Link Removal Companies: We're In A New World

Jun 26, 2012 • 8:49 am | comments (35) by twitter Google+ | Filed Under Google Search Engine Optimization

junk removalWith all the concern over unnatural link notifications, the Penguin update, disavowing links and lawsuits over linking, SEOs and webmasters are eager to remove all bad links as far back as they can.

A Google Webmaster Help thread has discussion about a new linking industry, not for link building but for link removals. The concept is not new, we discussed it in 2008 with link unbuilding but it is much more of a concern today than in 2008.

In fact, so much so, there are companies cropping up that just work on linkage removal campaigns.

The webmaster pointed out two services, one and the other SEOmoz is reportedly working on a way to detect spam links as well. Some other private tools do this already. There are also link removal tools such as

The new link building is unbuilding links, at least in 2012.

Forum discussion at Google Webmaster Help.

Image credit to BigStockPhoto for messy room

Previous story: The Susan & Maile Google Webmaster Hangout Today


Reshav Singh

06/26/2012 12:58 pm

What a scenario ! New jobs created by Google


06/26/2012 12:59 pm

There are actually a bunch of link removal tools now as well, including Virante's Remove 'Em (, rMoov ( and SEOGadget's spreadsheet tool (

Liam Fisher

06/26/2012 01:13 pm

Thanks for the mention, Russ! The SEOgadget Cleanup & Contact utility is a fully-fledged tool and can be found at

Uri Lederman

06/26/2012 01:17 pm

This is just a new ridiculous service that will make these people rich and make the industry look bad... just terrible... Like I always say to my clients.. I love what I do.. I just hate the industry I am in... :-( disgusting.. PLEASE DO YOURSELVES A FAVOR AND DO NOT BUY THESE SERVICES.....

Sunny Ujjawal

06/26/2012 01:37 pm

Hope this will create new opportunities for SEO's as in link building

Nick Stamoulis

06/26/2012 01:52 pm

How about we focus on building links for our clients that don't need to be removed in the first place? If you didn't build them yourselves in the first place there usually isn't a short or easy way to get rid of them. Why not spend the money doing it right as opposed to scrambling to fix things later on.

Richard Baxter

06/26/2012 02:31 pm

@twitter-17226619:disqus that ain't no spreadsheet tool buddy! Login via twitter, paste in your links and we'll fetch all of the contacts and metrics for you. We're taking feature requests too:


06/26/2012 02:35 pm

How about you focus on earning links instead of building ?


06/26/2012 02:39 pm

Unfortunately this is the same SEO world - the world of false promises and temporary solutions.


06/26/2012 03:21 pm

The link penalty may have more and more webmasters concerned about linking to anyone as we move forward.


06/26/2012 06:18 pm

One you missed is

Emily Sarah Manktelow

06/26/2012 08:26 pm

Some are paid some are free. it pays too look around.

David Eaves

06/26/2012 09:33 pm

Unbuilding links is very hard work, I am not surprised that a few services have cropped up.

Edwin Choi

06/26/2012 11:53 pm

Wow - extremely dubious value. Free $ for the above companies. If your links got devalued, focus on building new ones rather than cleaning up links that will provide a net gain of 0.


06/27/2012 01:42 am

This is quite funny. People still argue there is no negative SEO yet people can make a living from getting links removed. If removing bad links is GOOD doesn't it stand that adding bad links is BAD? Ie NEG SEO.


06/27/2012 07:29 am

If you want to earn links you still have to do some link building before anyone can find your web site.


06/27/2012 08:29 am

This is just an opposite of link building. Really bad. I am waiting for google's trust this time to come with a disallow link. If google is true then it must act fast or such companies will sprout out which is bad thing. There is no creativity, nothing just bullshit work. Damn


06/27/2012 08:50 am

Earn links means natural links, not to do direct link building. It should be like natural linking. Like users should be interested in ur site. But that is dam difficult.


06/27/2012 11:33 am

and few jobs destroyed...

Nathaniel Bailey

06/27/2012 12:32 pm

Save your money people! If your not happy about a link or two that's pointing to you simply email the site owner to ask for it to be removed. And if they don't do that within x days (personally I would give 3-5 days or a week depending on how bad the link is) you can use a "DMCA for link removal" (google it for more info). But what ever you do, don't waste your money paying someone to do just that for you, unless your only paying them a couple of pounds to save yourself the time of copy, pasting and sending an email!?

Omar Kattan

06/27/2012 01:04 pm

Legal Dep't should start writing the "How to link to us" pages

Nathaniel Bailey

06/27/2012 01:16 pm

That looks like a con to me! I just used it to test one of our clients sites and it came up with 3 old directories which have since been removed from googles index, but check this out... Go to the first one on the list it gives and notice the "Remove unwanted backlinks" button in the top nav, guess where it takes you! That's right straight back to And of the other 5 directories 4 of them are the same, and with the same affiliate ID! To me this is screaming out scam! IMO it looks like the guy either owns the directories from the start that have been removed from google or he is out buying such domains in the hope people will use his service to get the links removed!

Nathaniel Bailey

06/27/2012 01:20 pm

Only if you don't know what your doing for good solid white hat SEO!

Robert Meinke

06/27/2012 04:34 pm

Wow, nice catch! I thought that site looked shady, but I didn't realize how transparent the scam was.

Bill Sebald

06/27/2012 08:57 pm

I wonder if anyone has offered a removal tool to remove the spammy links they've built through their services yet? I'm going to bet... yes.


06/28/2012 05:11 am

This is seriously crazy. Instead of signing up with such services, the best way is to analyze your backlinks carefully and rely on your own judgement as to which links can potentially harm you and weed it out. Another opinion would be to not have built such links in the first place, but that would be possible only in a perfect world!


07/03/2012 09:55 pm

Go on folks, pay up money to do Google's job, give them more polished data and spend your money. Don't you guys really feel ridiculous to pay up money for something that should've been handled algorithmically? And as if that wasn't enough, now you also get the WMT disavow feature so it hooks up more webmasters on their panel that they can control and analyze even better?

Sha Menz

07/06/2012 05:34 am

Thanks for including us too Russ. An honor to be in such good company.

Sha Menz

07/06/2012 05:50 am

That's for sure! Cleanup & Contact is also making life much easier for some of our non-professional clients who find themselves in a bad spot and faced with a crisis of confidence over which links are genuinely a problem. Using it as a double check for their own assessments before uploading to rmoov is proving very useful.


07/31/2012 10:25 am

Disavowing links or link removals has certainly disturbed majority of the websites which are involved in extensive link building but it has really improved the overall experience of the search users.


09/02/2012 12:32 am

You are full of shit URI LEDERMAN

Uri Lederman

10/30/2012 04:42 pm

Just another SEO expert trying to take full advantage of people who really have no clue.. shame on you ... you make my industry look bad... :-(


04/18/2013 10:59 pm

This is the beginning of the end of static, meaningless web directories overall. It's all going from links to "likes" of which can now be purchased too.


07/03/2013 07:26 pm

The article forgot to mention creating bad links then asking for money to have them removed.


11/02/2013 08:29 pm

Hopefully this helps someone, but I found a free PDF that might help if you want to try and remove backlinks on your own:

blog comments powered by Disqus