Google has spoken about building links, now what?

Speaking of signatures, where the heck are yours SEOLinker? That's wasted opportunity! There are those in the forum who sell signature space. Now THAT'S serp manipulation at it's finest!

 

Well, as you can see I am not in money/promo here, hehe. But in future probably will have some signature

 

Right ----

I think though, this is a diversionary tactic so you can abscond with my popcorn.

 

They look at whether a link is 'natural'. That means (IMO) that they will look at your niche and compare your link-pattern to those of related sites. This DOES not mean your link pattern should be the exact same as your competitors, it should be better.

I feel links can still be bought and have a positive effect on rankings, but at least the following need to be taken into account:
- the site selling the links should not have ONLY sold links there (sold links should be such a small percentage that google would have to be clairvoyant to find the sold links)
- the site selling the links should not have the text 'sponsored links' near that link you bought.
- the site selling the links should have a good relation to your niche. Personally I'd prefer (not that I buy links at all) links on topical inner pages (they do have to be indexed in google) that get found in google for searches related to your site.

Hope that helps.

 

I'm going to put this to rest I hope.


When you look at Google what do you see???

Every search result page has at least 10 and as many as 21 links.

They sell links themselves, and they place the results of those link sales, on pages of links they give away freely.

It's okay for them but not okay for others??

Remember to tell Google to practice what they preach.

(PS buying links to get better SERPs rankings isnt a good thing other than as explained by kh7 above)

But anyone should be able to buy and sell links freely to push traffic.....

Who the hell knows if Brin & Page are gonna flip and steal all the money and bankrupt the company one day.....

then where would people get traffic?????

 

My seo instructor said that Google may try to start discounting links in sigs soon.

 

I would tell your seo instructor that Google probably only gives value to each link in a signature file just once no matter how many posts there are ....even though Google may show they have indexed it more than once it is actually a thread they have indexed and the sigs would be filtered after the first counted link.

Forums are nothing new to Google and I am sure that the thought occurs to them that forum signatures needed to be dealt with in a reasonable matter and a filter was written into the algorithm.

The engineers are computer science majors.

 

I'm in trouble. Got quite a few paid links, especially from directories. I guess directories would fall under the points kh7 made? BTW, Sem-Advance, interested in your PM, just haven't responded yet!

 

i think google is far from being a perfect search engine and "ranking manipulators" (seo) like us will still enjoy linking and getting links for many many years to come.

 

paid links + nofollow = okey . If you have nofollow attribute on your links you are safe from google.

 

I wonder hoe google can tell if its "natural" or bought

 

Your not in trouble. Your not going to get penalized for buying links. UNDERSTAND THIS: Google "supposedly" penalizes site who SELL links not the other way around. Any body could maliciously hurt others rankings if this were the case.

Buying links still works great IMO.

Buying links from directories, yea, that might not be a good place however to buy them from. Go after sites that are RELEVANT to your site.

Diversify your link building techniques for an optimal outcome, this is still the best strategy to date by far.

 

Okay let me go put nofollow on all my purchased links so I can assure that I am following there best practices, and then watch as all of my rankings dissapear b/c I will have no link popularity from any of those sites.

Sorry but nofollow is just ridiculous.

 

Not going to share too many secrets here but Im feeling nice:

Natural links:

- links within content
- non sitewide links
- a few links (1-3) on interior pages
- links with relevant content around them

Non natural:
- 5+ links stacked on top of each other, no content in between
- links placed on High PR pages on unrelated content
- using the exact same anchor text on most or all of your links
- links placed right under the words advertising, sponsored etc. etc.

You get the idea...

 

I'm not clear on this. I am referring to link I purchased FROM directories that point to my site. Not clear on the 'no follow' command, either!

 

Do you have any supporting evidence for this? Not that I don't believe you, actually I do believe you, but want to read further on it.

 

nofollow = absolutely no way that link will increase your ranking in the search engines.

 

I agree that google is a tad bit hypocritical on this. But links on search results don't count: they don't add to pagerank. Nor do adsense or YPN ads count as bought links (so of course we should just all become adsense customers): they are both javascript and therefore won't be followed.

I also think that buying links can't really hurt you. But if you buy links just for pagerank, you are going against what google wants. And if buying links is your only link-building strategy, you are not in good shape, IMO.

 

I'm new to SEO so maybe i'm just naive. But i believe Google's method of ranking search results is intended to give those that don't have gobs of money to spend on SEO, thus diverting the competition away from what you buy towards what you do. Rewarding relevant content vs. people who just buy their rank makes sense to me.

I also understand that Google has their own cash-cow with AdWords. If people can buy links to improve their ranking they won't need AdWords... if they can't do that, eventually their only hope to get a top result is AdWords.

and i have now typed myself into a circle, because it has come back to rewarding those who have gobs of money to spend on SEO, but instead they give their money directly to Google...

 

You've actually explained the issue perfectly, IMO.
The thing is that google wants to differentiate between the serps where it should be merit that gets you to the top and advertisements where it is clearly money that gets you to the top.

The serps is where every link is a vote and there should be no bought votes. This is understandable, except, why should we play by google's rules?
I just summarized everything from this thread here:
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/internet/link-buying.html