I was wondering on how really important is relevancy to google, for example what if you have 4 links on a pr1 non relevant websites and 1 pr link on highly relevant and related website... If there is someone with more experience than me, can you please let us know of your experiences... Of course i want to optimize for relevant keywords (i did a mistake before trying to optimize for non-relevant keywords) =\ But, do i have to have links on relevant websites to gain good serps? I personally think that it is better to have 1 link on a PR 2 non relevant website than 1 link on a highly relevant PR 1 website... Just the way that i am thinking now (and i am not talking about the users clicking here, just the links helping in google serps)
From my experience I would say the opposite, anyone can generate/pay for links however Google places more trust on sites that are relevant to the keywords that you are trying to rank for. If you were me, I'd choose the lower PR related site (espesically if older and established)
But also (especially for lower level sites) people can trade links (link exchanges) and can also buy links easily from those sites as well (hmm i am not sure really sure if this topic belongs here or in seo, it is kinda specific to google... mods... help me =\ if not appropriate please move it to the correct section), however i think the power of the links also depends on how many links per page or per site you have and how many of other links are there, so its not the same when you are posting (or buying a link) to a web directory or a site in your niche since there are many more links in a directory... Thank you for your input, i will certainly keep it in mind and try to stick to relevant sites and yes i agree that relevancy is important especially for having the users clicking on your link, however hmm not sure about google and while i am sure that it does count the number of the keywords in the site and in teh post, am not sure how much importance it gives to these ratios compared to pr... If the other thing is the case, i could be creating a website with a lot of content (lets say a blog) that has a lot of repetitive keywords and link to my site... wonder how would this be ranked... i should do an experiment i guess... is tehre anyone with a lot of experience about seo who could explain me more about this and is non-relevant link building a complete waste of time when trying to rank good on google?
It's easier to rank if all your links are "themed"--ie., from same category as your target site. However, it's very costly or time-intensive. The alternative is VOLUME links from unrelated sites.
IMHO, it's always much better to get a backlink from relevant theme website than irrelevant ones.. Quality of the linking sites plays a huge part as well, so the best link your site could ever have is from high quality relevant site
Yes, it seems easier if you start building the links not relying much on relevancy of your sites, however, if you build relevancy in a specific niche i know it would be much better... I wonder if someone did some experiment with this and what are the results and if someone has two things in comparison on how would you rank for posting on a same PR website with approximate same number of outlinks... If there is such an experiment somewhere, please let me know... For me i think that my niche is very saturated and i would like to get links from relevancy sites, however most of them that i can get are nofollow, and if i manage to get a dofollow it is usually much bigger effort than non related sites... so i was wondering, if the effort is worth it actually (should i keep on getting related links eventho they are much harder to get), or i should just go and get links from different sites... What would you do?
it can be important, BUT I don't think it's THAT important. What is important is finding out what your competition is doing and then duplicate that. If all their links are relevant then you might want to do the same, but chances are they are not going to be the same.