Another site – this time classic cloaking and a good example of what some of the more prolific black hat affiliates are doing.
xhttp://www.wisewomanguide.com/blackjack-online.html
This page ranks currently #8 in google for Casino Online – I doubt google will have it in it’s index for much longer though.
Performing a whois lookup xhttp://www.wisewomanguide.com was pending renewal/deletion on the 9th June. The domain also has over 13,000 inbound links according to MSN.
On the 13th June it was registered by the new affiliate and due to it’s age in the index under it’s old proper guise and the cloaking applied to it, it now ranks very highly for a multitude of terms in google.
So croupier, would you say this technique is acceptable? Does this site offer any value to the serps and the people that use search engines? More importantly does this bother anyone here, that someone putting in a couple of hours work can get a landing page for party poker to appear prominently in the serps?
I will go back to my main point in my first post. Should affiliate programs vet websites before allowing them to promote their casinos and poker rooms?
As Simmo has stated the likes of William Hill and Ladbrokes vet sites before allowing them to join their affiliate program. So should we as members of CAP, be supporting this idea that the affiliate programs help us ensure the industry is not full of spammy doorway pages, cloaked pages, scraper pages and stolen content that offer nothing back to the industry?
This can easily be achievable if the programs concerned regulate who is allowed to promote them.
I am guessing that those that work on sites like wisewomanguide.com are very likely involved in creating scraper sites as well.