I see people willing to pay big money for a single, high PR link to their Web site (PR7+). What do you see as the major benefit? Do you think it's worth it to spend a lot of money on one high PR link, or better to spread the money around on a lot of lower PR links or other promotion?
It would be interesting to see some hard evidence of what is better for your SERPs. I am not sure but a higher PR page might lead your site to be indexed more often perhaps. I would rather have more links than pay big money for a single link unless there was a lot of traffic upside also.
your PR is gonna increase with that single PR7+ link but it is better to have more quality PR links (PR4 ot PR6) then just a single high PR link.
I think buying links on high PR pages is a waste of money, and I have yet to see any concrete evidence that it helps. Particularly when with a little hard work you can get high PR links for free.
In the absence of other links from a range of sites (different C blocks) and giving an appearance of natural linking patterns you may just get PR benefit from the bought link but not a SERPs benefit. However, it can be useful if you're in the PR selling business. When your PR goes up you can charge more for the same ads. Yup, that's about what PR has been reduced to today
Here's a rough guide to what each PR link would give you based on around 20-40 links on the page passing the PR 1 PR10 link - PR8 1 PR9 link - PR7 1 PR8 link - PR6 1 PR7 link - PR5 1 PR6 link - PR4 1 PR5 link - PR3 1 PR4 link - PR2 1 PR3 link - PR1 It's about 3 or 4 links of the PR below the PR you want to obtain that PR. So 4 PR5s would give you a PR4 etc This is a very rough guide though but it can give you the basic system of how pagerank works. If you've got a mathematical brain there's a bunch of sites with the formulas and so on but I like to keep things simple.
I think it's more about time management. I mean if your time is worth $200/hour your not going to spend time finding all the sites that give you free links, you're just going to go and buy them where you can look and see them all in one place. Would you not agree?
no ,I don't agree. the only one who benefits from buying high pr links ,are the sites themselves that charge for the link. if your to lazy to find links, then you deserve to pay the price. at the end of day a decent set of natural PR3 and above links, will work just fine.
But my point was that if you're getting paid $200/hour to do some work and you have the choice of taking an hour of work for $200 and buying 10 links for $150-$200 or spending the hour getting maybe 10 links if you're lucky from related sites which is also a mind numbingly boring job I think most people at that level would just buy the links. For those on a lower level of pay then it's more worth their time to find links themselves. Do you understand what I'm saying now?
understood you the first time. there are many competent companies, that can accomplish the task of obtaining natural links rather quickly, and for less then $150-200 for maybe 10 links. further if you’re resourceful enough, getting links on your own accord is rather easy. PR brokers IMO cater to webmasters desire for a quick fix...IMO most quick fixes often have no long term benefit, and usually result in spending more $$$ in the long run.
What kind of strategy would you suggest for building links to your website where you would want to obtain thousands of links in a short period of time? I'm all ears
the basic strategy is find relevant links, from sites looking to exchange links. that involves some very uncomplicated research based your keywords. I'm not quite sure what your definition of "a short period of time" is .I have done several projects for client sites, and obtained well over 500 relevant links in less then a month. for those projects not one link was purchased from another site, nor where any of those links from those questionable auto link programs. . natural linking building is still more cost efficient and beneficial then buying links from other sites; which was my original point. particularly ,when those sites offering to sell you links offer no guarantee, because no one can really guarantee something like PR which you have no control of. further I don’t consider putting site wide links pointing to the same site link building, I call it spamming.
For me, I work on an hourly rate and I can't imagine it being worthwhile to spend hours working on SEO. I dabble in it because I enjoy it, but I would MUCH rather pay someone else to do it or at least find a couple of services to pay for - like paid links with high PR , etc. Problem is, I can never really get a sense for the best way to spend my budget. I've been looking for an SEO partner would would basically just do as much SEO as is possible for a monthly budget, but even that gets confusing. Very hard to decide how to spend my marketing budget! I dont really want to get into the reciprocal link thing, but I guess it's a necessary evil. I have managed to organically obtain a bunch of quality inbound (one way) links to my sites, and there's no substitute for that
most people outsource there SEO. however with the money people dish out for paid links. the money would be better spent IMO on developing content, building relevant one way and reciprocal links, etc. all of which can be done by any competent SEO individual or company if time is an issue . the long term effects of quality SEO pays for itself over time; unlike paying for links on high PR sites.
Interesting points! I suppose you could even pay someone $150-$200 to build links for you. When I was talking about obtaining a large number of links in a short space of time I was talking more about gaining thousands of links in maybe a few days. Well, for me I wouldn't have the money to buy a whole bunch of links. What I normally do is swap links with other related sites and to get those high PR related links I go to the Google directory and go down the list of sites that show the highest PR and email them asking if they want to trade links.