly? Do that and you can stop chasing your tail trying to cheat the system.

Michael Martinez

01/05/2013 04:46 pm

I base that on the Google blog post from Matt Cutts explaining what Penguin is all about.


01/06/2013 12:47 am

You've got a great blog and it's a shame that Google is holding you down. Even if you do have some spammy links pointing at your site, Google should stop seeing things in black and white as they do through the eyes of Panda and Penguin. You at least put effort in your blog - I think many, many webmasters don't. Unnatural links can happen to anyone and they even happened to Google, but they obviously don't penalize themselves as severely as they do others.


01/06/2013 01:17 am

Google can't deliver the most relevant, accurate results when it penalizes sites based on keywords inside meta tags and/or inbound links. Search results should be dictated by the quality and value of the products, services, and information a site provides. The game mentioned above is not referring to webmasters who try to game Google - The game referred to is the hypocrisy of Google itself when it claims to deliver the most relevant results to users when in truth it's impossible if penalizing sites based on links and keywords instead of the degree of relevancy a site's products/services/information contains.


01/06/2013 01:25 am

Disavow link does not work at all. The first stage goes fine. But then when I hit browse button nothing appears.


01/06/2013 01:33 am

James, do you even know that Google's main stream of income is google adsense? Haven't you seen their home page? It now has two huge ad units above the search results and they are designed in such a way that if we suddenly go to click the first result somehow one of the ad links end up coming in the way. It started happening after a few months of Penguin update. So no Andy isn't crying about nothing.

Nick Ker

01/06/2013 03:36 pm

OK you have back-pedalled on "keyword stuffing" since you apparently didn't know what it meant. Still, you are missing the big picture. Nobody is getting severely penalized for using keyword meta tags alone, so you are still fighting a straw man. Search results ARE dictated by quality, relevance, trust & popularity - not just links and keywords. You overlook the importance of trust & popularity. Some of that is measured by the links to your site. The way Google sees it, links are like endorsements. If you have tons of manipulative unnatural links (fake endorsements), they can't assume you can be trusted to be providing quality on the site. Since the rules about such things are defined (though many never bother to read them), they reserve the right to not rank sites with potential spam indicators as highly as those who have not broken the rules. It is Google's search engine, so you have to abide by their rules if you want it to work for you. I think you don't really have much of a grasp on how Google works. You don't want them to use links and overused keywords to penalize, but links and the words that make up the site's content are the largest parts of how Google ranks websites (among hundreds of other things). Do you expect Google to have a team of human reviewers thoroughly evaluating each and every site on the web or do you only want Google to use links and content when it benefits your site? I will ask you the same thing I have asked other webmasters who think Google is unjustly penalizing high quality sites: Give an example of a penalized site that has top quality, and has wrongly been penalized (meaning that they did not violate any of Google's guidelines but have seen a significant drop of more than a few spots). So far nobody has been able to give an example of such a site. All that being said, I am not a fan of using links to rate a site positively or negatively because it can in fact be manipulated. But evaluating links, along with all the other things Google uses to rank sites has worked pretty well or else we'd be discussing Bing or some other engine. Now Google has gotten much better at filtering out those who try to game the system through spammy links, and a lot of people are upset. I think Google is working toward making links even less important in the not-too-distant future, so watch for the hand-wringing from people who spent lots of money buying links to crap sites when that happens.

Nick Ker

01/06/2013 03:45 pm

Google already knows. The disavow tool is for sites that have been either penalized or hit by a filter like penguin once Google has either manually or algorithmically filtered/penalized a site, so Google is aware of at least a large portion of the site's "bad" links. Even if Google is using the disavow info to get a better idea of what links it should ignore in general and not just for the disavowing site, I don't think that is a bad thing. Speeds up the process of de-spamming search results if Google sees that links from certain sites are predominantly used for manipulating search results.


01/07/2013 12:45 am

You make my point. Incredibly, Google still sees links as the primary tool to rank & penalize sites. Google also judges links as the main drivers to determine a site's quality. The method is flawed, outdated, and ignores the reality that links do not serve as competent cues for a site's quality of content. In truth, link profiles are poor indicators to measure site quality, especially when webmasters can't control incoming links. By issuing "unnatural links" messages & manual penalties, Google is saying it has chosen to manually penalize your site based on the links reviewed coming to your site rather than manual review of your site's actual content. Until Google changes this practice, they can not possibly deliver the most relevant, accurate results to its users. It's impossible to do so when Google manually penalizes based on links instead of content. It's the content that search users want dictating their search results. Users don't want to miss out on viewing the most relevant results due to "unnatural link" penalties if a site's content is still the most relevant. Users want the most relevant accurate results period, plain and simple. They do not want skewed results that are heavily obscured with link-based penalties. Again, Google's method is flawed, outdated, and ignores the reality that links do not serve as competent cues for a site's quality of content. Google is doing users a disservice delivering results that don't value quality of content as the determining ranking factor.


01/07/2013 08:14 am

You have not understood my comment. Andy was implying that Google is deliberately making its organic results of poor quality, so that webmasters are forced to buy AdWords to appear on page one. My point is, that Google's organic results have to be GOOD QUALITY, not BAD to keep their reputation for quality results. If they ruin that reputation people will switch search engines. Of course Google want more clicks on ads. I am not disputing that. The results page is dominated by ads. But the organic results are still there and must continue to be of good quality otherwise Google is doomed.

Sean Hecking

01/07/2013 05:09 pm

@RyanMJones:disqus I'm with you. If the site didn't have good links to begin with, their rankings will not bounce back unless they replace those crappy links with good ones. The best results I've had so far with a site that got dinged before I started is to have a balanced approach. Remove (disavow) those bad links while building good ones. This can take a LONG time. Doesn't surprise me that most sites have yet to recover. It's still way to early for companies without a big SEO budget and 1,000s of links to research and flag. Barry - I would like to see the same survey done mid-2013.

Nick Ker

01/07/2013 06:37 pm

You seem to think there is a widespread problem of high quality sites that are being unfairly penalized. It just isn't so. The high number of people who CLAIM their site was unjustly hit is high, but you will have a tough time finding an example of a top quality site that has been wrongly penalized. As for your complaint about unnatural link penalties not having anything to do with content - they don't. But they DO have everything to do with trust and following the rules. Sites that received unnatural link warnings have lost the trust of Google due to promotion practices which fall outside of Google's guidelines. Google sees this as an indication that such a site is not trustworthy and therefore is not what they want to recommend to users of the search engine. Top quality sites typically don't have a lot of those "unnatural links". Top quality sites will also typically not be penalized for bad links since they will usually have plenty of good links. There is so much more to it than just those links. So again, you are getting all worked up about something that isn't what you think it is. I am not dropping this link to be condescending, but it seems like a lot of people forget just how complex Google search is and a refresher may be helpful: https://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=70897 That and the Webmaster Guidelines give a pretty clear overview of why Google does what it does. Whether or not you like how it works or the rules of the road, it is what it is. If sites are going to be ranked higher based on good links (among many other factors), they will also be ranked lower based on spam indicators like bad links (among many other factors). If you have a better idea, get to work on making the perfect search engine that is based on content quality alone.

Dr. Bill

01/30/2013 04:23 am

It's just not that simple. Even with "quality stuff" and numerous high quality links and no crap you likely won't recover, as this article documents. Seems that there are many who think they really understand what Panda, Penguin, and Google search are all about, but as I see it that aspect of SEO "street smarts" is 99% pure speculation - repeated and passed on until it becomes an accepted paradigm. Google has many chasing shadows as they laugh all the way to the bank - all the while shaking their heads at all the gurus explaining to the ignorant masses how to recover from ranking factors that are only vaguely guessed at.


02/17/2013 02:19 am

Their now POOR quality. In some cases REAL BAD Quality. I have one site ranking above me giving away stolen graphics and zero relative content, while my valid business site is drying up. Somebody from Google who knows how their PR system works could start their on search and make a fortune. It is now that bad and unstable. Google S_U_C_KS!!!


02/17/2013 02:40 am

The trouble is the large sites also have this ratio of bad links or worse. I wish somebody would find the Rosetta Stone for Penguin so we know what they are now weighting the rankings on. My brand new sites are now doing better than my old sites with PRs of 6. White is black and black is now white. I personally think they now have a VERY large list of sites that convert well in Adsense and they are now purposely weighting them way higher for even more$$$. All other sites that played the game can now site and spin. You say Google can't do this? Well folks, they are now illegally caching and giving away our full sized images to scrapers and bypassing your sites. I'm guessing next they will be placing Adsense ads in their new image catalog. You do the work, provide the images, while they get richer, and YOU go to the poor house. They know the jackass in the White House is to afraid to touch bankers, so they(Google and Bing) assume they can also steal and get away with it. They assumed correctly so far. SOMEBODY needs to slam both with a class action lawsuit ASAP. Screw the Feds!


02/17/2013 02:45 am

They weighted on stuffing before penguin. I actually removed keywords from a page that was marginal and the rank dropped three. I would not mess with the keywords on pages.


02/17/2013 02:48 am

Ok Matt.


02/17/2013 03:14 am

Your TOTALLY nuts. I can give you tons of personal examples but I don't want Google coming after the few sites I still have ranking. Basically, many quality sites you normally visited before April 2012 now are now most likely ranking a lot lower. I am sure you can find many. For example I have noticed that before April 2012 that any country map I looked for had the same results. Before April 2012 searches for Spain Map, Greece Map, France Map;etc would list WorldAtlas.com pages always first. After April 2012 you now get lonelyplant.com pages first. Why? There is actually more maps and country information on the worldatlas pages. Their site is also much older well known and trusted. Also, now notice the huge commercial Google Adsense ad on the bottom of the Lonely Planet pages, while worldatlas.com has mixed ads. I smell a rat!


02/17/2013 03:41 am

Another important fact I totally forget to state is that Lonely Planet is using Google Maps on all pages. Enough said. This is clearly anti-competitive conduct and should fall under the U.S. antitrust laws. Google is clearly favoring the Lonely Planet site to get them more ad clicks and lock in map users to their maps. Forget trying to play the SEO game. Game Over Man, GAME OVER!


02/17/2013 03:49 am

A PR of zero. Yeah, Google saw this blog alright. Best to just forward this site to people. Google does not control the email....yet!

Michael Smith

02/27/2013 05:58 am

No Recovery from google penguin update, i updated all the site according to new google guideline and according to google penguin latest update still there is no sign of recovery... waiting for the best..


03/16/2013 07:56 pm

If I hear one more person say that you wont recover fully because your rank was based upon spammy links, Ill puke. These people obviously have not been in the trenches battling penguin, and are blowing theory out their ass.


03/16/2013 09:34 pm

Awesome facts! I'm also still working hard to get back to my previous ranking. I think I did mess up with some backlinks in the past and this had a negative impact from the penguin update.


03/22/2013 06:07 pm

I had 3 big sites get hit back in April of last year. Another site, my largest and highest earning wasn't hit by Penguin, but was subject to an unnatural links penalty with the "we're taking very specific action" caveat. Since last april, I've removed thousands of backlinks from all 4 sites. Added new content regularly, social signals, good quality backlinks etc. The 3 penguin hit sites haven't recovered at all. The site with the unnatural links message, I'm still in ongoing reconsideration request mode, but even when I'm able to remove the example links google sends me as "unnatural", they continue to deny my reconsideration's and tell me they want to see a "good faith effort" to have links removed. WTF. So 3000 links from over 200 domains isn't a good faith effort? I've disavowed the links I just can't get removed after multiple attempts. That's done nothing. And how about the sites I attempted to clean up from Penguin? I fixed the anchor text issues, and got nearly all my anchor keywords below 5% and my branded domain in the 75% range of my anchor profile. Yet not one of those 3 has seen any recovery. Really, my only error on any of these sites was using some bad, bulk link creation packages, which seemed like a good idea at the time, but in retrospect were a bad idea. Prior to Penguin, all of these sites held the top spot for dozens of keywords in their respective niches, for 3,4 even 5 years prior. The content is still that good, but I don't think I'll ever get them back where people can enjoy and benefit from the content...all because of some blog comment links & some forum profiles. It's 100% my fault, but if you don't get an honest chance to resolve your mistakes of your past, what's the point in putting in the effort? The upside to this, I still get traffic to these sites from various sources. Obviously not the volume they did before, but I haven't abandoned them because they still make some money.

Cesar Bielich

05/20/2013 04:03 am

Same boat here I got hit with Penguin back in April and have had no recovery. I am racking my brain for months, tried everything (seems like) and at this point I think there is no point to even attempt to change it. The only thing I can think of is there is some "bad" link out there that is hurting me. Would Google take one link and apply that much penalty from just one or a few links? I am trying to think of something I have not already done at this point. Trying something new everyday.


05/24/2013 11:19 am

Buddy u just need to change your boat. (Domain ;-))

Cesar Bielich

05/24/2013 06:32 pm

lol It still ranks very high for some of the main keywords, it just lost a couple others so no way :)

blog comments powered by Disqus