How do you know if a competitor is using Negative SEO against your site?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by davidweb

hi janeth, Search engines will only consider website which was crawled first. Google itself does not rely on its PR technology, therefore it is best to look beyond PR if issues like duplicate content crop up.

If you want to see an example, then try copying content from a new website ( already crawled by Google ) and paste to your PR 3 PAGE. I am sure you will get the hint

Here you go.

I tested it

washing your lawnmower - Google Search

The number one site for washing your lawnmower is mine. Placed there by using an article by Scott Michaels.

And I am also #1 for the article name.

[DesignsOnline]

So are Google uninterested in who owns the copyright to the original text?
The difference in what you have done Janethis that you havent passed the text off as original or your own, you have given credit to the author, the 2 sites that have copied my client original text are passing it off as their own...!

What can we do about it?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by DesignsOnline

So are Google uninterested in who owns the copyright to the original text?
The difference in what you have done Janethis that you havent passed the text off as original or your own, you have given credit to the author, the 2 sites that have copied my client original text are passing it off as their own...!

What can we do about it?

Get more links. But the problem goes a lot further than that. I've been making my total living online for the last 7 years and it takes a lot more than a three page website to drive enough traffic to a site to support it.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by DesignsOnline

So are Google uninterested in who owns the copyright to the original text?
The difference in what you have done Janethis that you havent passed the text off as original or your own, you have given credit to the author, the 2 sites that have copied my client original text are passing it off as their own...!

What can we do about it?

Google does indeed care about copyright infringement. As a starting point, see Digital Millennium Copyright Act .

That having been said, the gulf between knowing that your client is the true author of the content in question and proving such can be great indeed, the bridging of which may entail considerable expense.

Short of enlisting an attorney, and assuming that you can demonstrate that your client was the 1st to publish said content on the web, you might try contacting the hosts of the infringing parties' sites, asking that they remove such content.

Thank you for confirming that alansairporttaxis.co.uk & alansairportcars.co.uk are both owned by your client, as was deduced.

Please keep us informed as to your progress. I am particularly interested to know how it came to be that Network Solutions' DNS Name Servers, for the "offending" Domain Names, came to bear the IP Address of your client's site.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by DesignsOnline

Although having said that it is his local competitor that part owns the company Taxiclub.co.uk and also Cabfares.co.uk so perhaps he is involved in some way...?

Point No. 1
Alan's own pricing/quote pages point to his "local competitor' cabfares.co.uk

How do you think that may have happened...?



Point No. 2
None of the websites are identical now... the links at the top of the page are all different.

If they are all pointing to the one site - how do you explain that...??

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by SEO

Point No. 1
Alan's own pricing/quote pages point to his "local competitor' cabfares.co.uk

How do you think that may have happened...?

The "Prices" page merely opens an IFrame which uses cabfares.co.uk as a rate calculator; there is nothing unusual or nefarious about this. And, per the OP, note that

Quote:
Originally Posted by DesignsOnline
Although having said that it is his local competitor that part owns the company Taxiclub.co.uk and also Cabfares.co.uk so perhaps he is involved in some way...?


which suggests that the OP's client is a part owner of the 2 named entities.

Originally Posted by SEO

Point No. 2
None of the websites are identical now... the links at the top of the page are all different.

Details please.

Originally Posted by SEO

If they are all pointing to the one site - how do you explain that...??

How about responding to the questions previously put to you re. the technical issues here involved.

[SEO]

Websites Different:

Originally Posted by deepsand

Details please.

At the time of posting that the sites were different:
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - all of the top links were dark. (has since changed - now light again)
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - 2 links dark, 2 links light (still current at time of this post)
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - 1 link dark, 3 links light (still current at time of this post)
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - remains unchanged.

Originally Posted by deepsand

How about responding to the questions previously put to you re. the technical issues here involved.

With regard to my knowledge (or lack thereof) I seem to remember gaining some knowledge of these technical issues during more that 10 years online business development experience combined with my $14,000 SEO + Internet business education.

What expertise - qualifications do you have on the subject...?

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by SEO

Websites Different:

At the time of posting that the sites were different:
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - all of the top links were dark. (has since changed - now light again)
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - 2 links dark, 2 links light (still current at time of this post)
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - 1 link dark, 3 links light (still current at time of this post)
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - remains unchanged.

No differences visible here. To prove that the sites contents differ, you need to capture & compare the source code. Did you do that?

Originally Posted by SEO

With regard to my knowledge (or lack thereof) I seem to remember gaining some knowledge of these technical issues during more that 10 years online business development experience combined with my $14,000 SEO + Internet business education.

None of which serves to directly address, let alone answer, any of the specifics earlier raised.

For starters, try answering just this one.

Enter the IP Address 216.26.144.193 into the Address field of your browser and Go.

Now, tell us which of the 26 Domain Names here involved responded.

Originally Posted by SEO

What expertise - qualifications do you have on the subject...?

49 years of experience with data systems, beginning Winter of 1958-59, on PENNSTAC. See pennstac

[janeth]

Originally Posted by deepsand

49 years of experience with data systems, beginning Winter of 1958-59, on PENNSTAC. See pennstac

I was having trouble figuring out how the radio in my car worked, I've got about 20 years experience of messing with car radios but could not figure it out.

My daughter jumped over the seat pushed a button and fixed my problem. She is six and has about 2 years experience with radios.

In short, I could careless about your 49 years of experience.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by janeth

I was having trouble figuring out how the radio in my car worked, I've got about 20 years experience of messing with car radios but could not figure it out.

My daughter jumped over the seat pushed a button and fixed my problem. She is six and has about 2 years experience with radios.

In short, I could careless about your 49 years of experience.

Take note that such was information solicited by another.

Odd that you should comment here, while making no mention of that other's statement re. "10 years online business development experience combined with my $14,000 SEO + Internet business education," or that he attempted to use such as substitute for responding to substantive technical issues.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Take note that such was information solicited by another.

Odd that you should comment here, while making no mention of that other's statement re. "10 years online business development experience combined with my $14,000 SEO + Internet business education," or that he attempted to use such as substitute for responding to substantive technical issues.

My understanding was that was due to your asking him for his experience.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by janeth

My understanding was that was due to your asking him for his experience.

Negative.

I asked specific technical questions; he replied with his "qualifications" in lieu of answers.

Still begged, though, is the question of why you chose to challenge my qualifications while not doing likewise of him.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Negative.

I asked specific technical questions; he replied with his "qualifications" in lieu of answers.

Still begged, though, is the question of why you chose to challenge my qualifications while not doing likewise of him.

I thought I answered your question.

I was under the understanding that you had asked for his qualifications. I've seen you post about your own more than once and every chance you get.

If I was wrong and misunderstood then I apologize.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Stranger still is the fact that there are 26 Domain Names hosted under the same IP Address!.

Why is that so strange?

Originally Posted by deepsand

I'm beginning to wonder if it is not the client himself who has constructed this web; though, other than for the above noted similar Domain Name, I've yet to imagine why he should done so.

Yes, most probably it is WWW forwarding or DNS pointer that I mentioned above.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by janeth

I thought I answered your question.

I was under the understanding that you had asked for his qualifications. I've seen you post about your own more than once and every chance you get.

If I was wrong and misunderstood then I apologize.

Rep point granted for the courtesy of an apology, something that is all too rare these days.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Have you studied how the DNS system works?

Do you understand the differences between a site, a Domain Name, a Host Name and an IP Address?

Question answered previous post.

Originally Posted by deepsand

How do you explain the fact that Network Solutions' DNS Name Servers contain records for the "offending" sites if Empire is handling the DNS for their IP Addresses?

How do you explain the fact that an IP Address alone cannot be dis-ambiguously resolved to a unique Host Name if multiple Hosts are bound to that IP Address?

Do you not understand that the data reported by Netcraft is merely a listing of Domain Names with an IP Address that is assigned to Empire?

Do you not understand that the Spider Simulator simply does a DNS Name look-up, and thus comes up with the same IP Address for all of the Domain Names here involved, but that it does not attempt to identify the Host Name?

The reason I haven't answered these questions is because they don't really make sense to me.

[kgun]

These are the main ways to promote your site online:

1. SEO free organic hits on the SERPs.
2. Click ad's, affiliate promotion and link brokerage (that some SE's dislikes).
3. Traffic generated like I mentioned above.

Regarding point 3:

I can see no problem why it should be regarded as spam when you buy n domains that you have to pay for yearly and point (n-1) to ther first you bought, all on the same IP.

Whether it is profitable from an economic view is another question. You have to pay the yearly cost for the site (name at least) that must be earned by the extra non organic traffic the site brings to you.

When I collect links, I sometimes find this situation and link to only one of the sites if I find the information on the site(s) valuable and semantic. Should it be more difficult for a SE to do the same and only register one site in the index?

P.S. For link collecters there may be problems if the content on the sites are changed later. If the site you link to is one of those that change content, the link can loose it's semantic power and as such degrade your own eProperty.

An other reason why you should not have a larger portal or directory that can be checked manually.

A typical example is the many internet dot com sites, that all have valuable unique content. I have not checked if they are on the same IP.

Moderator you may delete this example if you find it as self promition.

1. Click second link in my signature.
2. Site navigate to IT + Site.
3. Click "links" in upper right corner.
4. Scroll down to or page search (CTRL + F) to
   
   Internet com sites

There are 16 sites with unique content in my collection.

Also page search for

Automatic code generation

on the same link page, and you may get some valuable hints to use on your own site.

That is links to two sub sites of internet dot com. (June 12 2008).

The other are unique sites.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by SEO

The reason I haven't answered these questions is because they don't really make sense to me.

Hm-mm.

How about this very straightforward matter?

Enter the IP Address 216.26.144.193 into the Address field of your browser and Go.

Now, tell us which of the 26 Domain Names here involved responded.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Hm-mm.

How about this very straightforward matter?

Enter the IP Address 216.26.144.193 into the Address field of your browser and Go.

Now, tell us which of the 26 Domain Names here involved responded.

I can't tell... The IP address remains in the address field of the browser as I navigate the site.

[kgun]

My very fast answer. On this site

kbleivik's bookmarks on del.icio.us

CTRL + F

KW's

Fooling Search Engine very smartly

You find the tool in that thread.

It is moring here, and I should have gone to bed hours ago. Good night.

[Clint1]

Originally Posted by kgun

My very fast answer. On this site

kbleivik's bookmarks on del.icio.us

CTRL + F

KW's

Fooling Search Engine very smartly

You find the tool in that thread.
It is moring here, and I should have gone to bed hours ago. Good night.

I tried searching that page for "KW", "fooling", and can't find what you're talking about. Where is it please?
Thanks.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by SEO

I can't tell... The IP address remains in the address field of the browser as I navigate the site.

As expected.

Now, assuming that, as you claim, this is a shared IP Address, how did the host server know/decide which of the 26 Domain Names claiming to reside here should have its content returned to your browser?

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by Clint1

I tried searching that page for "KW", "fooling", and can't find what you're talking about. Where is it please?
Thanks.

Go to kbleivik's bookmarks on del.icio.us (looks like kgun's link, but has an added parameter), and search for "fooling."

Or, go straight to Fooling Search Engine very smartly .

[SEO]

As far as I know... a redirect always shows the destination URL in the browser address bar (both 301 and 302 meta refresh). This is not the case with the following URL's... In all of the examples listed here... each example displays it's own domain name in the browser address bar, so (in my opinion) they cannot be redirects:

Here is an example of link cloaking:
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted

It is not a redirect... and it differs from the 4 examples listed below.

This is exactly the same as the blog example used by kgun in his post at:
Fooling Search Engine very smartly


These are different:

Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted -
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted -
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted -
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted -

In the above 4 examples... Each site displays its own domain name in the browser address bar and also in the bottom status bar...
You can download images from each separate domain... you can even open each website's style.css stylesheet (things that you wouldn't be able to do if they were cloaked URL's)

I have had a website of mine hijacked with a 302 meta refresh and these are definitely not showing any signs whatsoever of a 302 meta refresh hijack... I have also had a website position hijacked by having somebody else framing my website within theirs. Both instances cost me a lot of money and I had to do some thorough research and investigation before I found out what was going on.

Based on past experience I can not see any evidence of redirects or cloaking in the 4 examples above. There are usually (if not always) "tell-tale" signs.

Although it is possible that redirects and cloaking techniques have advanced to a point of being completely undetectable since I last researched the topic.

[DesignsOnline]

Originally Posted by SEO

Point No. 1
Alan's own pricing/quote pages point to his "local competitor' cabfares.co.uk

How do you think that may have happened...?



Point No. 2
None of the websites are identical now... the links at the top of the page are all different.

If they are all pointing to the one site - how do you explain that...??

Hi Alan made the mistake of signing up to the service on taxiclub.co.uk he paid well over a thousand pound for the service and then his competitor bought the company! He is currently in the process of arranging an alternative taxi quote system.

It is being built as we speak. As he has paid so much for it he tried to continue using it, but he found that his competitor was turning up at his bookings and had obviously diverted all the bookings that are made through the system to send a copy to himself.

As for your second point, ive not seen any differences myself. At one point I added the word "Test" to Alans index page and then checked the 2 other domains that im aware of, and they both showed the change, then I removed the work and clicked refresh and the word was gone, ive got no doubt that these domains have had an A record set up in the DNS pointing to Alans Static IP address that he registered through EDT hosting.

If I can get enough responses to know that people are watching at a specific time (and I will be out of the office thisafter noon so I will need to be this morning, I will demonstrate a change at a specific time "Live" so you can all check for yourselves.

By the way could anyone possibly post the 26 domains that point to his IP address as I will need this when I manage to find contact details for Network Solutions.

[kgun]

Can you use this tool on the main domin / site?

YouGetSignal.com - Find Other Web Sites Hosted on a Web Server

If it is a shared server, you may find more than 26.

A WMW thread that may be of interest to you: Does the same IP address devalue links between the sites?

Especially note:

"I used to look after a few sites that were owned by the same company, were hosted on the same IP, but had completely different content as they were all for very different company divisions. Most of them were interlinked to each other from each page (sitewide). After a while we decided to use the "no follow" tag for these links, but it didn't make any difference, and the sites still rank well".

My bolding.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by kgun

Can you use this tool on the main domin / site?

YouGetSignal.com - Find Other Web Sites Hosted on a Web Server

If it is a shared server, you may find more than 26.

IP Address 216.26.144.193 - Found 4 domains hosted on the same web server as Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted.
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - New
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted - New
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted

2 new ones there...

Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted (original site - "Alan's Airport Cars") shows up as:
Invalid remote address.

[DesignsOnline]

Originally Posted by SEO

As far as I know... a redirect always shows the destination URL in the browser address bar (both 301 and 302 meta refresh). This is not the case with the following URL's... In all of the examples listed here... each example displays it's own domain name in the browser address bar, so (in my opinion) they cannot be redirects:

Here is an example of link cloaking:
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted

It is not a redirect... and it differs from the 4 examples listed below.

This is exactly the same as the blog example used by kgun in his post at:
Fooling Search Engine very smartly


These are different:

Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted -
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted -
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted -
Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted -

In the above 4 examples... Each site displays its own domain name in the browser address bar and also in the bottom status bar...
You can download images from each separate domain... you can even open each website's style.css stylesheet (things that you wouldn't be able to do if they were cloaked URL's)

I have had a website of mine hijacked with a 302 meta refresh and these are definitely not showing any signs whatsoever of a 302 meta refresh hijack... I have also had a website position hijacked by having somebody else framing my website within theirs. Both instances cost me a lot of money and I had to do some thorough research and investigation before I found out what was going on.

Based on past experience I can not see any evidence of redirects or cloaking in the 4 examples above. There are usually (if not always) "tell-tale" signs.

Although it is possible that redirects and cloaking techniques have advanced to a point of being completely undetectable since I last researched the topic.

That is VERY interesting because this isnt simply an A record someone has set up a cloaked page to point to Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted and that had to have been done conciously and specifically! Now im getting worried again...

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<script>window.status = '';</script>

<title>Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted</title>
<META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW">

</HEAD>



<FRAMESET border=0 rows="100%,*" frameborder="no" marginleft=0 margintop=0 marginright=0 marginbottom=0>
<frame src="http://www.filitheyo.com/" scrolling=auto frameborder="no" border=0 noresize>
<frame src="UntitledFrame-2" frameborder="no" scrolling=no noresize marginwidth=0 marginheight=0 topmargin="0" border=0><body></body>
</FRAMESET><noframes></noframes>
</HTML>

[kgun]

Thought of it.

Got an idea before my above post that it may be possible to use (a hidden - zero with and height) frame or an iFrame or more generally AJAX technology.

From a SEO perspective - A related thread
SEO and frames in a web 2.0 world.

[DesignsOnline]

Ok the time is 12:28 according to my monitor and as soon as I have posted this Im going to change the navigation on Alans site to pointot Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted what ever the link is, that way any domains that are pointing to his website should now actually work as links to his main site. (I think that will work...?)

Actually it is now 12:30 so if you check at 12:31 the navigation should have changed to point to the full path not just a link...

[AVC]

So this company has many domains with the same content on them, it seems a stupid tactic that was conducted by the owners of the firm.

[DesignsOnline]

I have changed the navigation on the index page on alansairportcars.co.uk and checked the others and it works if anyone loads up one of the others and clicks the links it will simply open alans own website on his own domain.

Will this count as valid links in Google, passing on any page rank that the other domains might have to alans own website?

Kgun, I dont understand what you are suggesting that I do, can you elaborate please?

[DesignsOnline]

Is there a script that I could use that will test the address in the address bar and if it is anything other than Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted redirect the page to that address?

And if I do that would it make any difference to the sites listed in Google?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by AVC

So this company has many domains with the same content on them, it seems a stupid tactic that was conducted by the owners of the firm.

Assumption:
You plan to make a new site n months from now?

Questions:

1. Is it then (from a pure surfer point of view), better to buy the domain name today, so it is not taken by someone else?
2. If yes, can it have a positive Ad effect to WWW forward the domain to your main domain?

Originally Posted by DesignsOnline

Kgun, I dont understand what you are suggesting that I do, can you elaborate please?

This

<FRAMESET border=0 rows="100%,*" frameborder="no" marginleft=0 margintop=0 marginright=0 marginbottom=0>
<frame src="http://www.filitheyo.com/" scrolling=auto frameborder="no" border=0 noresize>
<frame src="UntitledFrame-2" frameborder="no" scrolling=no noresize marginwidth=0 marginheight=0 topmargin="0" border=0><body></body>
</FRAMESET><noframes></noframes>

is as far as I can see a hidden frame. Why is that used?

Hidden frames are often related to cloacking

[DesignsOnline]

Originally Posted by kgun

Assumption:
You plan to make a new site n months from now?

Questions:

1. Is it then (from a pure surfer point of view), better to buy the domain name today, so it is not taken by someone else?
2. If yes, can it have a positive Ad effect to WWW forward the domain to your main domain?

This

<FRAMESET border=0 rows="100%,*" frameborder="no" marginleft=0 margintop=0 marginright=0 marginbottom=0>
<frame src="http://www.filitheyo.com/" scrolling=auto frameborder="no" border=0 noresize>
<frame src="UntitledFrame-2" frameborder="no" scrolling=no noresize marginwidth=0 marginheight=0 topmargin="0" border=0><body></body>
</FRAMESET><noframes></noframes>

is as far as I can see a hidden frame. Why is that used?

Hidden frames are often related to cloacking

I dont know why it is used, it is certainly nothing to do with me, and Alan has clained to know nothing about any of the non related domains.
He did go through a spate of buying RELATED domains such as alansairportcars.co.uk and .com and alansairporttaxis.co.uk and .com and also hockleytaxis.com but he also bought a static dedicated IP address and set up A records so that his related domains point to the ip address of his website.

Who pointed the other domains like filitheyo.com and the other ones which are totally unrelated and not owned or controlled or anything to do with myself or Alan I dont know, nor do I know why they have done it....

[kgun]

The first part of my post was an answer to AVC (that we can suspect of working for Google or has an agenda of making Google a monopoly).

Web standards are for me set here:

• World Wide Web Consortium - Web Standards
• Creating a Science of the Web | Web Science Research Initiative

We have seen some examples of big companies not following the standards set there with decreasing success.

[AVC]

Google is already a monopoly KGun, they send 90% of search traffic to many sites now days.

The truth hurts, but if you want traffic today, play by the rules or be de-indexed.

What is so hard to understand KGun ?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by AVC

Google is already a monopoly KGun, they send 90% of search traffic to many sites now days.

The truth hurts, but if you want traffic today, play by the rules or be de-indexed.

What is so hard to understand KGun ?

No it is not. I have seen large companies like IBM (OS/II vs Windows) and Microsoft and Yahoo in search and online web marketing, yes you know the story.

I have noted that long time success may be inversely related to arroganse

Related post:
how can you tell if your sites have been Banned at Google?

Originally Posted by kgun

Not indexed like my site http://www.w3toolbar.com/

May be Google don't like the site.

Personally I have more important things to do than please GoogleBOT if he is not able to reinclude the site if it was banned.

At least, I will look for another Ad provider on that site if it is not reincluded when I continue working on it.

Webstandards:

WWW = W3C

WWW NE Google

How do you like my new meta SE http://www.surftoolbar.com/ with some semantic outbound links?

Originally Posted by AVC

What is so hard to understand KGun ?

Please tell me where I do not play by Googles sub set rules of the many you find if you start at my banned site mentioned above?

But this is in respect of the original thread starter off topic.

I do not know who started, so if a moderater see this discussion, please cut and paste posts to a new thread started by ...

[SEO]

Originally Posted by DesignsOnline

That is VERY interesting because this isnt simply an A record someone has set up a cloaked page to point to Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted and that had to have been done conciously and specifically! Now im getting worried again...

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<script>window.status = '';</script>

<title>Alan's Airport Cars - chauffeur driven luxury Southend, Rayleigh - Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted</title>
<META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW">

</HEAD>



<FRAMESET border=0 rows="100%,*" frameborder="no" marginleft=0 margintop=0 marginright=0 marginbottom=0>
<frame src="http://www.filitheyo.com/" scrolling=auto frameborder="no" border=0 noresize>
<frame src="UntitledFrame-2" frameborder="no" scrolling=no noresize marginwidth=0 marginheight=0 topmargin="0" border=0><body></body>
</FRAMESET><noframes></noframes>
</HTML>

Sorry guys...

I should have warned you...

The cloaked page (now removed) Page Title Here was a cloaking test pointing at filitheyo.com set up by me on my own domain to try to reproduce what was happening to Alan's website via the other domains...

Redirects I tested all showed Alan's web address in the browser address bar...
cloaking was the next best thing but still showed tell-tale signs...

Of course there could be cloaking techniques that would do a better job than my example.

[kgun]

But you can not generalise.

Hidden frames are part of the most complete hybrid AJAX technology.

There are no rule without exception and Google may use that technology themself in Gmail, Google suggest, Google maps etc.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by DesignsOnline

He did go through a spate of buying RELATED domains such as alansairportcars.co.uk and .com and alansairporttaxis.co.uk and .com and also hockleytaxis.com but he also bought a static dedicated IP address and set up A records so that his related domains point to the ip address of his website.

So that's why we can type in the IP address 216.26.144.193 and it will display a copy of the website...!

The whois record for hockleytaxis.com tells us that "Alansairporttaxis" owns about 5 other domains

So Alan (hockleytaxis.com) owns:
alansairportcars.co.uk
alansairporttaxis.co.uk
And at least 3 others...

All set up in an extraordinarily similar manner to:
al-hobayb.org
alomair.org
filitheyo.com

All with the same IP Address: 216.26.144.193

Have I missed anything...?

Does 1 + 1 = 2 here...?

[AVC]

This is an idiotic tactic, using the same content on multiple sites with different domains, Google will end up banning most of these domains.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by AVC

This is an idiotic tactic, using the same content on multiple sites with different domains, Google will end up banning most of these domains.

But what if there was an important mathematical proof or another important article (about the importance of being consitent in programming) on the original site shown nowhere else?

Why is is so difficult for a Bot (software) to

1. Identify the different sites?
2. Index the original site?
3. Ignore the rest as long as content is identical?

Theoretically, it could even save life and billions of USD if the other sites were indexed if content was important enough.

Imaginary example: Site network of weather alerts that was not found because n-1 sites were not indexed. It is imaginary and as told above as a rule, I only link to one of the sites myself. So what about my own site W3 Toolbar? Can that be a unique important site for a new webmaster?

In theory, theory and practice is the same, but that is in theory and Einstein once said if the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts.

[AVC]

Google will sort it out in the end, I report scraper sites all the time that show up in the SERP's and they end up banning the domains forever.

This thread will end up being bad for all these duplicate content sites in the end also.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by AVC

Google will sort it out in the end, I report scraper sites all the time that show up in the SERP's and they end up banning the domains forever.

Then I would not be able to do anything else and 24 hours day + night would not be enough.

Searching for

Forex trading

(only 7 850 000 hits now Hm. Wasn't that much higher some months ago? ).

would occupy me for days.

And the first free hit is definitely not my favourite. You find my favourite on PurpleRank. You will find no Financial institutions on RedCarpetRank so long. There are too much noise in the financial industry at present.

GoogleBOT so you will compete with me or Professor Fisher in ranking (financial related) internet pages? Rely on your faceless community. I rely on the professorsI know.

Originally Posted by AVC

This thread will end up being bad for all these duplicate content sites in the end also.

This thread, the story in this thread or webmasters and Google's reaction to the message in the thread?

My own conclusion, we have very little to learn Google, but some hints may sometimes be in place.

The devil is in the details.

[DesignsOnline]

Originally Posted by AVC

So this company has many domains with the same content on them, it seems a stupid tactic that was conducted by the owners of the firm.

Hi AVC,
the domains that are owned by Alan are firstly all related to his business, and secondly all registered to him in his own name and thirdly he has only registered them through Fasthosts so by checking the whois details on the domains you can clearly see which domains are his and which are not.
Joe

[janeth]

The sad truth is that if 1/4 of the time being spent in this thread was spent on the site it would already be ranking.

[AVC]

Originally Posted by DesignsOnline

Hi AVC,
the domains that are owned by Alan are firstly all related to his business, and secondly all registered to him in his own name and thirdly he has only registered them through Fasthosts so by checking the whois details on the domains you can clearly see which domains are his and which are not.
Joe

Tell Alan to come here and tell his story, also inform him of his major blunder of putting the same content on many different domains.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by SEO

So that's why we can type in the IP address 216.26.144.193 and it will display a copy of the website...!

The whois record for hockleytaxis.com tells us that "Alansairporttaxis" owns about 5 other domains

So Alan (hockleytaxis.com) owns:
alansairportcars.co.uk
alansairporttaxis.co.uk
And at least 3 others...

All set up in an extraordinarily similar manner to:
al-hobayb.org
alomair.org
filitheyo.com

All with the same IP Address: 216.26.144.193

Have I missed anything...?

Does 1 + 1 = 2 here...?

Does this mean that you've dropped your claim that this is a shared IP Address?

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by DesignsOnline

I dont know why it is used, it is certainly nothing to do with me, and Alan has clained to know nothing about any of the non related domains.
He did go through a spate of buying RELATED domains such as alansairportcars.co.uk and .com and alansairporttaxis.co.uk and .com and also hockleytaxis.com but he also bought a static dedicated IP address and set up A records so that his related domains point to the ip address of his website.

Who pointed the other domains like filitheyo.com and the other ones which are totally unrelated and not owned or controlled or anything to do with myself or Alan I dont know, nor do I know why they have done it....

Have you yet contacted Network Solutions re. the non-related domains registered with them that are pointing to your client's IP Address?