Sandboxing the competition

Is this a real method? It has dawned on me that there are so many things we shouldn't do to avoid getting sandboxed. But, what if we did those things for the competition, likes especially for SERP?

then, things like those 1 million backlink services from India would actually be worth something...

of course, I guess it could backfire, and you just propel the competition to #1 forever...

You can get sites penalized... I've read several threads post Penguin, saying its easier now than ever to do this. I think using a mixture of fake traffic with 100% bounce rate and low ip diversity along with spamming thousands of duplicated post over the net would get sites that are fairly new, or have a poor backlink profiles flagged by Google's radar.

But I don't recommend taking out your competition in this fashion... Karma will bite you in the butt...

~Naz~

Haven't tried negative SEO yet, but I'm pretty sure it works. Bad links = penalized, whether it's your site or someone elses.

It's possible I don't know if we are supposed to discuss it here though. But in the end it is bad karma as Nazareth pointed out. You can beat your competition the legit way, no need to screw them over.

I have been doing this for reputation management since the penguin update, it's definitely possible but I'm worried about them eventually bouncing back stronger.

This has been discussed a lot in the community for the past few months. Consensus is that it works, but you're a dick if you go out of your way to ruin your competition rather than beating them fair and square.

I would never do this on a site that is legitimately outranking me by having superior content; there's no shame in being beaten by the best.

But I came across a lot of little junk blogs that have posts that are obviously one of my articles stolen from my money site. I noticed that they are all linking for a big keyword to one site. Every time, it's the same site. I submit DMCA takedown requests to all these crappy blogs, and they get de-indexed by Google, Bing, and Yahoo. I've also been emailing the hosting companies and informing them that one of their users is posting copyrighted content without permission. So these junk blogs are a piece of cake to get rid of, but the guy behind it is obviously unscathed, as he keeps making these little sites. All of them using the same article that he stole from me.

I can't think of what to do, since there is no copyright violation on his main site (the one he is linking to) Even though he is obviously behind it. I'm getting tired of submitting DMCA requests and emailing hosting companies over and over, and I'm starting to consider negative SEO. I really didn't want it to come to this, but I can't just sit here and let some guy OUTRANK me with my own content! SEOmoz had a big thing where they challenged people to knock down their rank with negative SEO, and it didn't work. They actually rose a little bit for some keywords. But so many people on BHW say they have successfully beaten someone back with neg. SEO.

Someone here on BHW suggested that I sandbox his site, but I don't know how. I really don't like the idea of this, but I can't stand the notion that this guy is 1) being lazy by copying the content that I spent hours writing myself, and 2) he is actually outranking me with it and probably making a bundle while I'm logging into Clickbank and seeing a big fat ZERO most days!

Can you please stop with these negative SEO threads? Let's say it's not about karma, if you do that to my sites I will return the favor to the top 20 results and I will monitor the new sites trying to rank in that niche. And it's easier to rank instead of doing negative SEO to your competitors anyway, because some of them will not be affected by your low ballz try. It's pathetic and you negative SEO fan boys make me sick. "Your competitors" may have families to support.

catardat said:

Can you please stop with these negative SEO threads? Let's say it's not about karma, if you do that to my sites I will return the favor to the top 20 results and I will monitor the new sites trying to rank in that niche. And it's easier to rank instead of doing negative SEO to your competitors anyway, because some of them will not be affected by your low ballz try. It's pathetic and you negative SEO fan boys make me sick. "Your competitors" may have families to support.

Click to expand...

^^ this.

I mean, damn man. A few of my profitable sites were penalized and I suspect it was douchbags whom used "negative SEO" or sabotaged me. Lots of moolahs were gone and I'm in need of them at times.

... bitch.

Why not go to competitor and beg him to take his site down if you can't follow the rules and outrank him genuinely?

Don't f**k the system. Play by the rules..

blackhat777 said:

Why not go to competitor and beg him to take his site down if you can't follow the rules and outrank him genuinely?

Don't f**k the system. Play by the rules..

Click to expand...

Well this is BHW after all

But on a serious note, yes they may bounce back stronger, but more important, you have to figure that in most sough after niches, the guys in the top 5-10 spots already have strong sites. If they've been around for a few years, they have authority ranked domains.... these, unless they are somehow already full of junk content and spammy links, may well be impervious to negative SEO tactics. This will only really work on weak sites, and even then might fire back on you. Just my 2 cents.

Aside from the karma/conscience aspect of taking food from a competitors table. The most likely outcome of blasting the crap out of somebodies site is they will own the front page. The amount of post penguin/panda faffing about is a diversion. I like most people that wants to earn in the long term builds a diverse and natural looking profile for my sites.......but I now people who openly blast straight to their tier one and get ranked, so dont believe the hype. Taking down your competitors with spammy links is not easy and will most probably come back to slap you.

SEO_Alchemy said:

Well this is BHW after all

But on a serious note, yes they may bounce back stronger, but more important, you have to figure that in most sough after niches, the guys in the top 5-10 spots already have strong sites. If they've been around for a few years, they have authority ranked domains.... these, unless they are somehow already full of junk content and spammy links, may well be impervious to negative SEO tactics. This will only really work on weak sites, and even then might fire back on you. Just my 2 cents.

Click to expand...

Neg SEO been proved (sort of - to my satisfaction anyway) to work short term on weak sites
Been equally proved to have no effect what-so-ever (except perhaps a slight positive one) on strong well established sites

The scuzzer at SEMOZ did the test (he invited us to spam him - an open and real invite - which I - with 4 Xrumer servers and a list of 22 million sites - duly did)
I was one of hundreds doing the same thing.
Main keywords unaffected, many long tails improved.

Putting all that effort into something negative isn't something I'll likely bother with again.

Scritty

I didn't realize it had been discussed so much before. Sorry for rehashing it.

It was just a thought I had this week. It is not something I would do, anyway, but more of a thought experiment. Like, would it work, what would be the consequences, why would you do it, etc.

It's kinda like a virtual hitman sorta thing. Definitely not white hat!

But, I think it brings up an interesting aspect of how G's policies can affect things, and I'm sure there are negative aspects of those policies that they have not considered.

Bad Links = Sandboxing

Ah what the hell. Don't waste your time & money doing negative stuff, use it in a positive way to improve your own site/products!

yeah, I totally agree, why waste your time with the negative, when you could be focusing on the positive.

In some niches, however, there is a lot of competition. I imagine in those niches it is being used between the top players.

Sites in a certain niche with a particular back linking strategy are vulnerable but consider a few key points. It is harder to accomplish a negative campaign on a solid site than it is to put a good strategy into effect. The algo changes all the time and they may roll back some of the aspects that make this work. It falls under the heading of mutually assured destruction, trust me I am a totally mellow guy until, I figure out I am getting screwed, then you do NOT want to be in the room with me. Also take into consideration your own quality of life, putting this much effort into something that is has such bad energy is legitimately detrimental to your own well being.

dont be a dick.

focus on building your own brand and/or another website

grow your empire cause i assure you the time you waste trying to screw the other guy over isnt worth it. its simply a waste of time and will not get you the results you think it will.

Scritty said:

Neg SEO been proved (sort of - to my satisfaction anyway) to work short term on weak sites
Been equally proved to have no effect what-so-ever (except perhaps a slight positive one) on strong well established sites

The scuzzer at SEMOZ did the test (he invited us to spam him - an open and real invite - which I - with 4 Xrumer servers and a list of 22 million sites - duly did)
I was one of hundreds doing the same thing.
Main keywords unaffected, many long tails improved.

Putting all that effort into something negative isn't something I'll likely bother with again.

Scritty

Click to expand...

Glad to hear some real world tested feedback. This was my understanding also. High quality authority domains are not going to suffer for Negative SEO.