Like I say - it's not the networks they are concentrating on... It's the placement of the links and what that means in terms of it's [edit] reasoning for being there.
So much for natural linking, this means my link list of the uber-cool sites on the internet that I recomend to everyone will be treated as junk. What about an image galery with links to quality image websites, opps no text, down the spam drain. Then they can get the sites that the coop/lv links to, not the ones That run it, Time to point all your weight vaultage to your competition. Remember no matter what google do, the people trying to cheat the system (from G's point of view) will adapt and go on, now the inocent bystanders will be hit, and they won't know what hit them. At the end its all about how good google's serps are.
I don't think that should be affected... It's all to do with the Latent Symantic Indexing stuff along with a couple of bits of technology that I've had mentioned to me. Some stuff will be affected for sure, but I imagine G will be dealing with this...
I have never said (or at least I didn't mean to if I implied it) that Google will actually penalize these sites. I just think it will follow the path of sitewides where there isn't as much value. So signing up your competition will still benefit them, just not nearly as much as it used to.
I was refering to the first post on the tread, getting penalized for being on the system. SEbasic: I also think it shoudn't be afected, I'm just providing examples here. I saw everyone agree on all this and I had to jump in to provide an arternate point of view. It makes discussions more interesting and educational. If I was Google I would be concentrating all my efforts on detecting who's not gamming their system isntead on detecting the ones that are. More easy to do from my point of view.
Well, not really because you have to be a member of the networks in the first place before your ad will show. This is all pure speculation of course. I'm merely guessing that it won't be too long before sites which artificially inflate their links using a network will get hit.
Don't you think the links gained through such networks will just be devalued? Personally, I think this has already started in Google.
I believe it is only a matter of time, if it isn't happening already. By 'speculation' I mean there aren't any hard stats or forum-wide reports of sites dropping out the serps.
I agree entirely. If you are using LV or any other automated system, don't slow your efforts in the other areas of link building. This is very important. Some other general tips people can overlook when using something like LV: * use a wide variety of anchor text * direct links to a variety of pages, not just homepage * update page content if you are pointing a bundle of new links at it * gradually add links, don't point too many all at once
I cannot see Google penalising sites that get links TO their site via LinkVault. If so, it would be a lot of fun pointing thousands of links at your opposition and watch them tank! And Google state in the guidelines that there is virtually nothing anybody else can do to get your site penalised. So it will come back to the same old story - relevant links have value - irrelevant links have little or no value. And if you manage Link Vault properly and only add very few links each day, you are more likely to get related links than throwing thousands at a time - in my experience then you get a bunch of garbage links, so you waste your vaultage. Slowly, slowly catchey monkey!! I believe Google already have something in their algo that catches massive links coming in to a site all of a sudden. Its common sense that thats a red flag for something unnatural going on.
I don't see any evidence at the moment. As has been said here already, the relevance of the link is important (as well as page placement).. so irrelevant LinkVault IBLs that sit in a footer aren't likely worth much. However, throw enough out there and a few will be valued. I have a 5-month old site that is basically powered on LinkVault and it is doing very well; recently un-boxed for 2-word money phrases.
I haven't used link vault for a while but promote all my sites on the bottom of my pages, every page on every site. Most of them are penalized now and I am assuming this is the reason why. Something to think about, no proof that this is the cause.
agree with candysmith slowly does it - and with LV very well. I slightly disagree with the term "relevance" as I think it is used / understod wrongly. Relevancy is very subjective - saturation is not. I have "cleaned up" and for example thrown out any link to seo / webdesign / marketing bar one each on all of my and my clients sites - as how many seo's, webdesigners etc does a site need? I happily agree that if there are 10 links with the same anchor only one should count..... (it is either endorsed for the phrase or not - 110% don't exist in the real world) Expat
I'm not going to go into detail either, mostly because my views are based on a number of small and as yet not conclusive trends that I see in where Google has been going recently, but I agree with SEbasic. I think the Coop has had a nice run which is about to end and I suspect that what will end it will hit LinkVault even harder precisely because the LV links are permanent. Opinion only, not fact, although in my opinion not entirely unfounded either. I was never part of Link Vault to begin with and I have recently removed the Coop from my sites. Note: I'm not advising anyone else to make the same decision, nor do I fault anyone from dismissing my opinion here as total delusion or hysteria -- I'm just saying this is my take on things. YMMV.
It's not a question of "penalizing" per se. It's more a matter of discounting so the links have no PR value, much as Google does with link buying.
I'm not knocking Link Vault nor the Co-op, however my own thinking is along the lines that at some stage, whether it be sooner or later, the SE algos are going to ignore co-operative networks and any websites using them to shore up their organic rankings are going to get hit hard. Of course, the gravy is still on the plate and thus far there doesn't seem to be significant impact from using the networks so if you can make it work for you, great. Like Minstrel, it's my own personal opinion but I do feel the writing is on the wall.