Review Sites & Google's Maccabee/Fred 2.0 Update

My affiliate/review site has not been hit, but there is a lot of talk among SEOs that scholarship links are one of the reasons why sites got hit.

We are all familiar with 10beasts, but it seems it got penalized with this update. If you search for 10beasts in google it’s not even in the the top 100, and that’s 2 weeks after selling it for $600,000!
 
I run a review type authority site but have seen minimal fallout from this update. At first glance, a single keyword I was tracking has dropped out completely, other than that, all seems as before.
 
Cash Builder said:
We are all familiar with 10beasts, but it seems it got penalized with this update.
Click to expand...

I think the timing was coincidental. The owner was claiming it was a white hat operation but with a little investigation into the backlink profile, you can see the site was propped up by scholarship links, as you said, and mainly a very poorly done PBN. The PBN is now de-indexed as well.

Focused said:
Has anybody running an authority site (review site business model) been hit by the Maccabee update?
Click to expand...

My current understanding is that this update targeted sites with tons and tons of doorway pages. Typically this is going to be sites going after lots of local terms, usually using spun content and boilerplate ad-lib content. Stuff like:
  • /los-angeles-plumber-90210
  • /los-angeles-plumber-90211
  • /los-angeles-plumber-90212
  • /san-francisco-plumber-87825
  • /san-francisco-plumber-87826
That's what they mean by permutations. Just incrementing zip codes over every city in every state, then doing it again for a different vocation like /los-angeles-locksmith-90210. It's kind of like a patch for Panda, which took care of a lot of this. I don't think this is the one, but we'll eventually see a patch for Fred too. That's when all hell is going to break loose.

Now if your review site is targeting terms like:
  • Best pillow
  • Best cheap pillow
  • Best pillow under $300
  • Best pillow under $250
  • Best pillow under $200
  • Best pillow under $100
  • Best pillow for side sleepers
  • Pillow reviews
  • _____ pillow vs. ____ pillow
And on and on you may get hit. If you're a pillow site with a high ratio of informational content versus the commercial content you're probably fine. But if you're doing this for every product you can think of across every vertical, I'd say that's a problem. If you're being reasonable and hitting tons of unrelated products without doing these permutations I'd imagine you can still be fine.

But I also think an apocalypse is coming for all kinds of sites following this 100% review content model. There are sites doing 8 and 9 figures a year that are going to be having a real bad time at some point in the near future.
 
It's very suprising that inspite of recent google updates , sites like wirecutter are still ranking high when they're clearly breaking the review / best xxx content vs Info content rule

Cash Builder said:
We are all familiar with 10beasts, but it seems it got penalized with this update. If you search for 10beasts in google it’s not even in the the top 100, and that’s 2 weeks after selling it for $600,000!
Click to expand...

10beasts was hit with "Unnatural links" penalty. The owner confirmed this on Facebook and it looks like he's currently working with her (the buyer) to fix this issue.

Now do I feel bad for the buyer? NO

Who the heck spends over half a million dollars on a 10page website with no source of traffic other than google? No Facebook , Twitter or Active email followers.

10beasts was clearly a penalty waiting to happen and I'm surprised it took this long for Google to take Action.
 
Ryuzaki said:
I think the timing was coincidental. The owner was claiming it was a white hat operation but with a little investigation into the backlink profile, you can see the site was propped up by scholarship links, as you said, and mainly a very poorly done PBN. The PBN is now de-indexed as well.
Click to expand...

Even now, the owner is still claiming he only used scholarship links and no PBNs, when clearly he was. The Empire Flippers listing stated that the site did not use PBNs, but it was easy to spot.

It was most likely the PBN that got him, but because the site had become so famous for its use of scholarship links people have put two and two together and said they were the cause.


Ryuzaki said:
But I also think an apocalypse is coming for all kinds of sites following this 100% review content model. There are sites doing 8 and 9 figures a year that are going to be having a real bad time at some point in the near future.
Click to expand...

Would you include sites like the Wirecutter in this?

Encrypted said:
10beasts was hit with "Unnatural links" penalty. The owner confirmed this on Facebook and it looks like he's currently working with her (the buyer) to fix this issue.

Now do I feel bad for the buyer? NO

Who the heck spends over half a million dollars on a 10page website with no source of traffic other than google? No Facebook , Twitter or Active email followers.

10beasts was clearly a penalty waiting to happen and I'm surprised it took this long for Google to take Action.
Click to expand...

I agree, I'm surprised the site never got hit by a previous update. If the buyer had done proper due diligence she might have seen the PBNs and wondered why the listing said there was no use of PBNs?

I also saw that the owner was helping to 'recover' the site, but if the site was ranking solely on PBNs and scholarship links it's going to take a lot of time and money to even get close to what it was earning.
 
Cash Builder said:
Would you include sites like the Wirecutter in this?
Click to expand...

Yes but I'd also include them into the special group that will get secret backdoor treatment, much like we're already seeing them get within Amazon's SERPs.

It's like Genius and other big sites and companies that get caught blatantly buying and trading links. They get penalized for 3 days, "fix" the problem, and get all their rankings back. There's a lot of "bread & circus" public relations non-sense that goes on that pretends to be the opposite of what it actually is.

Then of course, when you have a bunch of billionaire investors with direct lines to higher ups in Google who are pissed that their baby just went tits up. Specifically I'm talking about Genuis and Marc Andreessen, co-founder of Mosaic and Netscape and venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz and social network Ning, and member of the board of directors of eBay, Facebook, and Hewlett Packard.

The game won't be played fair by any means.

Now, a site like Top Ten Reviews is huge, scraping in ungodly amounts of money monthly. They are a part of a network of other big brands like Business.com, Tom's Guide, Space.com, Live Science, AnandTech, etc. These are the kind of sites I think that exist in a weird gray area where they won't have the influence to be immune.

What saddens me is when I look at other internet marketing forums and places of discussion and all of the newbies are jumping in and publishing 100% "Best Product" and "Product Reviews" articles. These are the types that will have their first real efforts destroyed, and very soon, and bail on the industry altogether. Which I suppose is fine. It's the Great Filter.

But my point is that guys like me and you and them can and will and have been decimated, while others get to skate by thanks to backdoor deals and hypocrisy.

What we all need to be doing is brainstorming the next "area" Google will target and actively avoid it like the plague. Unfortunately that's hard to do, but thankfully it all ends up being pretty obvious stuff. Basically if we avoid greed and build our sites in a way and get links in ways that doesn't embarrass Google, we should be fine.

Cash Builder said:
I agree, I'm surprised the site never got hit by a previous update.
Click to expand...

I think what happens is you fly under the algorithmic radar, especially when you only have 10 posts on the site and you're earning everything off of one ranking, which was "best routers" if I recall.

The PBN would have been caught eventually, but the main reason it was busted was likely because the owner wanted to start the Guru trip. As soon as he dialed in that first ranking he was doing interviews in the blogosphere. Then made the scholarship links into a spectacle. Then made the sale into a spectacle.

If you're doing "black hat" link building, the last thing you should do is draw attention to yourself because then you're forcing Google's hand. And that's only with the scholarship stuff. They start digging because you're flaunting that you've beaten Google, and then they find your PBN.

Loose lips sink ships.
 
Cash Builder said:
it's going to take a lot of time and money to even get close to what it was earning.
Click to expand...

Its possible to get back a little bit of its previous traffic and earnings but getting back to $15k/month? I don't think so.

The penalty is so bad that 10beasts no longer ranks for its own name. Google "10beasts" and see
 
Even I can spot their PBN using Serpstat :smile:
It's pretty obvious! Be interesting to see if any of the other sites that the PBN links to drop in the SERPS too.
 
Ryuzaki said:
But I also think an apocalypse is coming for all kinds of sites following this 100% review content model. There are sites doing 8 and 9 figures a year that are going to be having a real bad time at some point in the near future.
Click to expand...

Are you saying only 100% review content sites are doomed, or even well crafted, less obvious sites likes your own, in time? What % of review content Vs informational content should I shoot for as a guide?

Tao said:
Even I can spot their PBN using Serpstat :smile:
It's pretty obvious! Be interesting to see if any of the other sites that the PBN links to drop in the SERPS too.
Click to expand...
Was it his own PBN or one of those "Matt Diggity" PBN network sellers?
 
Focused said:
Was it his own PBN or one of those "Matt Diggity" PBN network sellers?
Click to expand...

The sites I saw had site-wide links in the sidebar to a handful of totally unrelated niches, 10Beasts included. "I know you love my blog about making music, but if you want to buy a new wifi router, I suggest using 10Beasts.com! and then buy some work shoes here..."
 
wooohooo.

That poor guy probably had diarreah, lack of appetite and a general state of lack of well-being. I hope he gets better now.

He is back for "Best Gaming Mouse 2017" and related shorter tail.

There is hope.

Rob

Encrypted said:
Update : 10beasts is back.
Click to expand...
 
Can you TL;DR?
I don't want to join yet another FB group...
 
TL;DR :

- About 58% of sites that got penalized were Amazon affiliate sites

- Manual outreach (white hat ) sites as well as black / grey hat sites were affected

- Strong possibility that scholarship links caused the trigger although most sites that were hit used a combo of scholarship , PBN & Niche Links.

WHAT 10BEASTS DID TO RECOVER :

- Contacted .edu websites to remove scholarship links

- Disavowed the rest (Edu sites that didn't respond)

- Removed a few spammy web 2.0s

- Submitted a reconsideration request (since its a manual penalty)

- Penalty removed in 5days.

In another Facebook comment , the owner of 10beasts confidently stated that he never used PBNs on this site , so my guess is that those PBNs found were from random networks that linked to 10beasts as an "Authority site."

Some details from the video.

43nSFbU.png


DrJHOSR.png


BoyoT3S.png


K991DBz.png


dGHvChv.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks - When I first heard about the scholarship link building method, it just screamed of something that was obviously going to be hit by Google at some point in the future.

But good to see they got the 10Beasts site back on track so quickly though. I wonder if they were able to make contact with anyone inside Google to help point them in the right direction?
 
Tao said:
Thanks - When I first heard about the scholarship link building method, it just screamed of something that was obviously going to be hit by Google at some point in the future.
Click to expand...

It probably wouldn't have happened if the owner kept this method a secret. But trouble began the moment he made it a public case study.

Tao said:
But good to see they got the 10Beasts site back on track so quickly though. I wonder if they were able to make contact with anyone inside Google to help point them in the right direction?
Click to expand...

I really don't know but i wouldn't be suprised , considering the amount of money involved and just how fast big G removed the penalty.
 
So is it worth even building Amazon review sites at this point?
 
built said:
So is it worth even building Amazon review sites at this point?
Click to expand...

I'd say if you're only strictly working the bottom of the funnel, you're going to be considered a leech by Google. Besides the inside players mentioned above with power brokers behind them, it's looking like everyone is going to take a hit of some form.

It makes sense from any perspective. All an affiliate site is is a middle man that offers no value. It's the definition of a doorway page with no goal but to drop a cookie.

If a print magazine was nothing but product reviews, nobody would buy it or read it. But if they nestle in 5 product reviews across 2 pages somewhere in the midst of interviews, opinion columns, editor comments, photo galleries, top 10 pieces of advice, and investigative editorials, then it's packed with all kinds of value including the reviews. But reviews alone look real shifty.

Like a print magazine, sometimes you monetize parts with display ads. Sometimes it's native ads and sponsored content. Other times it's product reviews. But generally it's a mix and match.

It's not just Google that despises a leech. Most affiliate networks won't let you do certain things, like PPC with brand names, domains with restricted words, platform restrictions like email spamming, etc.

I think as long as you're working the entire funnel with the purpose of providing true value to your own and Google's users, they don't mind if you make some money. It's all perspective. The exact same product review will look helpful on one site and like a money-grab on another site. It's all in how you present yourself (to humans and the robots).

Strictly building a review site? I wouldn't. Having a review section of my authoritative content site? That's your bread and butter in SEO.

I try to diversify my income streams within the same project, if you're following a content site model. My main project has affiliate links, CPC ads, CPM ads, CPA offers, and sponsored content here and there. If all of my review pages tanked, that would suck really bad since they represent the bulk of the earnings, but all 5 of those earning methods would still be earning across the other pages on the site and I'd still have a decent cash flow generator on my hands.
 
Focused said:
Was it his own PBN or one of those "Matt Diggity" PBN network sellers?
Click to expand...

sounds all very 2014 Google had some "special update" when in reality they just went after high profile PBN sellers like "no hat seo" who were decimated.

wonder how many PBN sites Matt Diggity had deindexed?
 
What’s going on with Dec. 12th?

Focused said:
Has anybody running an authority site (review site business model) been hit by the Maccabee update? If I review 10 different types of bicycle wheels will I get hit for "Keyword Permutations"? Is this the nail in the coffin for targeting lots of best/review keywords?

More info: https://www.seroundtable.com/google-maccabees-update-analysis-24951.html
Click to expand...

I have seen a bunch of people linking to that article but I have been hit on three sites and none match up with that keyword permutations suggestion. I cant link on here but if you go on Reddit and /r/juststart then look for the topic called "What’s going on with Dec. 12th?" there are a few people in there who were hit and their sites dont match up with it either. If you look for the conversation string between myself and ibpointless2 on the thread, he says he thinks it was due to over monetization on his site. He reduced the ads and the site began to climb again.

One of my own sites that was hit seems to be right on the threshold with Google unable to decide if it should be slapped or not as it seems to flip its SERPs between the pre and post-rollout positions every few days.

I have removed all ads from some of the pages hit but still waiting for G to recache them, I have also reduced adsense ads on one site from six per page down to only two but again waiting for it to recache.
 
shaunm said:
I have removed all ads from some of the pages hit but still waiting for G to recache them, I have also reduced adsense ads on one site from six per page down to only two but again waiting for it to recache.
Click to expand...

Please let us know how this ends up going. I've been thinking about display ads again recently and the fact that, while they bring in a solid chunk of money, they still only represent around 15% of the total earnings of this one project. That number will continue to decrease too.

I've considered taking all of the ads out entirely. Even though I'm only working with asynchronous networks, they still slow the rendering a bit. I've been wondering about their effect on ranking not only due to that rendering delay but also the simple fact of them being there. I'm sure Google has a bias against them, as you're saying, but where that limit is is what we need to determine.
 
Ryuzaki said:
Please let us know how this ends up going. I've been thinking about display ads again recently and the fact that, while they bring in a solid chunk of money, they still only represent around 15% of the total earnings of this one project. That number will continue to decrease too.

I've considered taking all of the ads out entirely. Even though I'm only working with asynchronous networks, they still slow the rendering a bit. I've been wondering about their effect on ranking not only due to that rendering delay but also the simple fact of them being there. I'm sure Google has a bias against them, as you're saying, but where that limit is is what we need to determine.
Click to expand...

Will do :smile:.

In all honesty, I have been thinking of dropping the display ads completely too. Over the past few month I have noticed that my RPM for adsense has been going down due to companies pulling their ad spend from Google. This time last year I was getting around £7 and now its about £4.5 and I can only see it getting worse.
 
With some of my sites across multiple industries, I'm seeing a variety of causes. It's enough variety, and based on reports from others, I'd say it's a safe bet this is par for "Fred's" course. The root causes I'm seeing are:
  • Keyword permutations (definitely down to the local / hyper-local level on some sites)
  • Links & anchor text distribution
  • Ads & ad-heavy pages
Also, on at least 1 site (so take it with a grain), I'm seeing what looks like similar culprits to link/anchor text, but from internal linking.

I think it's pretty safe to say this was a variety of updates and not a "one or the other" type thing. Considering that, the effects people see on their sites are going to vary between at least those 3 categories, if not more. The general solution in each of these areas seems to be:
  • Diversify & refine
  • Scale back a bit from taking things to their natural extreme
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back