links are kING or is content King?

There is no lesser of two evils here. You must have both.

If you have content but no links, then you get no traffic.
If you have links but no content, then no one returns.

There are exceptions to both statements, but in general, you can't have one without the other and ever expect to do well.

You must have both.

 

I like your simple answer.

 

off course content is the king, if you have a good content without any backlink your website is popular among all people around the world example: facebook, you tube ,google, yahoo.
people that enter those web are not from search engine, but directly to the site

 

Content is king and links are queen.

 

I believ the links are more important than content. How many thin websites did you see in the first pages, yet very good content websites are pushed further.

 

links then content

 

I think the focus should be on content first. Good content will assist then with your link building; if you post links in the right places and other users find the content relevant then they will take your link and post it elsewhere for you.

 

OK, once again I said, "great content optimized for keywords that you can dominate." I did not simply say content is king. Once again, "great content optimized for keywords that you can dominate," is king.

Great content optimized for keywords that you can dominate can get visits. Not as many as it would with backlinks obviously, but great content optimized for keywords that you can dominate can get visits. And because the content is great, the few visitors the site gets will likely link back to it.

I've seen this happen many times, so I'm not just stating an opinion. So agree or disagree, this is what I've personally seen.

Now I did NOT say just have great content optimized for keywords that you can dominate, and don't have links. To do so would of course hurt your business profoundly because backlinks are pretty much just as important as great content optimized for keywords that you can dominate. So I'm just answering the question, weighing the lesser of two evils here.

And yes you can weigh the less of two evils here, as you should be able to do with everything in life. It is a necessity to survival. If you are faced with a situation where you have to choose between two things, you can't say you can't choose. So great content optimized for keywords that you can dominate is my choice. However fundamentally, you should never do without both.

 

I think it depends on your competition. I find that - for sites targetting hte local market - I can usually get them to the top of the serps or pretty near with carefully written content and code and just a few links; if however the competitors are pr4 with LOTS of links then content alone is unlikely to compete.

 

You don't have to choose.

The bottom line is that you *must* have both, or you will fail. If you have to choose between the two, you've already lost.

Period.

 

Apples and oranges — both are great to eat.

Content and links — both are important for a good website, but they serve entirely different purposes.
• Content is what your site is all about.
• Links tell surfers where your site is. Both are vitally important. Who cares which is "king"? You ignore either at your own peril.

 

Is like TV and the cable connected to it

You have a HUGE TV (content) but no cable connected (links) - you see nothing
You have a great cable with lots of channels (links) but no or shitty TV (content) connected to it - you see nothing

If there's a weird question of "what would you choose - poor content or poor links" i'd choose "poor content" though .. because you can see at least something on a shitty TV, but you can't see anything without a cable

 

( Content + Links ) = You can't determine which one is more important !

 

We're having lots of fun with this aren't we? Awesome, well IF, I said IF, you had to choose, I would choose great content optimized for keywords that you can dominate, as king. Chances are its not a dire situation where you would have to choose, so I would do both.

It's a simple playful question, so let's just weigh the scales and pick a king. Everyone knows both are extremely important to do. But if I knew I was going to be disconnected from the internet for a week for some drastic reason, and I only have 30 minutes to work on my site, I would choose to use that 30 minutes making great content optimized for researched keywords that I can dominate.

 

It's common sense, I think it's the answer.

 

LOL, if I only had 30 minutes to work on a site, I'd choose links, because I can get 5-10 links on quality relevant sites with high PR, but it would take me at least an hour to come up with really good, high quality content.

If you can come up with quality content fast and I can come up with quality links fast, maybe you and I should go bowling.

 

Hehe, you've got that backwards, but we understand what you meant.

 

both need but i think links are become more than consent

 

Content first, linking back to nothing is useless.

Good content can get links without you even having to do the link part.

 

You can't have one without the other.

That's a bit misleading. Unless you already have good traffic, it is very doubtful that you will ever get any backlinks without doing the work.