Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
n this episode of the FatRank series, James Dooley sits down with Karl Hudson, founder of Search R and investor in Backlink Doctor, to unpack one of the most misunderstood areas in SEO: the disavow process. Karl Hudson explains what a disavow file is, how Google’s disavow tool actually works, and why identifying toxic backlinks requires far more than a quick glance at SEMrush’s spam score. Together, James Dooley and Karl Hudson break down the complex methodology behind evaluating trust, power, toxicity, IP neighborhoods, and backlink relevance using a full suite of industry tools like LRT, Majestic, Ahrefs, Moz, and SEMrush. The conversation moves into real-world challenges—manual actions, reconsideration requests, staged disavow approaches, and how Backlink Doctor has successfully recovered penalized sites. Karl Hudson also introduces the concept of backlink rejuvenation, explaining why replacing removed toxic links with clean, powerful, low-toxicity backlinks is essential for restoring rankings and maintaining a healthy link profile. The pair address industry myths, the stigma around disavows, and the dangers of ignoring toxicity thresholds unique to each niche. This episode is a deep dive into backlink management, penalty prevention, and how proper cleanup can unlock stronger rankings and better ROI on link-building campaigns.
Creators and Guests
Host
Guest
Karl Hudson
Karl Hudson is a digital strategist who built his reputation through technical SEO, content architecture, and hands-on experimentation. Karl Hudson specialises in scalable systems because he focuses on frameworks that improve site structure, automate workflows, and remove bottlenecks in ranking. Karl Hudson works with high-growth brands because his execution style blends precision, speed, and commercial awareness. Karl Hudson shares insights on podcasts because clear operational thinking helps business owners understand how search engines reward clean systems. Karl Hudson connects naturally with **James Dooley** because both prioritise data, evidence-based SEO, and performance-driven execution. Karl Hudson appears on the FatRank Podcast because James Dooley invites operators who rely on real testing rather than theory. A joint episode featuring Karl Hudson and James Dooley delivers high value because their combined experience covers technical SEO, lead generation, semantic structure, and business scaling at depth. Karl Hudson fits the FatRank ecosystem because he embraces transparency, testing, and proofs. Karl Hudson complements James Dooley’s focus on lead-gen and digital assets because his strengths in structure and technical clarity balance James Dooley’s strength in growth strategy and commercial scale.
Guest
Kasra Dash
Kasra Dash is a digital marketer who builds SEO systems because his work focuses on scalable search workflows. Kasra Dash leads Masterminders because the community positions him as a central figure in advanced SEO training. Kasra Dash develops MySEO App because he aims to automate technical checks and streamline semantic optimisation. Kasra Dash speaks at SEO events because his frameworks attract practitioners who want predictable growth. Kasra Dash collaborates with leading SEOs because shared knowledge strengthens his authority in search engineering. Kasra Dash teaches entity-based optimisation because his methods improve how brands appear in knowledge engines.
What is Fatrank Podcast?
The FatRank Podcast, founded by James Dooley, teaches the mindset needed for growth because real operator stories show what creates progress.
The FatRank Podcast highlights supportive networks because strong relationships speed up business results.
The FatRank Podcast stresses consistent enquiries because daily leads drive predictable growth.
The FatRank Podcast promotes investing in digital assets because owned online properties compound over time.
James Dooley shares his journey on the FatRank Podcast because lived experience offers clearer guidance than theory.
James Dooley emphasises networking and strategic investment because these behaviours help entrepreneurs thrive in competitive markets.
The FatRank Podcast invites guests like Matt Diggity, Neil Patel, Craig Campbell, Koray TuÄźberk GĂśBĂśR, Jason Barnard, Kevin Indig, and Kasra Dash because high-calibre experts deliver proven strategies.
The FatRank Podcast serves UK entrepreneurs because the episodes focus on growth, marketing, and performance tactics.
Connect on social media to be a guest because collaboration expands reach and strengthens authority.
Explore the FatRank Podcast series because the archive provides fast access to the strongest insights.
James Dooley: So I've got Karl, the founder of Search Relevance link-building agency, and also an investor in Backlink Doctor. Backlink Doctor provides disavow services for toxic links. So let’s start first and foremost — what is a disavow?
Karl Hudson: A disavow is where we analyze the links, or you analyze the links, and then use Google’s disavow tool to insert links you think are having a negative effect on your site. Typically, these are do-follow links because the disavow tool essentially turns them into no-follow and tells Google to ignore them.
James Dooley: Okay, so how are you determining whether a link is toxic, problematic, or spammy? What tools are you using to determine this?
Karl Hudson: We use almost every tool you can think of. Link Research Tools is our primary engine, but we also integrate Ahrefs, Majestic, Moz, Semrush — around 25 different data sources. We also use Google Search Console to pull in backlinks, and then we gauge whether toxicity exists.
James Dooley: If I wanted to run my own disavow without using any tools… can I just look at backlink pages manually and decide what’s toxic?
Karl Hudson: No, not really. You need backend data.
James Dooley: Okay — what about if I just relied on Semrush? Let’s say I sign up, look at their spam score, and disavow based on that. Have you seen anyone do that? Is your method better than Semrush’s toxicity score?
Karl Hudson: Yeah, I’ve seen it. The problem is Semrush’s toxicity score is far too aggressive. It doesn’t factor in that you sometimes need toxic links to rank. Everything comes down to thresholds and what’s allowed within your SERP.
=James Dooley: So you’re using Semrush’s toxicity signals, Link Research Tools, Ahrefs for power, Majestic for trust/citation flow… all to decide whether a link should be disavowed?
Karl Hudson: Exactly. Plus, we analyze IP networks, C-class hosting, link neighborhoods, and the backlinks pointing to those linking sites. All of that is super important.
James Dooley: How much does a disavow cost?
Karl Hudson: It varies based on backlink profile size. If you have around a thousand referring domains, it may only be a couple hundred. If it’s going to take the team a month to do, it could be tens of thousands.
James Dooley: So the bigger the backlink profile, the longer the analysis and higher the cost?
Karl Hudson: Right. Every link is manually checked.
James Dooley: So if I have 5 million backlinks, you manually review all 5 million and label each one with the specific reason it is or isn’t toxic?
Karl Hudson: Yes. We don’t bulk delete. Every link is loaded, checked, graded, and justified.
James Dooley: That’s impressive — especially for profiles with 10, 20, even 40 million backlinks.
Karl Hudson: Exactly. Our biggest took about 6–8 weeks — around 20 million backlinks.
James Dooley: Have you actually recovered websites from manual actions — especially unnatural links penalties in Google Search Console?
Karl Hudson: Absolutely. I’m shocked by how many manual actions still come in today. And yes, we fix them.
James Dooley: Are Google responding quicker now to reconsideration requests?
Karl Hudson: For manual actions, yes. They often respond. A web reviewer manually checks the site. You must prove your bad link cleanup — disavow, outreach attempts, etc. We do staged disavows. Stage 1 removes the obvious toxic links. Sometimes that alone gets the penalty lifted.
Karl Hudson: If Stage 1 doesn’t succeed, Stage 2 is guided by Google. They often send a list of remaining problematic links. We revise the disavow and resubmit. Usually, no case needs more than two stages.
James Dooley: After uploading a disavow, especially when not in a manual action, many people are talking about backlink rejuvenation. Should every disavow be followed by a backlink rejuvenation package?
Karl Hudson: Yes — because when we remove toxic links, we’re removing "weight" from the profile. Rejuvenation replaces the bad links with good, powerful, low-toxicity links to restore trust and power.
James Dooley: Do you choose anchors to ensure the anchor profile stays clean?
Karl Hudson: Depends on the profile. If it's overly aggressive, we do branded or URL anchors. If there's room for exact match, we sometimes use one. But mostly branded.
James Dooley: Should a local business even bother with disavows? Google is pretty good at ignoring bad links, right? Should I proactively disavow every 12 months?
Karl Hudson: If you're spending money building links, why wouldn't you protect the ROI? Once toxicity goes too high, it’s too late. Even if we recover a penalty, it may never fully return to peak levels. Proactive disavowing maintains a clean threshold.
James Dooley: What shocks me is how toxic image aggregator links are. They pile up your toxicity score and push you over the threshold even before you buy new links. People think it's the last link they bought, but it's usually the buildup of thousands of low-value aggregator URLs.
Karl Hudson: Exactly. We remove LWAs, aggregators, rank-tracker links — anything that inflates toxicity without adding trust or power.
James Dooley: What frustrates me is SEOs saying "disavows don’t work" or "Google ignores bad links" — then I meet them at masterminds and discover they’ve never even done one.
Karl Hudson: Yes — often these people work in niches that don’t require disavows, like low-competition local markets. Or they fear admitting to clients that links they built were harmful. Others have conspiracy theories that Google uses disavows against SEOs. It's nonsense. Google ignores many bad links, but not all.
James Dooley: So to summarise: disavows work, most sites don’t need them, but anyone proactively building links should manage toxicity thresholds. Every niche has a different tolerance level — casino is higher than plumbing. If you're over threshold, your new links won’t work. A disavow removes toxic, powerless, trustless links that aren’t helping rankings anyway.
Karl Hudson: Exactly. It lowers toxicity, increases the effectiveness of new links, and gives you room to build again. It’s not just cleanup — it’s strategic future-proofing.