Google has spoken about building links, now what?

I was told that SEO is a lot like NASCAR. There is a certain amount of skill and knowledge involved, however, if you have enough money the #1 position is yours. It's hard to compete against someone who has hired a half-dozen content writers, and has a large budget for SEO as well as text link purchases. In my industry (real estate), some of the big players make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Putting $100,000 into a website wouldn't be out of the question for them.

 

Yeah - real estate is a real hard business to succeed in. I hope you have a clear niche where you can personally add value and thus gain links. Because it is pretty obvious that you can't quite compete with the big boys on their turf. But if you find turf that's just too small for the big boys, you may be able to sneak up and get precisely the kind of traffic you need.

 

Lets bear in mind that when you submit to a paid directory you are paying for a review not a link, and Google acknowledges this. I would not worry about this i think its just Google using the scare tactics as a first measure.

 

Well I haven't spent a dime on myself to have me seo my sites and I got the frontpage results I want.....that does not mean I don't want even more though

SEO isn't really not rocket science.......it's just selling it well that works

 

Lets clear up a misconception Google rarely penalizes

Theyre not out to hurt you or damn you to ranking hell. If anything they try to help as best they can considering all the facts....

They filter....

Its written into the algorithms to detect things such a meta tag spam, meta description tag spam, oop, link spamming and so on. Google simply applies a dampening filter and off they go. No time to play silly games with webmasters.

What you want to look for is artifical link building vs natural link building.

You can buy a Yahoo directory link and its known to help your Google rankings.....now you will say that is not natural...but it is.....

What is not natural is buying a Yahoo directory listing for every keyword you are trying to target...

This is what trips a filter and earns the website lowered rankings.

Its reasonable to post in several forums each week and to have a few signature links in those few forums, in fact Google tells us if we want to be authorities on a subject to go work in the related forums..blogs, write articles.

What Google sees as not natural is forum posting spam, blog posting spam, writing 100 articles per day...

This is what trips a filter and earns the website lowered rankings.

See its like any other vice in life,
doing it on occasion is not bad......

doing it so often hair grows on the back of your hands and you become a junkie is !!!

 

That's probably because you know more than the SEO guys the big boys hire!

 

pretty good discussion going on here... im learning a lot! thanks DP memmbers!!!

 

I was honestly hoping we could discuss if reciprocal/exchanged links with relevant sites are going to get devalued or not now.

Has anyone seen a site that has mostly recip links get hammered in the SERPS recently?

 

An anecdotal answer at best — I have a relative (M.I.T. grad) with 40 years in the computer field. Without any explanation, he recently told me that it appears that Google is putting less value on reciprocal links. Just one man's input, but he has been quite reliable in the past.

 

Jim so do you asked him some proof with his websites ? Cause probably he is under effect of Google PR campaign Anyway will be very interesting to hear about this.

 

I think blog posting might be a good backlink because its incontent.

 

Yes, but it will cause mad blog spamming. But it works, something here on DP was Forex related site owner and he got in top 30 for forex keywords doing that.

Funny example (guy want to discuss white hat link building and instead got spammer who want to rank for keyword "jonny" or whatever) Omg
http://links.seo-works.com/2005/12/10/post-your-white-hat-link-building-examples.html

 

I don't think they disqualify bought links alltogether. In fact, it would be pretty difficlut for them to determine what or what hasn't been bought. If a link comes form a very related site of similar value, I think that link would be worth having, but not too many.

 

Well, I've seen sites rank well without having recip links. Does that count?
I don't mess with reciprocal links, and never have, because I feel my site's there for users first. Personally I trust the practical knowledge in SEOBOOK:

http://www.seobook.com/archives/001941.shtml

 

Well, kh7, that does count and it's true. I worked and working with website which gain lots of one-way even trough requests. He have thousands of pages with unique content. But it's nature of it. Cause I can't say that any site can do the same.

But it will be very interesting to hear about reciprocals today. As for example Wall don't provide URL of website with that 1000's reciprocal links. So for now it's just knowledge, but not practical.

You can open google and type adult, porn, pills and casino related keywords and you can see lots of top 5-30 and other sites DO reciprocals and their rankings speaks for itself. They buy links also as well.

As for all that linking scheme Matt Cuts said about that last December (2005). But I can see that people actively buy links during 2006 and it helps them.

 

Hi

I have to point a few things out of your post that are incorrect.

First of all what one sees in the SERPs is not conclusive evidence of what worked to get a website listed there.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread Google does not penalize often. When they do its a ban. What Google does do is FILTER.

Years ago keywords stuffed in the meta tag helped search engines & directories categorize results. Once they found that this also influenced rankings this tactic was filtered from the search engine algorithms.

In addition these older sites accquired links slowly and more often than not while it appeared reciprocal it was not.

Webmaster A liked a site and linked to Webmaster B site.

This was a one way link at the time.

Webmaster B a month or two later saw Webmaster A had linked to him and to return the favor Webmaster B linked back to Webmaster A

Since these links were developed over time the engines picked them up seperately and applied value to each.

Todays reciprocal links usually occur within 24 or less hours and any search engine can see this and filter it out.

Further, as filters are applied it can hurt rankings. However if a site is a hub or authority site, better than anything else published online, and it has set off a filter for example, keyword stuffed meta tags, it can still rank 1 2 or 3 ahead of others sites which have no filter but yet are much less of an authority.

So posting that these methods work is off base. You do not work for Google or any other engine and so you can not accurately say what got a website it's rankings.

What you can do is see the good things the website did / do, and mimic those, and forget the bad things. This will typically help you get to the same level rankings if not higher.

Now, as for my Central Pa. peer Aaron's blog post on recips, he is very correct. Here is an article I wrote on the subject of links two years ago almost.

http://www.seochat.com/c/a/Google-O...Helping-To-Achieve-Front-Page-Google-Results/

Peace

 

Well, your opinion is just opinion as well as mine. And I am not saying that I force someone to do 1000 reciprocal links and it will help them to gain top spot. Simple thing that people want results and want them fast. I agree with you that it not works. I also hit pretty good top 10 position with content and on-site SEO, so don't know why you think that I am linker and nothing more

However we can't discount link building at any case be it reciprocal or n-way or whatever. I see lots of forums spammed completely with viagra and other products. As well as blogs with "Thanks you!" and then 100 links to their site after that message. But today I still do little reciprocals, little link buying, little spamming blogs, article and dir submissions. And I can say it all helps. It all depends what you call link building. And of course I research competitors actions.

Besides of that everyone smart knows about doorways and other shady things. And I personally know people who use them right and get nice results I am not going to cultivate it cause it's not good tactic, but it all depends on goals. I see at as a business.

 

First wanting results fast is what everyone wants however Google could careless what others want.

Next I really do not care if you build links or not...your tactics are yours and they don't effect me one iota.

However to sit and post what works without any proof of such, and to have others think it is correct, is grounds for debate and opposition. Basically you posted some misinformation and I simply pointed this out.

Yes you are right gray & black hat tactics can & do work on occasion.
However 95% of the clients I have worked with always thought long term in building their business and spending $20,000. to $250,000.00 on a website, to have it banned for shady tactics, is just simply poor business acumen and a good waste of ones money.

Peace

 

Also good food for thoughts
http://blog.v7n.com/2006/02/02/inbound-links-and-anchor-text/