How do you prefer to be charged for link building?

I'm running a little market research here.

How do you prefer to be charged for link building?

1. On a per hour basis?
2. By link Google PR?
3. By link relevancy?
4. A percentage of link cost in case it's a paid link?
5. Other?

All comments are welcome, I'm very interested in your opinion.

Thanks!

 

Per link that actually does something.

If the link supplier's resources don't do anything... was there any real value?

 

For results. If the campaign increases my sites PR or keyword ranking.

 

For results would be the best option.
However many SEO companies won't offer it.

 

Well some of them go for PR and subject wise and they do it on monthly basis. for example:

One month charges for 10 PR4 links $blah blah
One month charges for 20 PR3 links $blah blah

What do you say?

 

this is criteria for me

 

Totally agree, there's no point in buying links just for the sake of it, links must boost your rankings or provide direct traffic.

It's hard for SEO companies to offer "results", given then instability of search engines algorithms.

Relevancy is a key factor, while PR can be a bit tricky, higher PR doesn't always mean higher relevancy or a sure boost in rankings.

And what about links that provide direct traffic?

 

Not really it merely requires a different approach.

 

When I was an amateur, I was paid 10 dollars for link building, per hour.

 

I agree. However paying for no results (or poor results) means that I'm wasting money and that someone is not doing his job.

 

I came to that conclusion 2 years ago. I "usually" paid $5000-$10000 per domain for link development from PPI directories and industry journals [and some blogs]

But the simple fact is that once the transaction is completed the proprietor of the resource completely ignores you... and that is the problem... I didn't "just buy a link" I purchased "support for my website" and the moment there is no more support the service value is lost.

I instead started re-investing my $5000-$10000 in my own resources... and when one of those resources don't work I replace it, then fix it, then include it back in the mix.

 

I see the offers all the time. $1.50 per link, blah blah blah. To get quality links, it takes time to research (find them and determine if they are worthy) and negotiate with the website owner. In many cases link requests are flat out refused or the website owner simply never responds. I don't think anyone can do this for $1.50 per link and generate any reasonable number of quality links.

Most clients of SEO companies pay a separate bill for hourly services and one for their link building budget. Link research, negotiations, etc., is billed out of the hourly budget. If the link is purchased, the funds come out of the link budget.

 

I have know of some people offering "per backlink" charge. The higher the PR, the higher the pay.

 

Per link standing my requirements!

 

So how much would you pay for someone to get you links from PR3, PR4, PR5, etc. pages?

 

PR is overated imho. Relevancy is much more important. For example, there is little point getting a link from a high PR site about fly fishing if your site is about fashion.

If you can get both relevancy and high PR at the sametime, that is a bonus.