Linking to or from? I've not seen anything yet, although I've heard news recently of G developments that could greatly devalue the links themselves.
Yes it would I'm sure they would Sorry, I don't want to give out any more details for the moment as I haven't heard enough about it myself, although I can tell you that it will effect all of these systems if it gets worked into the G algorithm... And it would be a fairly major effect I should imagine.
No problems here... ruling serps with assistance of Link Vault... on goog / yahoo and msn... on competitive terms! PM me your site and I'll have a look at it if you want.
How would any search engine identify it's from link-vault ? There is a way to detect if a site is running link-vault. But do search engines want to try to get four or five 404's on every domain name they want to spider ? And we would easily figure that out, and hide. *coop - currently can be detected but you can easily comaflage it into any text/ feed easily so it's up to the page designer to hide it .
Thanks for the offer but no need. Actually, it was something I read on SEW forums that had me wondering. It can only be a matter of time, surely, before server-side link manipulating gets the attention of the big players, no?
It will except it won't affect just Link Vault. It will affect all SEO's as linking, whether you compliment it with LV or the Coop, is a huge part of SEO
The Changes I have heard about will effect nearly all SEO linking strategies, like yfs says... It's easier than you think to tell which sites use link-vault, co-op etc... At least it's pretty easy from an SE point of view.
Another point is that those relying on these methods WILL be hit the hardest. But not because Google catches them but instead because the quality of these links as a whole is not good enough. I know I will probably get some reds for that (I had 4 in the last LV thread) but its the truth. There are some gems of course but anytime you have an automated system, you drop the quality compared to truly "natural" links. This is the area Google is concentrating on as its the future, not picking off individual networks.
Very true. I think the people who will get whacked the hardest are the ones who stopped doing any other sort of link building and/or marketing after they discovered the automated networks. I view automated networks as a compliment/addon/bonus to what I've been doing already - not a replacement. Those who don't share this view, imo, will be the ones screaming all over the forums over the next couple months/years when their sites drop off into never never land.
Google's definition on natural links is getting so narrower that soon all links will be non-natural links. The more and more google focuses on links and links the worse the serps will become. Google bombing so far has been fun stuff (miserable failiture, litiguos bastards) but it will get worse as it gets into results users care about. I'm still interested in how you guys think google can easily find coop /lv without hitting pages that don't use these. I bet that we can find a way to protect a site for each way mentioned.
Not really... The methods Google are working on focus around the location of links within a page source - They aren't targetting "Advertising Networks" so much as "Unnatural linking". Links in copy won't get penalised.
Well, one way I can think of off the top of my head is for Google to join the networks and collate all of the data they collect.
New networks are springing up everyday - I bet they work on devaluing those links using automation vs. any sort of manual filtering or intervention.