• Adam Thompson

    “a tool conceived at SEER that pulls all of the metrics you could ever want on any site into one spreadsheet”
    I think Wil mentioned that in New Orleans. Any chance of getting my hands on that tool? :-)

  • Wissam

    i have been seeing these kinda sites with PR 4-5 …just a bunch of text pulled from wikipedia. with links …

  • Bill Marshall

    I’d like to think that you were right about Google being able to find this sort of spam but sadly I’ve seen too much of it and very little sign of them doing anything about it. While I understand the attitude of not “ratting” I do think that this sort of thing needs to be brought to their attention because either they can’t find it currently or there needs to be sufficient publicity about it to force them to do something about it.

  • Abbott Shea

    Wissam, that’s odd. I thought the only reason that these sites were flying below the radar was because they weren’t duplicating content on a string level. That surprises me that pages are just scraping content from Wikipedia and still receiving recognition from Google.

    Bill, I understand what you’re saying, but if we were to go that route and take the time to inform Google I think the question would have to be asked – who are we really working for, Google or our clients?

    Adam, did you know that we are hiring? Think about interviewing and joining the team. SEER shares the coveted tool with all team members :-)

    Thanks for all of the comments!

  • Terry Van Horne

    hmm truth be told it is not Search Engine spam perse. Crappy sites as link foundation is not SE spam..nor is building other crappy sites to put link equity into these crappy sites Search engine spam. It’s stupid… but not spam so likely google doesn’t catch this. It could be spam but from what I could see from the site in the picture… crappy site. Even the building of the sites (if in fact owned by the 1st crappy site) is not SE spam these days. In the past definitely… but Google in particular and the other SEs too a much lesser extent handle at least poorly conceived link networks

  • Bill Marshall

    Google seems to think we’re all working for them already! ;-)

  • Wissam


    just went and double checked one of the “seo company sites” that had a good and heavy with these kinda links and to tell you the truth content is scraped ( but seems all website has be de indexed decached checked arround 10 sites . btw was a PR4

  • Abbott Shea

    Terry, you are correct my loose use of spam is most likely technically incorrect. I should have just referred to the site as simply crummy. When I used “spam” I meant it to be synonymous with a piece of content on the web that does no good to anyone and is only created in the first place to boost a website’s “internet credibility” (i.e. qualifying metrics for SEs).

    Bill, haha you might be on to something!

    Wissam, this site is freakin laughable. Unfortunately it is proof that Google is at least a few months away from being able to block all of this stuff from our search peripherals and also from eliminating their positive influence on companies using them in their black hat schemes. I guess Google ISN’T perfect. Plus, what can we expect when we have people linking to them in comments on quality blogs!?! Only kidding! And don’t worry, they’re no-follows ;-)

    Thanks again for all the comments!!!

  • Jeff Parker

    That most certainly is SE spam (and SEO spam), whether the engines handle link networks well or not (and they don’t, hence this spammers success). It’s created to game the algo.

    Great to share with the client. Thats the right thing to do as a consultant. But you most certainly should aid your client by aiding Google. Turn this crap in. Google probably won’t do squat, but until it gets more sophisticated, Google needs guidance.