How did [Company B] recover from a Google penalty?

To understand how Company B may have recovered from a Google penalty, we need to look at common recovery strategies for handling various types of penalties (such as manual penalties or algorithmic penalties like those from Panda, Penguin, or Core Updates). Although I don't have specific details on Company B, I can outline the typical steps businesses take to recover from a Google penalty.

Here’s a breakdown of what Company B might have done to recover:

1. Identifying the Type of Penalty

Manual Penalty: These penalties are applied directly by Google’s team after reviewing the site. They can be identified in Google Search Console under the "Manual Actions" section, where Google will provide a reason for the penalty.
Algorithmic Penalty: These are triggered by algorithm updates (like Google Panda or Penguin) that target certain SEO tactics. Algorithmic penalties are harder to pinpoint because there is no direct notification from Google. A site may notice a drop in rankings following a core update or other algorithm changes.

Company B would first have needed to confirm which type of penalty they were facing in order to guide their recovery process.

2. Conducting a Thorough Site Audit

Company B would have conducted a comprehensive audit of their website to identify potential issues that could have caused the penalty. This would include checking for:

Content Quality: In the case of Panda-related penalties, low-quality, thin, or duplicate content could have been an issue. They would have reviewed the quality of their content and removed or improved poor pages.
Backlink Profile: If the penalty was related to unnatural links (often linked to Penguin), they would have examined their backlink profile. Tools like Ahrefs, SEMrush, or Google Search Console can help identify spammy, low-quality, or unnatural backlinks.
Technical SEO Issues: For algorithmic penalties, issues like slow page speed, mobile usability problems, or improper use of structured data could have triggered the penalty. Company B would have fixed any technical issues impacting their site’s SEO.

3. Addressing Unnatural Backlinks (for Penguin Penalty)

If Company B was hit by a Penguin penalty due to unnatural or spammy backlinks:

Backlink Disavowal: The company would have used the Google Disavow Tool to submit a list of low-quality or spammy backlinks, asking Google not to consider these links when evaluating the site.
Removing Toxic Links: If possible, they would have reached out to webmasters or website owners and requested the removal of harmful links.
Cleaning Up Link Profiles: Company B would have worked on building a more natural backlink profile by acquiring high-quality, authoritative backlinks to replace the toxic ones.

4. Improving Content Quality (for Panda Penalty)

If the penalty was due to low-quality content (commonly associated with Google’s Panda algorithm), Company B would have taken these steps:

Content Evaluation and Removal: They would have identified pages with low word count, duplicate content, keyword stuffing, or pages offering little value to users. These pages would either be improved or removed entirely.
Enhancing Content Quality: To meet Google's quality standards, they would have focused on producing original, well-researched, and engaging content that provides value to users. This might include adding depth, improving readability, adding multimedia elements, and ensuring the content satisfies user intent.
Avoiding Keyword Stuffing: Ensuring proper keyword use in a natural manner, avoiding over-optimization of pages.

5. Resolving Technical SEO Issues

If technical issues (e.g., broken links, poor mobile optimization, or site speed issues) were contributing to the penalty, Company B would have:

Fixed Broken Links: Removed or redirected 404 errors and any harmful redirects.
Improved Mobile Usability: Ensured that the website was fully mobile-optimized, particularly since mobile-friendliness is a ranking factor.
Speed Optimizations: Reduced load times by optimizing images, minimizing code, and using tools like Google PageSpeed Insights or GTMetrix to improve overall page performance.
Fixing Duplicate Content Issues: Resolving duplicate content (via canonical tags or content rewrites) to ensure that Google wasn’t penalizing them for having too many similar or copied pages.

6. Requesting a Manual Penalty Review

If the penalty was manual (likely from a spammy link profile or manipulative SEO practices), Company B would need to submit a Reconsideration Request to Google.

This would involve explaining the actions taken to resolve the issues that caused the penalty (e.g., cleaning up links, improving content).
Company B would also likely have submitted a detailed action plan, showing they were committed to improving the site’s overall SEO strategy and adhering to Google’s guidelines.

Company B would have waited for Google's response, which could take several weeks.

7. Improving User Experience (UX)

Behavioral Signals: If the penalty was related to poor user experience (which could impact rankings), Company B would have focused on improving dwell time, page engagement, and reducing bounce rates. This could be done through improving page layout, navigation, and overall content relevance.
Mobile Optimization: Ensuring the site’s mobile version provided an equally great experience as the desktop version would be a key focus.

8. Monitoring for Results and Continuous Improvement

After submitting the reconsideration request (if applicable), Company B would need to continuously monitor their rankings and traffic via Google Analytics and Google Search Console to track whether the penalty had been lifted.
They would also have kept an eye on future Google algorithm updates to ensure that they didn’t encounter any new penalties or issues.
Company B would have continued to build high-quality content, acquire authoritative backlinks, and optimize their site to maintain compliance with Google’s evolving guidelines.

9. Post-Recovery Focus

Once Company B successfully recovered from the penalty, they would have focused on:

Ongoing SEO Best Practices: Implementing and adhering to Google’s Webmaster Guidelines to avoid any future penalties.
Focus on White-Hat SEO: They would have transitioned to long-term, white-hat SEO strategies like building authoritative content, earning high-quality backlinks, and focusing on user experience.

Tools Likely Used by Company B in the Recovery Process:

Google Search Console: To identify manual penalties and issues.
Ahrefs / SEMrush: For backlink analysis and link disavowal.
Screaming Frog / Sitebulb: For identifying technical SEO issues like crawl errors and broken links.
Google PageSpeed Insights: To address site speed issues.
Yoast SEO or RankMath: For content and on-page optimizations.

By implementing these strategies, Company B would have been able to recover from their penalty, improve their SEO standing, and prevent future penalties. The recovery process can be lengthy, but with a methodical approach, many businesses successfully bounce back from a Google penalty.