Coop Ad Network Woes

I want to start a new thread about the new link network. First off, I think there is a lot of potential here, however I think some changes need to be made.

The biggest for me is the weighing system. From what I understand the most important factor is number of links. I have had a discussion with a few people about link value on this forum and was surprised to find they were more interested in abundance than quality. DigitalPoint already has the ability to pull PR from a page, why not factor it in???

Right now all my links are PR5's and PR6's which are exponentially more valuable than 500 PR0's let's say.

On another note, with the local rank system Google is already showing signs of using, I am under the impression tons of links from tons of different types of sites is not what they’re looking for.

To make this network really pay off I suggest factoring in PageRank and matching pages within 1-2 points of each other. I also suggest general categories to pick from.

I think the network focuses too much on impressions. If this network's priority is to build link popularity and not necessarily generate clicks, tweaks need to be made.

 

The power of the network is the positive affect it should have on SERP placement.

If you are looking to build PR, there are lots of tools and resources already available to do it and the ad-network is not for you.

The affect the coop ad network will have on SERPs is unproven as it is too new ... but, with enough members in the network, it should be a *very* big boost to SERPs.

I have been working on a different twist for an ad management system that gives a lot more control over your ads. In many ways I think Shawn's tool is more powerful. But, my approach will have some other nice features that come with total control. In the end, I think there is no single tool you should be using.

But, to not get in on the coop ad network I think is a big mistake to quickly and easily increase the number of sites from which you obtain backlinks --- this is a significant factor in many things including, I believe (not proven, but I have many sites where it appears to be the case) getting out of the "sandbox".

Anyway - that is my $.02. I don't know shawn personally and haven't been at DP long, so its not like I have any bias for him or the tools. I just think the ad network is a stroke of genius. And the DP community and shawn's reputation will help it get to critical mass which is probably the hardest part of getting this to work.

 

It appears to me that you want this to be a PR building campaign/program, and it's not.

From what I have read and understand PR is factored into the weighing system, it's just not the most important factor. It shouldn't be either - PR doesn't get you thing besides a longer green bar. The intent of the program is better placement in the serps. Better placement in the serps is realized, at least in part, by the number (not necessarily Quality/PR) of properly formatted anchortext links pointing at your site. PR in and of itself doesn't have any effect on your placement in the serps.

I don’t agree with that. If you have 500 PR5 or PR6 pages I would, but if you're saying that 10 anchortext links from 10 pages on one site are more valuable 500 PR0 anchortext links on 50 different sites I'll disagree. I would take the 500 links on 50 site any day over 10 PR6 links on a single site. Placement in the serps doesn't have anything to do with PR.

Where did you get that impression? As far as I know Google loves " tons of links from tons of different types of sites". Is there evidence that shows this not to be the case?

PR is factored in already If I understand some Shawn's other posts correctly. PR matching…don't like that idea at all. I think by doing that you're entering a grey area in relation to buying/selling PR (even though no one's buying or selling). I just think building any type of program like this primarily around PR brings an element of "risk" into the equation that's complete unnecessary.

Categories, or "themes" would be a nice feature.

I've run into people (I've been promoting the network a lot) saying some of the same things - should do this, should do that, don't like this, can't stand that. I usually just let them know that if they sign up and don't like it I will personally refund all the money they paid to participate in the network

It's free links…I don't get what there is to "complain" about.

 

Has everyone gone crazy???

PageRank is Google's name for the weight of any givin page. Most of the major engines use similar methods to weigh a pages value. To say it is not important is INSANE. I am baffled here. I am not talking about the green bar here. I am talking about inbounds from well linked pages as opposed to inbounds from crap content pages.

Google does NOT want TONS of links from TONS of different sites. There are enough sites out there with high PR and SERP with only a couple hundred back links! If Google wanted tons of back links software like Arelias and Zeus would still work. The fact is they don't

10 PR8 pages from different sites weigh MUCH MUCH MUCH more than 500 PR0 pages from different sites. This is a fact. read up on PR if you don't believe me.

http://www.ozzu.com/ftopic23775.html
http://www.iprcom.com/papers/pagerank/

Go to linkadage.com and look how much high PR inbound links are selling for. The difference between a PR6 and a PR7 is in the HUNDREDS. If PR wasn’t important, sites like this would be out of business.

I think Shawn's idea is great; I am even part of the network. However, I think the methodology is a bit dated. QUANTITY IS NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN QUALITY!!!!

If Google spiders my site with your link, you will have an automatic PR6 pointed at you. If this isn't valuable then why do I consistently sell links like this for hundreds of dollars every month??? This is a freebie to any site I link to, and I would like to know I have the same deal. However, the way the system is currently set-up, anyone with a gazillion crappy content pages can come in and get a ton of back links.

 

...however...

should the site with a gazillion pages have an effective internal linking structure that could be a gazillion pr 4+ pages. I'm pretty sure from the sites i submitted the algorithm uses pr as a multiplyer of rank - if you had 10,000 pages on a pr 1 site you would not be doing half as well as if you had 10,000 pages with a pr 8 front page.

It is true that you need a combination of pr and links - for instance, a website with a gazillion pages will not get more than a few hundred indexed if they don't have 'nuff pr. I wouldn't be surprised if the rank was also based on how many pages you have indexed in google, rather than the number of pages the script is called from. Thing is, as many people on these forums have noticed with signature links on low-pr posts, a large number of links - high or low value - with the right anchor text can work wonders for your serps.
Again, witness the 50 links a day offer someone is running elsewhere on the forum, and the interest it has caused.

If you're unhappy about 'giving away' your pr then fair enough, pull your links. But the point is it's a cooperative - which is all about sharing anyway.

 

Long, long ago

IMO PR is a visual measurement of the # of links pointing to your site, or the number links that are pointing at a site that's pointing at yours (passing PR). I think that's all it is - I don't think PR is factored into placement in the serps at all. Not one single bit.

I think that's 100% wrong.

How competitive are the keywords? More importantly, where do these sites rank for those keywords in the allinanchor search? There are plenty of sites with low PR that have great serp placement too...how would you explain that? A lot of low PR sites even out perform higher PR sites.

Still don't think it's "fact". If the 500 PR pages have any links pointing at them (ie - are they indexed and do they get crawled?) at all I would still take 500 PR0 pages with proper anchortext, all other factors being (IP spread, theme of site, etc, etc) equal.

Hey, we all buy water when it's free out of the sink - I can't explain why people spend their money on the things they do.

Glad you're part of it, I think it could do wonders for your serp placement over the long haul. I think the methodology is smart - slightly ahead of it's time smart. I still take quantity.

See water comment above

I will welcome the person with a gazillion crappy content pages with open arms

Overall I just don't think PR is all that important. I base that opinion on what I've seen personally - I could be wrong.

 

If you were Google would you care more about tons of inboud links from various sites that have nothing to do with yours (hence my categories idea), or would you want fewer targeted links on sites with reputation?

How does inbound links from a site that has (A) "0 credibilty" and (B) "nothing to do with you" tell the SE's you are an authority?

Anyone can get a link on Joe's Golf Site. However, getting one from Titleist is another story. Why would these two sites care about sharing links?

 

Perfect example. What do you want for $70/month - 1 PR8 link or 50 low to no PR per links per day (1,500/month)?

50 a day for me.

 

There could be more to the coop, such as categories, in fact a number of other features really.

But at the core of it, it's weighted by site size, combined with PR (the weighting does have a cap though, so as not to hand out major advantage to bigger players.)

In simple terms, if a large player doesn't just plonk the ad on a single page, rather, uses their size for distributed exposure (ie ads appearing on all 100,000+ pages), then people are winning. It takes time and consistency.

At the end of the day, you're saving time and money, and adding to your link base. In fact, it's the perfect compliment to an established link campaign.

Well, that's how I see it anyhow - and by all rights, it should pay off. Only time will tell

 

Hey Shawn,
Where are you using it on your site/s ?