I was wondering if anyone had any idea about how beneficial it is to get mutliple backlinks from the same site... For instance, if I get 40 backlinks from one site, is is worth 40 backlinks, or do they only put weight on one of those links... This has had me wondering for a while. It would be great if anyone had some anwsers.. Cheers SEbasic
I think they loose value the more you add. But I don't think anyone really knows how much value except the search engines.
Multiple links from the same page won't work. I think it is pretty clear that Google doesn't evaluate duplicate links from a single page. But I'm not convinced that multiple links from the same domain lose value. For instance one of the main reasons that your home page will almost always have a higher PR than any other page on your site is because every page on the site is linked to the home page but not the reverse.This is the same explanation for why site maps have high PR ratings. These links are all from the same domain. Schlottke and other continue to talk about the value of links from content or thematically related pages. Can anybody show me any real evidence of that? The McDar page seems to be stalled a bit right now. But we pushed that fairly competitive search term page into the top 20 or 30 with links from only 4 different domains and absolutely none of them from relevant or content related pages. Are you Guys suggeting we would be top ten if we had used 100 different domains and links only from pages about sleeping bags? It would be wonderful to have the resources available to test that. But I frankly have my doubts.
Just a guess here but... 2 links from the same domain has a greater effect than 1 link from the same domain. 1 link from 2 domains has a greater effect than 2 links from the same domain.
Well one of the thing we should decide if we are going to continue to speculate without a shred of evidence is what "link effect" are we talking about? Are we talking the value added to PR or are we talking about the relevancy value. Nobody know for sure how Google judges the relevancy of a link towards deciding where to place the recipient page in the SERPs. I personally think the judgement is done almost entirely on the anchor text, or alt tag in the case of an image links. I see no evidence for value depending on the theme or topic of the page the link is from. If we are talking about a backlink's contribution to a page's PR then I don't think Google possibly cares about, or adjusts for, the source of the link. PR is mathematical and all PR is equal in my opinion. How could we have good PR and bad PR. If Google really gets pissed of with a page they remove all the PR. So if a linking page has a PR value and links to you, I believe you get all the PR it has to pass. Remember also that links are looked at on a page by page basis. PR is not attributed to a site or nor is transfered from a site. It is a page to page transfer and calculation. So I doubt like hell that the domain or IP that the pages are from has any effect on the PR that is transfered.
I basically have the option to get a link from every page of a particular site, where the content is on topic. I was basically just wondering whether it was worth my while doing the work envolved in getting that, or whether it would be better to spend my time chasing links from elsewhere... I would probabally have to spen about an hour a day working to be able to keep the links sustained on the site (which has about 150/160 pages of on-topic content). I could spend that time going elsewhere and getting links from other sites...
I agree with compar completely. multiple links on the same page: useless. multiple links on the same domain: great.
If that is true then you are doing something wrong. There has to be some way to automate it. I use server side includes (SSI) to maintain all of my 'run of site' links. But there are several other ways to do it.
I have friend who owns free web hosting with 211,630 domain names. By the agreement he can place links on every page of every site of this hosting and it's about 1,000,000 pages for 211,630 uniq domains. All of 211,630 sites have uniq content.
You forgot to add "for the same page". If I have multiple links on the same page for different pages they are not useless. Am I wrong?
Are they actually unique domains? Or are they sub-domains? Like yoursite.digitalpoint.com for example?
Being a Nigritude competitor, I have a number of footer links on peoples websites. One thing I have noticed is when I do a site:domain.com nigritude search, it only shows one of x results, then shows the "repeat this search with omitted results included..." In other words, where there is the same footer etc for every page, Google is able to see that it is duplicate. Signatures can be the same issue, as the same signature is used in every post, therefore Google can see it is the same. There is probably less of an issue if there is distinct text on either side of the signiture within say a 135 character limit that Google uses for its snippet. I have no proof of whether Google uses this filter to reduce the PR or text link value of such links. It would be an interesting experiment - value of one index page link compared to multiple from footer on a site.
I have never seen an issue of duplicated content for backlinks. I know quite a few people have said that there is indeed an upper limit on anchor text, but we have thousands of links identical and have not seen this limit as yet.
SEbasic i think, placed links on the different pages of same domain have worth. u can do experiment for it. truth, pr must be makes by amount links from different domains. otherwise, pr'll be grow up by left method, that isnt good for google.
This thread is just over 4 years old! Please look at the date before responding to threads that have long since idled...