There is quite a stir on the internet at the moment that is causing a lot of heart ache for marketers and affiliates.
Rumours are rife that Google has now slapped "squeeze pages".
Not only that, the pages have been declared an "iffy neighbourhood" similar to a "bad neighbourhood" that subsequently damages the links from a legitimate site to a squeeze page.
Marketers are ducking for cover, removing squeeze pages from their sites even going to the extent of cancelling domain hosting and starting again.
This is going to have some impact on Clickbank CJ and other affiliate networks. Its all about the duplicate content and poor quality of the squeeze pages where the bell tolls.
It will be interesting to see over the next few weeks what changes affiliate marketers will now make.
where are these rumors populating? anyplace authoritative? seen any of your sites drop or deindex?
It all started with real estate sites. Owners were seeing there main domains dropped entirely from the index. This has then progressed to similar sites such as insurance, home loans and now being reported to affiliate marketing sites that use squeeze pages.
It seems the old link farm factor has now moved on to squeeze pages, which for all intents and purposes is to provide a better experience for searchers.
No my sites have not suffered as I do not use nor do I link to squeeze pages. My own sites are content driven review sites with no email capture at all.
A simple Google search for "google slaps squeeze pages" will provide you with plenty of resources.
My own knowledge comes from one forum that I frequent, a members forum that will not allow an open paged url as it is pass word protected.
And thanks for the question...
Really I didn't know that, interesting, I know clickbank has alot of squeeze page ads. Your right it will be pretty interesting to see how this all plays out.
I had to Google "squeeze page" to find out what it was, and now I know it's those annoying pop-up pages that ask you to sign up with your email address.
If they disappear I will be very pleased!
I agree Marisa and any site associated with squeeze pages is all but now gone.
The benefit that I see is the true "review" sites where we put in a lot of effort and quality content to promote will now take a prominent position in the serp"s.
I find it funny when people are talking about "Duplicate content" because I think the subject has become a legend as opposed to fact.
Simply, a lot of sites don't accept unoriginal content i.e PLR articles because you are not the original author.
That said, copy and pasting someones work and putting it on your site is just an issue of copyright.
Duplicate content on the other hand is just in regards to how your website is set up.
I'm not a techie but it sounds like the "duplicate content" which search engines don't like is when your site accidently makes multiple copies of one page and search engines when crawling your site start crawling the same page over and over agin with simple changes in the url and thats it.
Thats what I believe duplicate content is
Heres google talking about it aswell
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot. … nalty.html
How did we get from squeeze pages to dup content?
If this is actually going to occur or has already occurred then it has not come too soon. Thanks Marissa for doing the google so that I did not have to. The more c--p that is removed from our surfing experience the better. Thanks TerryGI for bringing this to our attention.
Although Google does a reasonable job of getting semi-relevant sites available to us for each search term they definitely fall short on real relevance. I understand the difficulties (or at least some of them) and the demoting of 'squeeze pages' is a step in the right direction. Anything that assists those of us that produce quality, well-researched, unique content should be applauded.
How will this actually help us at hubpages? I think very little in the short term. But here's hoping that it is one innovation that helps us in the long term!
What about the pages linking to squeeze pages? It's known that linking to questionable pages can bring the linking page into question also. If this is the case some affiliate marketers are going to struggle.
Exactly my point Peter. The term used was iffy neighbourhoods, similar to the old bad neighbourhood.
No one wants a link to an iffy squeeze page or site promoting one as the damage will come down the line. I wonder what effect it may have on an individual Hubpage if it links out to such a site?
Affiliate marketers will struggle and there will be a huge change on how things are done.
Could somebody please post a link to an example of a 'squeeze page', I am still none the wiser as to precisely what they are....
Hi Ryan, this url leads to a site that sells squeeze pages and shows an example of such pages. Here is the link of the samples..
Just change the hXXP to http
Well in that case GOOD.
That can only be a positive thing for people like me. On so many occassions I have searched for some valuable information and been presented with something like 40 of these things out of the first 50 search results for pretty generic and common search queries.
This represents, in my opinion, a clear swing towards a 'content is king' principle. In fact, that has made me very happy. They utilise nothing other than keyword rich domain names, hopefully that will open up the market for good domain names too, when the developers of these things (if you can call them developers) find that paying the annual domain renewals are no longer worth it.
Sorry for the strong words, but these things ruin the internet experience for so many. Anybody who likes to put the word 'money' in their titles will benefit from this move.
Apologies to anybody who makes a living using these squeeze pages, but something had to be done to contain them.
If I was in the least bit sceptical I might think that big G was taking care of business as usual. (Think Google affiliates)
Ryan, a squeeze page is a page that gives you the option to opt-in/buy or to exit.
That sounds like optimism to me Peter Unless you have a portfolio of these squeeze pages yourself.... in which case, consider using the domains to develop some AdSense monetised micro sites insteads
I agree it can only be a good thing. I feel there might be more than gust quality control being put into play here, hence the skepticism. I don’t have any affiliate sites or link to any squeeze pages and it’s not my goal to earn a living from Adsense either. This is the only site I run Adsense on these days and I certainly don't write here for money.
Uh-oh. I wonder if the sign-up-with-HP links I have on my profile page and a couple hubs could be interpreted as squeeze pages. In as much as they don’t work anyway, I guess it’s time to delete them.
I don’t think a hub could be seen as a squeeze page, there are options available to the reader other than opt-in or exit.
Rumours are rife...
Is there any kind of reference here?
I can think of a hundred cliffs to jump off.
It does seem to me like this is the webs hot topic.
SiteProNews can certainly be considered as up their with the most reliable news sources in this field Will...
I am assuming that this article, from today, is where this topic has emerged from. Seems perfectly plausible to me.
I dont know that sitepronews is any type of valuable resource, Ive never seen it referenced by anyone I respect.
Its a webmaster site, but its only a PR3..in comparison seomoz ( a site i do respect) is a pr8!
The article in question has no references? or comments agreeing to the event.
the last article I read on the site was ripe with typos. the overall information is solid, but im yet to find anything cutting edge. seems like link bait.
Anyone have any previous experience with the site?
When talking about things google does, I expect examples, previous linking behaviors, original site rank - drop of X places in rankings or deindexing ..basically something that make sit seem like the person knows what they are talking about.
Matt cutts blogs and webmaster forums also should be buzzing!
all the links on the first page of google are relating to two dinky articles from 2010 - the rest is the sam enews from 2009, and then again in 2008.
I have access to members only sites for webmasters also (requirements being earnings proof at a certain level) No one has complained since mayday about some longtail losses and these folks make real money they dont just market to marketers or theorize seo.
im sure google would love to squash squeeze pages - lets see the algo that can differentiate between content and squeeze
Fair enough so it isn't a reputable source... but remember that I didn't start this thread I simply typed 'Google Slaps Squeeze Pages' into Google News and speculated on the source based on the first thing that appeared. Will Apse was asking for a source, he got it, irrespective of whether it was reliable
I have just researched the author, and fully take your point. Apparently 'Sunforged' gets three times more searches than 'Duncan Wierman'.... so you are quite right, he is no major authority. You, on the other hand, are quite the celebrity!
really? .. maybe its a different sunforged.
idk, that its NoT reliable , just that the OP didnt cite any sources and neither did this sitepronews which I just happen to have never heard of and wasnt much impressed compared to proven sources like seomoz.
For all I know its the best site ever...but a PR3 can be achieved with little to know promotion or optimization, i prefer those who practice what they preach
Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't most E-Book sale pages classify as squeeze pages too?
This is good one.
http://www.helium.com/items/1882339-doo … ling-event
Well sunforged, let's say "you heard it here first".
This is just a slight thread on the rumours that squeeze pages have been slapped. Nothing more than that. The world is still revolving and day follows night still.
Don't over think it. Not everything has to have a wiki link or a Matts Cutt reference. There is nothing sinister or ill designed about this thread.
i dont give much truck to rumors - as you can see by searching the term you stated, the same rumor spread in 2008 and 2009.
but i was just hoping for some back story so i could react if necessary ...didnt think there was anything sinister.
im assuming the forum is the brute force forum? where users are doing many other activities that could invite a slap? ...hence the need for a backstory
Are you implying TerriGl here is Teriss on brut force seo forums?
I do not frequent Peter's forum although I understand it is very good. The forum I am associated with is a major internet marketing forum that charges a yearly fee to be a member of. The idea of the forum is 100% positive working strategies only. Not Warrior or any of the usual suspects but an invitation only forum.
The good thing that has come from what is now a failure with squeeze pages is the advent of new ideas that are exploring strategies outside of the box.
These strategies are leaving review sites behind at the moment and I can only see exciting affiliate marketing techniques ahead.
Hmm. I, too, had to look up the definition of 'squeeze page.' In essence, it seems to be what we used to call a 'kidnap site,' with no exit hyperlinks, and you are trapped there unless you close your browser, or the tab from which you visited.
I always hated that, and if I land on a page that seems to have been a legit link, and all it wants is my e-mail before letting me proceed, I leave. I never sign up. I had that happen the other day from FaceBook--it seemed to be a legitimate link from one of my regular contacts, but when I arrived, I could not view the content without providing some info "to prevent spam" it claimed. Bah, humbug! Sorry, but you just lost a possible ally with that tactic.
It is time to boycott those techniques, then, by whatever means is available.
by Nicole Pellegrini2 years ago
I just got hit by a duplicate content unpublishing of one of my articles. For the record, it is my own work which I had originally published on another platform and wanted to relocate here. After deleting the article...
by Mark Knowles8 years ago
I am moving this question over here to ask for help from the hubpages team.2 of my hubs and some of hovalis' hubs seem to have had a penalty applied by google and have disappeared from the search rankings down to the...
by broalex9 years ago
I`ve noticed a strange behavior of some of my hubs , they are online for two months now , and there was no problem , There is no mature content on them , nor link to porn sites , nor duplicate content , they are purely...
by HSanAlim5 years ago
Given all the time spend world wide worrying about Panda and Google's poor quality and duplicate content comments, what the hell does this post from GOOGLE themselves mean. Talk about...
by Lisa Vollrath2 years ago
Why those of us moving over from Squidoo should not try to transfer our lenses to HubPages manually:I just moved one of my recipes that's fairly new, and doesn't have a high search engine ranking, thinking I would use...
by Gary Anderson5 years ago
Google allows dup content from trusted sites, one to another. Here is an example. This was an article from the Daily Beast. While I don't agree with Carlos Slim because Mexico has the worst inequality, maybe in the...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.