Are .EDU Links and .GOV Links a Waste of Money?

Discussion in 'Link Development' started by tdd1984, May 7, 2008.

  1. #1
    tdd1984, May 7, 2008 IP
  2. alemcherry

    alemcherry Guest

    Best Answers:
    0
    #2
    Matt Cutts mentioned long back that they dont give importance to any tlds. A .gov is no better than a .com, if both of them have same kind of page rank and importance. Those .gov sites that sell links are probably worth nothing!
     
    alemcherry, May 7, 2008 IP
  3. tdd1984

    tdd1984 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,357
    Likes Received:
    42
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #3
    Exactly!

    The domain extension has nothing to do with it, you can get .com links that will blow the .edu out of this world.
     
    tdd1984, May 7, 2008 IP
  4. microtekblue

    microtekblue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    464
    Likes Received:
    14
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #4
    Don't listen to Matt Cutts cuz he will never tell you how to rank on Google.

    .Gov and .Edu links are Authority links..so they will Definitely help you rank better.

    The key is finding them that offer no follow. Also you must keep them pointing to you for atleast 3 months + before you can expect to see their significance.

    IMO Matt Cutts is a good guy, but to rely on his SEO, I would have to think twice!
     
    microtekblue, May 8, 2008 IP
  5. Nestrer

    Nestrer Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,663
    Likes Received:
    103
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    135
    #5
    Matt Cutts has no reason to give us false info.
     
    Nestrer, May 8, 2008 IP
  6. microtekblue

    microtekblue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    464
    Likes Received:
    14
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #6
    Do you really thingk Matt Cutts is going to give you the exact details on how to rank for search engine rankings?

    Ok buddy.
     
    microtekblue, May 8, 2008 IP
  7. mjewel

    mjewel Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,693
    Likes Received:
    514
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #7
    .gov and .edu's tend to be authority sites, so any quality link on an authority site is good - but the vast majority these edu & gov links are on orphan or student pages or forum pages which will carry very little or no weight and are probably a waste of money.
     
    mjewel, May 8, 2008 IP
  8. tsenseless

    tsenseless Active Member

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    15
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #8
    I used to think .edu and .gov were the shit.. Until recently I beat out a .gov site for one of my main serps.. Something I thought I wouldn't be able to do.. Now I'd have to agree with the above info and Matt Cutts, and say that .edu and .gov do not matter anymore than anything else.

    You can see if you do a google search for "congress blog" I'm the one above loc.gov
     
    tsenseless, May 8, 2008 IP
  9. microtekblue

    microtekblue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    464
    Likes Received:
    14
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #9
    Trust me when I tell you that this reason is cuz ur in niche what doesnt have any authority for that keyword. Meaning your keyword is worth nothing, and is hardly searched, and is not relevant to any content. That makes your Authority concept of the .gov next to nill.

    Try searching for Ontario Highway Traffic Act

    #2 is www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com

    Now there is Authority. Learn from that.

    If this site still cant beat the gov site...then think why?

    I can tell you for sure its not about rankings. Its because of Authority. This site will NEVER beat that site because in that niche the .gov site has the most Authority.
     
    microtekblue, May 8, 2008 IP
  10. tsenseless

    tsenseless Active Member

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    15
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #10
    So, I guess content really is king then? With my intent for the blog originally it didn't matter about traffic amount (just PR for selling backlinks).. But seeing how the world is going now, I recently started trying to build real traffic to it.
     
    tsenseless, May 8, 2008 IP
  11. mjewel

    mjewel Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,693
    Likes Received:
    514
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #11
    It's hard to draw conclusions on non-competitive keywords. It appears that only 2 people a day search for it on google.

    http://tools.seobook.com/keyword-tools/seobook/index.php
     
    mjewel, May 8, 2008 IP
  12. Nestrer

    Nestrer Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,663
    Likes Received:
    103
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    135
    #12
    Of course, I didn't think he will help us with our Google rankings :)
     
    Nestrer, May 8, 2008 IP
  13. microtekblue

    microtekblue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    464
    Likes Received:
    14
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #13
    Content has always been King!
     
    microtekblue, May 8, 2008 IP
  14. PS_of_Carramba.net

    PS_of_Carramba.net Peon

    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #14
    Oh c'mon! He has all the reasons. He has no reasons to give you true info - He's Google representative, aims for SERP relevancy, and I would be surprised if he gave us tips how to cheat on Google and manipulate their natural SERPs. Google for sure pays him good money and these money are paid to make SERPs as natural as possible.

    Saying this metaphorically - You don't expect pirates to stick on their treasure maps on every corner ;)

    As for .EDU and .GOV links they could be more valuable than .COM ones, they're for sure more valuable in terms of PR. But I would rather go for related content links if we're talking about difficult-to-obtain links and... loads of crappy links. The thing is that in my opinion even in 2008 loads (1k, 10k) of cheesy links are more valuable than few quality links.

    Regards,

    PS
     
    PS_of_Carramba.net, May 8, 2008 IP
  15. Qryztufre

    Qryztufre Prominent Member

    Messages:
    6,071
    Likes Received:
    491
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    300
    #15
    For the most part, linking up to articles is a waste of time unless done with some tact and taste. It would do more for the site linked too if a brief summery of the article was given in the post and proper linking followed (like with anchor text).

    I'm on dialup, so I don't generally bother clicking into links without something a bit more substantial then "oh oh I wrote sumting!" though even when I was on highspeed I generally didn't follow links unless I had a reason, and as it stands, this is simply no reason.

    My opinion is even supported by the rules here at DP:
    As posting some content with the link helps the link itself by generating more traffic to click through it, and offers up some content for the forum you are posting it on (in this case DP). It will also help promote the discussion within the thread helping it to stay on top (which can in turn generate addition traffic and site recognition).

    *shrug*
     
    Qryztufre, May 8, 2008 IP
  16. Breakaway11

    Breakaway11 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    882
    Likes Received:
    27
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    120
    #16
    Why spend money for backlinks when there's tons of free ways to be doing your link building.
     
    Breakaway11, May 8, 2008 IP
  17. tdd1984

    tdd1984 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,357
    Likes Received:
    42
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    150
    #17
    Yea, but either way if your busy you still have to pay someone to take care of content or consulting fees.

    For example a lot of our clients are CEO's and etc they always have to hire someone to expand different areas rather its investing into links or hiring a content writer that can acquire them links naturally through content.
     
    tdd1984, May 8, 2008 IP