Skip to content

Sites not ranking any more with GSA

Hi, im using GSA for some time now and own 3 licences. Everything was fine untill a month ago. Since then i cant rank any of my websites or blogs but not shure why. I haven't changed any of my settings so it would be great if someone could give me some advice on what to do. Regards


  • Never stop testing. Doing the same stuff is only going to lose it's effectiveness in time. Throw in social signals, throw in some other types of links apart from ones created by SER, mix it up, do some white hat stuff, copy your competitors.
  • pepertuletum - what kind of technique did you use, what anchor text % etc ? I have noticed that some google versions are monitored more closeley and updates are rolled out earlier than in other versions.
  • i use 60 % anchor, secondary anchor 20%, generic anchor 10% and domain as anchor 10% . Do you think i should change my values?
  • goonergooner
    Wow anchor is very high, make anchor 10% and domain 60% and you will be heading in a better direction
  • @pepertuletum - yes, 60% is definetely too high, it is almost like negative seo attack, I`ve seen sites ranking with less than 5% anchor. good luck.
  • i have changed my values, but the biggest problem is that i have very low search engine traffic on my new sites. Seems to me that google is not indexing any of my new sites, i have even changed my server, bought new domains but the problem is still here and i cant figure out why they are not indexing
  • spunko2010spunko2010 Isle of Man
    Do you mean they aren't appearing in Google at all even if you search for the specific URL? If yes feel free to PM me as I know a way to force indexing.
  • 1. If you have scrapebox, use the index checker on your site.
    2. If you aren't indexed, get an indexing service from one of the vendors on this site. You should have this anyway to get your links indexed (I use the Incredible Indexer - great service). Put all of your URLs into the indexer.

    Maybe you are indexed, and not getting ranked... Entirely different matter.

    A basic check would be to search in google ""

    If you show up, you are indexed.

  • @pepertuletum - Do you use Google Webmaster Tools? Has your site been penalized?

    Guys - social signals are HUGE. Getting ranked on links alone is getting harder. Facebook likes, google followers, google +1s are very powerful.
  • @Satans_Apprentice I have done a lot of testing with social signals and i haven't seen any proof of them helping my rankings, so i have decided against them for the time being, as it is way to tedious and time/money consuming to get real social signals.

    OT: i would lower the anchor to 30% 20% LSI and the rest a mix of generals, mistypes and such and i would up the amount of daily links by 20/30 percent
  • Google+ followers are HUGE. You need to be mixing in social signals with your links. Plenty of deals on BHW
  • @satans_apprentice - might wanna share an example where followers have made any difference to your campaigns ?
  • spunko2010spunko2010 Isle of Man
    edited March 2014
    I have tried and tried social signals. Links work, I can't find much evidence that SS do. Trying out Drip Revolution right now, nothing so far.
  • I will not use SS until i have seen proof that it really works, my test says there is no real difference so i will not waste my time with it and the BHW deals are mostly bot signals, useless.
  • @spunko2010 and @PaulieP I'm in the same boat as you guys, BUT, I have been buying SS for a few sites to test on and to see if it actually works AND as Satans Apprentice states, social stuff has too much of an online presence to not make a difference either now or at least going fowards. I have found that I've hit a stagnant stage with link building on those sites and SS are the only things I don't do on them. Will let you guys know if it makes a difference. FWIW it's a drip-fed cheap service and looks different to others I've seen. Whether it works or not is another matter. 

    Oh I'll not be buying anything from BHW ever again as MCutts/G are all over it way too fast. I had a site that got penalised and the links that GWMT gave were those exact links I bought in 2012! Removed them and the site bounced back. Funny that. I know I should have protected the site but it was purely to test them and glad I did. Don't use directories in SER either.
  • goonergooner
    I've seen evidence where circles especially make a big difference.
    Check a few results where there is a site on page one with several hundred circles.
    Often times they don't deserve that ranking based on their link profile.
  • spunko2010spunko2010 Isle of Man
    @JudderMan to be honest if they were bought in 2012 and they got slapped recently that's a good amount of time for C&B stuff. I'd be happy with half that. What drip feed service are you using? I tried Drip Revolution but just found out they only send social signals to your Facebook/Twitter pages, i.e. followers and Likes there, but i need them on my actual website pages. Is there such a service any one knows of?
  • spunko2010spunko2010 Isle of Man
    edited March 2014
    @gooner by Circles do you mean Google +1s? I think the Circles are the number of friends, i.e. if you are in 100 Circles on G+ you basically have 100 friends. Or is that what you mean? Either way, I just bought ~20 Google Plus Ones to my moneysite (not the G+ Profile page) off Fiverr. Will report back if it does anything. Not sure if that's enough, though.
  • goonergooner
    @spunko2013 - I mean the actual circles, authorship with tons of circles.
  • spunko2010spunko2010 Isle of Man
    @gooner ah you mean in the SERPS when it has the name, and the number of Circles the author is in? I toyed around with this and bought 3,000 circles once, didn't really do a thing for my site. Maybe I did something wrong.
  • goonergooner
    @spunko2010 - Just realised i wrote your name wrong before, sorry about that! lol.
    Yep that's exactly what i mean. I haven't tested it to be honest. I'm just seeing more and more instances where it seems to be influencing results. It's possible that they are genuine circles and G can tell the difference, but some that i have seen are blatantly fake.
  • spunko2010spunko2010 Isle of Man
    edited March 2014
    According to my own research, about 90% of them are fake. Google+ is a load of sh*t if you ask me, I don't think anyone uses it apart from social media "gurus" and spammers. :) I'm going to try something out this weekend, if you look on Google+ they have an inbuilt redirect going on, for all outgoing 3rd party links. Twitter have something similar with, and it's not open for registration, i.e. you have to use their services to be able to generate a link, which makes me wonder why... Aside from the obvious security/phishing protection that is supposedly the reason behind them. I'm going to try spamming that to sh*t to see if they're using it for garner how popular a link is and see if it affects placement in the SERPS on a brand new site. That, and a few other related G+ experiments I've been thinking about. Will report back in a few weeks with findings :)
  • is a meta refresh fyi @spunko2010
  • ronron

    @spunko2010 - I love when you tell everyone exactly how you feel, lol. I miss that.

    I think it helps if you weave the social in with a new site from the beginning. I think we always take an existing site, then this and that doesn't work, so let's throw some social crap up on the wall to see if that works.

    My thinking is that a real website that has some social value has some drips of social right from the beginning, and then escalates. Just a theory, but there is some logic to it all that make some sense to me.

  • spunko2010spunko2010 Isle of Man
    edited March 2014
    @Justin true, and they can rank (well) in some cases, as can The problem, if you can call it that, is and google+ outgoing links are nofollow/blocked by robots.txt. I know some link juice is still handed down, but it's reduced. (FWIW, google "" and you'll see that Google is ignoring the robots.txt directive partly, surprise surprise) However, there's a loophole that I think I've discovered after several hours of looking , to skip out the robots.txt part & the 301 redirect, so in other words a link from a * domain with full link juice. I'll delve further into it tomorrow to see if the same loophole exists for Twitter, too. It's probably nothing, though, I'm sure they're one step ahead. Imagine if you could create a link to your M$ on, spam it to high heaven and possibly falsify the weighting given to it via their social signals algorithm, and have full linkjuice flow to your site at the same time...
  • spunko2010spunko2010 Isle of Man
    edited March 2014
    ...Here are some KWs to see actual URL redirects ranking well, for those interested (remove the *): "fre*e iq test", "wbir wea*ther", "get rid of puf*fy eyes" ... Note that in some cases the actual M$ that the URls point to, are ranking too...
  • Those bitly links...
  • I've been seeing some interesting info leaking out about this recently. This is one of the more interesting article I have read on it.
  • ronron
    +1 - Nice share @Samx =D>
Sign In or Register to comment.