Important SEO Question

Hey guys I have an important question about SEO that I haven?t seen answered anywhere. No one seems to know definitely.

Does duplicate content that contains a link to a money site pass the same amount of link juice/power than if the content was completely unique?

So for example if I copy and pasted an article from my money site to a web 2.0 and included a link back to my money site. Would the same amount of link juice be passed back to my money site than if I had just wrote a unique article on the web 2.0?

Which is more effective in regards to link juice:

Moneysite < unique article on web 2.0
Moneysite < copied article on web 2.0

It seems people seem to assume the top one, and any tutorial you watch regarding tiered link building recommend that the articles be unique. We all know that Google won?t rank an article if it already ranking but that?s not to say it won?t pass the same amount of juice.

Thoughts?

I believe you are starting to think outside the box and not being a sheep. BAAA BAAA! What I would recommend is start of with a little paragraph that changes it up by saying I found this article from here and give the authors name so it looks syndicated and change this up in the beggining of the paragragh and the ending paragragh randomly having this short phrase spun into different ways as syndication is OK and if google ever does a manual check it will look more legit.

Recap:
Copy articles
add the author and the link
makes syndicated content
= backlinks

Your assumption is correct. Duplicate content will not be held in high regard as unique content. Will it pass link juice? Yes, a little, but not as much as 100% unique content. Just getting a link is not the end goal of SEO. The "quality" of the link is more important. And this is where unique content comes into play. For Tier 1, I would use only 100% unique content as those are linking directly to your money site. The rules can be more relaxed for your Tier 2 and even more so for your Tier 3.

Kindly not post same content at all web 2.0 post all unique content with spun article and just one anchor text link of your moneysite in one article. other wise google will kill you ...

Only Google knows the exact answer to your question. However, since they stated unique content is important you can assume thatyou would get more link juice from that.

Using content originally posted on your site and used on your web 2.0 is called content syndication and passes you a good link juice. Publishing 100% unique content all through on your web 2.0 is off course more powerful for your money site but build more authority for other peoples site you are using. Whichever way you go it's good, just look at what you can do. You might want to experient this yourself and see the awesome result.

Moneysite < unique article on web 2.0

And I hope this is what you already know!

aka sam said:

Moneysite < unique article on web 2.0

And I hope this is what you already know!

Click to expand...

john1444 said:

Using content originally posted on your site and used on your web 2.0 is called content syndication and passes you a good link juice. Publishing 100% unique content all through on your web 2.0 is off course more powerful for your money site but build more authority for other peoples site you are using. Whichever way you go it's good, just look at what you can do. You might want to experient this yourself and see the awesome result.

Click to expand...

zee007 said:

Your assumption is correct. Duplicate content will not be held in high regard as unique content. Will it pass link juice? Yes, a little, but not as much as 100% unique content. Just getting a link is not the end goal of SEO. The "quality" of the link is more important. And this is where unique content comes into play. For Tier 1, I would use only 100% unique content as those are linking directly to your money site. The rules can be more relaxed for your Tier 2 and even more so for your Tier 3.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your input!

How do you know this though? Do you have any evidence to support this? Personal experience? Or are you just basing this on Google rhetoric and hearsay?

I watched a video recently, a director of an SEO company and he talked about duplicated content - he said something along the lines of:

"Google bases it's algorithm on the user experience, that's why they have a spam/ scam teams etc etc - so why would they show dupliated pages on page 1 of Google? If you're searching for something, a specific keyword and you don't find what you're looking for on the top website, then you click on the 2nd, 3rd and 4th websites. If you didn't find what you're looking for on the 1st website but then the 2nd, 3rd and 4th have exactly the same content, then you're not going to find what you're looking for and Google has failed as your tool to find that."

PM me and I'll link you to the video if you like. Hope this helps a bit.

ollie9009 said:

I watched a video recently, a director of an SEO company and he talked about duplicated content - he said something along the lines of:

"Google bases it's algorithm on the user experience, that's why they have a spam/ scam teams etc etc - so why would they show duplicated pages on page 1 of Google? If you're searching for something, a specific keyword and you don't find what you're looking for on the top website, then you click on the 2nd, 3rd and 4th websites. If you didn't find what you're looking for on the 1st website but then the 2nd, 3rd and 4th have exactly the same content, then you're not going to find what you're looking for and Google has failed as your tool to find that."

PM me and I'll link you to the video if you like. Hope this helps a bit.

Click to expand...

Thanks.

Yeah I completely agree that Google won't rank duplicate content on the obvious basis that it will diminish the quality and diversity of its results. However that is different from passing diminished link juice from duplicate content.

I watched a Matt Cutts video where he stated that a 301 redirect passes the same amount of juice as a regular link. Which to me suggests that the quality of the linking page does not diminish the amount of juice passed. If a page that just redirects the user can pass undiminished link juice why can't duplicate content do the same thing?

Oh and if anyone is interested I think the video Ollie is referring to is a recent whiteboard Friday on duplicate content.

NicheFocus said:

Thanks.

Yeah I completely agree that Google won't rank duplicate content on the obvious basis that it will diminish the quality and diversity of its results. However that is different from passing diminished link juice from duplicate content.

I watched a Matt Cutts video where he stated that a 301 redirect passes the same amount of juice as a regular link. Which to me suggests that the quality of the linking page does not diminish the amount of juice passed. If a page that just redirects the user can pass undiminished link juice why can't duplicate content do the same thing?

Oh and if anyone is interested I think the video Ollie is referring to is a recent whiteboard Friday on duplicate content.

Click to expand...

I see....sorry for the confusion. I don't know the answer to this question. The video that I watched is on a digital marketing website called: Fiagro

Here is a video galley of loads of SEO experts talking about strategies & news:
http://www.figarodigital.co.uk/Vide...=true&id=284b114a-2273-4ef1-b6e5-7bee22ebfb99

Enjoy

It is from all of the above! Listen, the best way to ever figure out the best tequniques is to have a dummy site and try to rank it. Then you are no longer taking the word of others as you no it is true. Testing, testing and more testing is the best way to understand SEO.

I already posted information on this issue in two other posts. Here is an article and a video talking about syndication and duplicate content on your website. This is not from me but has great information on the topic and the video itself is a Google represenative talking about the way they handle duplicate content.


About testing myself. I do!!!!!!!!! I actually have a program that I use to syndicate each and every one of my articles to quite a few social networks, bookmarks and 2.0's (blogger, wordpress etc) to a pre existing blog from them with obviously a backlink to the blog itself. This does two things.

1. Gives instant traffic to this article.
2. Gives you backlinks to the post in return gives you a stronger website as you have links disbursed throughout the whole thing and not just a few pages.

Many people are sheep and they only follow advice from others that scream they know the gospel. It is good to do what you are doing and think outside the box.

The next thing you need to do is just test things out. Make a web 2.0 and test your theories and see if you can rank it. This way you don't even lose money on a domain etc if you plummet the 2.0. I can't stress testing enough..

Edit: One more caveat; When you do a press release what do you think your doing? hmmm cough cough.. Content Syndication!!!

NicheFocus said:

Thanks for your input!

How do you know this though? Do you have any evidence to support this? Personal experience? Or are you just basing this on Google rhetoric and hearsay?

Click to expand...

It really depends on how google indexes the content. If the page doesn't get indexed or is added to the supplemental index, the link is worthless. If it happens to get indexed it may pass link juice, but you are playing with fire. The question I would like to know is why would you ever want a link from a page with duplicate content pointing to your money site??

It's not too hard to create unique content,I'll find a great article,print it off and then ,using dragon naturally speaking,manually rewrite it so it looks nothing like the original but means the same thing.It takes around 10 minutes and I have just recently started using this technique.I will sometimes do this then spin it for the web 2's pointing to my high quality web 2s.I only use the spun article 3 times,then use another.It may seem like alot of work for sub level web 2's but it is submitted via automated I simply randomly rotate the articles so the web 2's don't all have the same subject for their posts.Works well and of course I still add images and video links to this level.Automation saves logging in all the time,there isn't really an excuse for web 2's to have one article anymore.
Duplicate content can be a good thing in small doses,makes it look viral to an extent,the source is important for this,hence put the time in and it will be postitive duplicate content which will help you.What do people do when they like something,they share it! why is this any different,I'll link back to where I originally placed the article(giving credit),so giving the orig article a small boost.This is a natural thing to do.Duplicate content in a negative sense is trying to rank using it,which is unlikely to happen,sharing it is different.

content syndication is in use for many years, It always gives more visiblity and credibility as google only take the first seen index of the article as original mostly. Better to use some reference when copying or use unique content.