Ukraine's SEO outsourcing sector manages rankings for client sites across multiple markets, and a real exchange between a site owner and Google's Search Liaison, John Mueller, in early September 2026 gives those teams something concrete to reference the next time a client asks about disavowing links. Mueller confirmed the tool "does have effects, but it has its place & time" - and the case behind that quote is a useful reference point for how to answer that question well.
What Happened
The site owner in question had bought guest posts and links through Fiverr, a freelance marketplace known for exactly this kind of manipulative link. After disavowing a batch of them, rankings did not come back, prompting the owner to ask Mueller whether the tool actually works. Mueller's answer reframed the situation: the tool does have an effect, but disavowing a handful of links will not sink a site out of search on its own. The site's real problem was never the tool failing - it was that the purchased links created risk to begin with, and disavowing them after the fact does not undo that.
When Disavow Is the Right Call for a Client Site
- A confirmed manual action in Search Console specifically for unnatural links, with Google pointing directly at the backlink profile.
- Documented history of the client - or a previous vendor - buying links at scale through marketplaces or bulk guest posting, requiring a formal clean break.
- An active negative SEO attack: a sudden burst of obviously spammy links from clearly toxic domains in a short window.
When It Is the Wrong Call
- A ranking drop with no manual action and nothing unusual in the link profile - the more likely explanation is content, technical SEO, or a recent algorithm update.
- A request to disavow "just in case" without any evidence the links in question are actually toxic. Google's systems already ignore most low-authority links on their own.
- Using disavow as a way to avoid diagnosing why manipulative links exist in the profile at all - without fixing that source, the same pattern comes back.
Framing This for a Client Who Is Anxious About Rankings
The clearest way to explain this: a link profile built on purchased guest posts and marketplace links makes a ranking drop a matter of when, not if, and disavowing after the fact addresses the symptom, not the cause. That framing usually lands better with a worried client than a purely technical walkthrough of how the tool functions.
For more on building a link profile without manipulative signals, see our guide to link building for marketing and SEO.
A Repeatable Process to Follow
- Check Search Console for a manual action first - without one, disavow is unlikely to fix a current ranking problem.
- Pull the full backlink profile and look for real anomalies: a sudden spike from one domain type, obviously spammy sources, anchor text that was never built naturally.
- Keep the disavow file narrow and evidence-based - specific domains or URLs with proven toxicity, not the entire profile as a precaution.
- Submit through the official tool and set the client's expectations that recrawling takes weeks.
- Address the root cause at the same time - stop any ongoing purchase of questionable links and shift the strategy toward earned links.
Building This Into a Standard Response
Instead of answering each disavow question from scratch, it helps to turn this case into a short standard explanation the whole team can reuse across accounts: what the tool actually does, when it genuinely applies, and why a ranking drop is more often unrelated to links entirely. Having that ready in advance keeps the message consistent no matter which team member handles the client conversation.
Checking for This Pattern Proactively
Teams managing several client portfolios should treat any known history of purchased links - whether from the client's own past decisions or a previous vendor's work - as worth checking proactively rather than only responding after a client raises it. A quick audit of accounts with that history, even ones with currently stable rankings, can surface risk before it turns into an actual drop and an anxious message from the client.
FAQ
Could recommending disavow create a problem instead of solving one? The tool will not penalize a site directly, but disavowing genuinely valuable links by mistake can reduce some of their positive effect - a reason to be selective rather than broad.
How should the timeline be communicated to a client? Google has not published a fixed timeline. Set expectations around weeks, not days, so a client does not expect an immediate ranking change.
Should teams disavow preventively for cautious clients? Generally not - Google does not recommend routine preventive disavowing, and that effort is better spent auditing where questionable links are actually coming from.
What if disavow does not fix the ranking drop? Redirect the investigation toward content, technical issues, or a coincidental algorithm update rather than expanding the disavow file further.
Does this apply the same way regardless of which market the client is in? Yes, the underlying mechanics are global - only the client relationship and communication style change based on the market.
Is it worth writing this up as a standing team resource? Yes - a single, pre-approved explanation that every team member can reuse saves time on future client conversations and keeps the answer consistent no matter who fields the question first.
Bottom Line
Google's disavow tool works exactly as described, but only for a specific, proven toxic-link problem, not as a general fix for a ranking drop. When a client asks, check for a manual action first, look for genuine anomalies in the profile, and be straightforward if the real fix is addressing how the link profile became risky in the first place.
