PDA

View Full Version : How To Earn Links



vangogh
10-22-2012, 11:36 PM
I know people struggle with getting other sites to link to their's. It's not always easy and unfortunately that leads to people taking shortcuts and ultimately ending up with links that don't help and recently can even hurt.

Over the years there have been many tactics for building links. Google made a couple of algorithmic changes earlier this year that devalue many of the links people built. Worst case is that some of these links can now actively hurt where your pages rank.

Rand Fishkin posted a video to SEOmoz this past Friday all about links. The video, The Death of Link Building and the Rebirth of Link Earning (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-death-of-link-building-and-the-rebirth-of-link-earning-whiteboard-friday), is a little over 10 minutes. In it Rand looks at some traditional ways people have gone about building links and compares those methods to what he's calling link earning equivalents.

If you're unsure how to get others to link to your site, then you definitely want to watch this. It's a good guide to earning links for your site.

Harold Mansfield
10-23-2012, 01:38 PM
I am so happy that Google is finally cracking down on self linking that I don't know what to do. Makes me wonder how bad sites that have spent years self linking via Directories, and Article dumps will be screwed.

vangogh
10-25-2012, 12:30 PM
You can find those sites searching all over the web asking what to do now as they watch their search traffic drop. Sadly none of these changes will stop people from doing the same old. People will still send out the link exchange emails and write crappy articles to submit to crappy directories, etc. Stuff like that is easy and people like easy, even when easy is ineffective. Now easy can potentially hurt you. Yet I bet we see a lot more questions here asking how to tweak meta tags or how many keywords to use in a page than we will about how to improve site content.

seolman
10-26-2012, 03:59 PM
(a voice form the distant past chimes in)

I know this sounds like a broken record but rich/meaningful/useful content earns links and there is no way around the fact it takes a lot of effort to produce. Some years back I wrote a detailed page about what to bring to Costa Rica while vacationing. Did a ton of research and provided not just a list but a links to other websites with good travel tips. Lots of other travel sites have now linked to the page for their site visitors as a good place to get educated about travel to Costa Rica. Not tooting my horn - just saying it wasn't easy to compile all that info but the results were great and I use it as an example for my clients who ask "how can I write good content".

I notice the same attention to detail in VanGogh's blog postings. Every time I try to drill down on the detail my ADHD kicks in and I start looking for alcohol...

vangogh
10-29-2012, 03:43 PM
Funny.

I think rich, meaningful, useful, entertaining content has always been the way to earn links. It's not easy though and lots of people prefer easy even when easy doesn't work. The people who have been creating great content the last few years aren't seeing any issues with the recent algorithm changes at Google. If anything we're seeing more traffic. The people who chased easy are now scrambling to undo all the things they've done the last few years.

I'm sure I've said it a few hundred times here that if you want search traffic, you need to create content people are interested in. That's what draws traffic. Some people don't want to listen though.

seolman
10-29-2012, 04:35 PM
Yes. I just had a bad experience with some of the Panda updates. All the long term sites I have been optimizing are doing fine. However a few sites that I have been optimizing over the last 12 months are having all kinds of problems because of the low quality links they picked up prior to our SEO. We get these "hey it's trending upwards" and then a drop because some new Panda filter is applied :P - but overall they are still improving its just a long hard slog to get them healthy and definitely difficult to get the client to understand the difficulty of overcoming all the bad links.

ozetel
10-29-2012, 10:24 PM
We got belted severely with the Penguin and Panda updates (and I know many are probably very much sick of hearing about it) and really needed to reassess how we do things. We handed the work out to a third party SEO company - bad move. Having said that it has been a big door opening now into the right practices and new avenues like video channels and different marketing/branding as a whole that has stemmed from the penalty. So in a way it is a blessing but we have had a long road back (that we are still travelling) to rankings.

Seomoz issue some good stuff and this is a great article/video thanks. Constant learning curve.

vangogh
10-30-2012, 12:33 AM
definitely difficult to get the client to understand the difficulty of overcoming all the bad links.

Yep. That's the problem. So many people wanted the bad links, because they saw them as the quick route to results. In the past those links were generally ignored more than anything so no big deal. Now they seem to be hurting. There's a lot of mixed thought about that and I go back and forth about which is the right approach on Google's end. I guess the thinking was you could go after as many links as you wanted and so what if most counted for nothing. Enough would count for something and help. Now you have to rethink that and not go after any of the bad links since the most that don't count now actively hurt you and outweigh the few ok links you found in the process.


Having said that it has been a big door opening now into the right practices and new avenues like video channels and different marketing/branding as a whole that has stemmed from the penalty.

Definitely a good thing in the end. You'll recover from past mistakes. The hurt will be temporary for the most part. However if it's pushed you to reassess and the end result is better practices you'll come out ahead.

Have you both seen Google's new disavow tool? Here's a post from Google's Webmaster Central blog (http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2012/10/a-new-tool-to-disavow-links.html) about it. Basically a way to tell Google, please ignore this link to my site. Lots of thoughts pro and con about that. Here's a video from Matt Cutts talking about it. You really only need to use it if Google has sent you a message (through Webmaster Tools I think) that you have some bad links. Most sites won't ever need to use it.


http://youtu.be/393nmCYFRtA

seolman
10-30-2012, 10:40 AM
I've seen the disavow tool and I think it's a nice gesture by Google but in my view it's only helpful when some enemy has added a ton of bad links to sabotage a web site. Even then it requires vigilance on the part of a webmaster to catch this and react to it as quickly as possible.

However, from a practical perspective, how can anyone know what links are bad? I see an ethical dilemma here: Yes, Google must continue to filter out sites with bad SEO practices from their search results (and to their credit they have issued warnings for years about bad linking practices), BUT there are no internationally recognized standards for SEO practitioners. The result is (and will continue to be) the innocent (and often ignorant) business owners are the ones who will pay for bad SEO practices, not the snake oil salesman who have ignored Google's guidelines.

I can understand Google not wanting to share it's algorithm with the world, but ethically I think they should come up with a system (perhaps through Webmaster Tools) to inform site managers about new links recognized in their index. Example:

"We have discovered 227 new links during January, click here to view the list"

In the detail list they give the URL and a "pass" or "fail" rating (that is pass or fail their quality criteria). Example:

link 1 (actual URL) - pass
link 2 - fail

This gives the innocent party (site owner) a way to measure the quality of their links and by default their SEO provider. The "fail" links would simply be ignored by Google as worthless so the owner does not have to worry about damage to their website ranking due to bad links, while "good" links would obviously be a help to them gaining a better ranking. Lots of "fail" links would make it clear to owners their SEO provider is useless so they can search for a better provider.

I realize I am simplifying this a lot but I am trying to come up with a way for Google to protect the ignorant from the plethora of bad SEO practitioners. This would certainly begin weeding out the fools and that is so needed in this industry. I also think such a tool would be a big help to Google in their legal hassles. Too many site owners (especially in Europe) claim Google shows favoritism. By having a link rating tool they can quickly show how any site with quality links can get to the top while at the same time not giving away their confidential link rating system.

vangogh
10-30-2012, 11:23 AM
Pretty much sums up my thoughts exactly. One of the things I think interesting about the tool is that in some ways it's a way to keep tabs on people who've been pushing seo beyond allowable borders for the last few years. Those are the people most likely in need of disavowing links. Using the tool kind of tells Google, "Hey, I've manipulated your results in the past, so best keep an eye on me in the future."

I wish Google would be a little more open about things too. Obviously they can't share everything, but they could give us more clues. One of the things that has people upset about all these changes to links is Google set up the economy of links. They didn't share specifics about what links to get and now they're punishing people who went after links. Personally I don't think it's been all that hard to know which links you should have stayed away from, but that's what some are saying and feeling.

Your pass/fail ideas is interesting. I doubt we'll see Google do something like that, but it's interesting. On one side you'd have Google saying they don't want to give away that kind of information, but on the other wouldn't giving away that information be good. Does Google want people getting the kind of links they think valuable. A few clues about the specifics and you drive the web toward getting those kind of links.

seolman
10-30-2012, 11:58 AM
I think as long as Google refuses to share at least some data they will continue to sow seeds of doubt about whether they are truly being fair in their rankings. To support this statement I put forward the following observations:

This is your PageRank but it has no meaning (???? so why even show it?)
If lots of bad sites link to you it may affect your ranking (so even if I write link-worthy material I may end up paying for someone else linking to it because they are in a bad neighborhood?)

Thus my question: how do I know what links are worthless, and how do I control who links to me? If Google can penalize my site for actions taken by others then they are morally obligated to warn me when this happens. The "don't be evil" mantra they promote requires this from them. In my view this is why they are being scrutinized so carefully by European governments and are getting themselves into the Microsoft "monopoly" camp. If they wish to minimize the flack they should share enough information to protect site owners from unscrupulous competitors/practitioners.

In my view they lost their "don't be evil" status when they started putting paid ads with barely discernible pink background above the search results but that's another matter ;)

vangogh
10-30-2012, 11:48 PM
The "don't be evil" mantra stopped being true a long time ago. I'm with you. I think it hurts them now more than it helps them. Only the faithful believe it anyway and everyone else criticizes them every time they do something that goes against the mantra.

I assume they aren't more transparent for a couple of reasons.

1. They don't want SEOs being able to reverse engineer the algorithm. They probably think the more that's known, the easier it will be to manipulate.
2. Their algorithm is a competitive advantage

I have a feeling #1 would do more good than harm. Sure some people would use the knowledge to manipulate more, but if it helps more people do the things Google wants to see and provides benefit to the sites it's a win-win for both. I think these videos from Matt Cutts and others are their way of being transparent without being too specific. The problem is those who understand seo know some of what's being said isn't exactly true. After all the links Google is now fighting against are links they've been telling people not to get for years. Those links however have helped many web pages rank.

Another problem is the average site owner probably doesn't ever see these videos or hear the advice directly from Google. Their more likely to hear something from a random seo who's posting advice based on a lack of specific information.

seolman
10-31-2012, 10:12 AM
1. They don't want SEOs being able to reverse engineer the algorithm. They probably think the more that's known, the easier it will be to manipulate.

2. Their algorithm is a competitive advantage

I have a feeling #1 would do more good than harm.


I agree entirely. There are plenty of ways they can share helpful information without giving away their algorithm. I think their company is controlled more by patent lawyers than anything else. Often when people have huge success by developing a much needed product at just the right time they wrongly assume they are God's gift to the market and stubbornly refuse to move away from original policies and practices they think give them an advantage (i.e. Microsoft). Even as their market slips away they stay with old practices until the company spirals downward.




...After all the links Google is now fighting against are links they've been telling people not to get for years. Those links however have helped many web pages rank.

This is a major point. Even though they gave warning about "bad" links they never really provided any tools FOR WEBSITE OWNERS to know when a poor quality SEO practitioner may be adding such links. And the fact these ugly links worked for a while led many to believe that Google was lying and bad SEO's were good. The temporary success even encouraged new practitioners to copy what worked and compound the problem. I like Google as a search engine but I really think they should be a bit more transparent by providing some sort of link quality tool. Yes, competitors will try to determine exactly why a link is "poor" but it will simply be guesswork and the advantage remains in Google's court - not to mention the improved reputation (loyalty?) they will gain by being more transparent.

cobase
10-31-2012, 12:48 PM
People will still send out the link exchange emails and write crappy articles to submit to crappy directories, etc. Stuff like that is easy and people like easy, even when easy is ineffective.

Ain't that the truth!

billbenson
10-31-2012, 07:32 PM
How about tags these days. I suspect the title and h1 etc are important. But do you think the image alt tags and similar are still worth the trouble?

vangogh
11-02-2012, 03:00 AM
There are plenty of ways they can share helpful information without giving away their algorithm.

I agree, but so far they don't. I'd like to see them be more transparent. I don't think they have to or should tell us everything. It's not hard to understand that they can't reveal everything. Then again it's probably so complex that few people could even understand it all. I doubt many people inside Google even know how the entire thing works.

Unfortunately Google has encouraged a lot of the bad practices they now want to get rid of. They make it clear links were important so people went after links. Google has to understand that no matter what they do there will always be people trying to game their system. That's what people do. We're wired that way.


How about tags these days. I suspect the title and h1 etc are important. But do you think the image alt tags and similar are still worth the trouble?

I don't think they've been worth the trouble for a few years now. It's not that the things you mentioned are looked at by search engines. They probably even play some small part in what pages rank where. The thing is changing the alt text on an image or squeezing in a keyword to a heading tag isn't going to really change anything. I think most people need to stop thinking about those things and instead think about higher level things like creating content people want to consume and helping your content travel across the web. I think people who are spending most or their time on what words to put in what tag are only ensuring they'll never get much search traffic.

billbenson
11-02-2012, 11:09 PM
Ok, but take something like the title tag. People still believe it is the most important tag on the page. And that includes some of the very competent webmasters I know. They feel that way because it tells the visitor what the page is about. But they also feel that way because is slaps G in the face and says 'this is what this page is about'. Assuming the title tag is accurate, I would think G would like that.

In the Zen Cart thread, one of the problems with Zen Cart and Oscommerce is they used a php constant in an includes file for all the title tags. The title tag on all the pages was identical and that was a time period where that tag definitely mattered. I forget exactly how I did it, but I changed the title tag to a variable and pulled the relevant content from some table so it matched the page.

dianecoleen
11-06-2012, 07:59 PM
The tags and other SEO elements of a website is still worth the use. I think Google is more often about the links we have on the site and the content we share over the web.

I just read an article about the different ways of Link building, perhaps you might want to read it. Note: Obviously this has nothing to do with different submissions anymore. Read it to learn more: Big List of Link Building Strategies - 'Net Features - Website Magazine (http://www.websitemagazine.com/content/blogs/posts/archive/2012/05/11/big-list-of-link-building-strategies.aspx)

vangogh
11-09-2012, 06:37 PM
Bill I think writing a good title is still very important for both real people and search engines. However the title isn't an h1 or an alt tag, which is what you had originally mentioned. My point is mainly not to obsess over where exactly in your code to place keywords. When anyone starts worrying about how many keyword to place in a heading or how to specifically write alt text or what's the proper amount of words to have on the page, they're looking down the wrong path and very likely not going to have any success. Getting search traffic today is not about optimizing a few tags on the page.

Thanks for the article Diane. I get Website Magazine in the mail and often recommend it here.

I'm not trying to say tags are completely irrelevant or that Google doesn't look at them. Google is going to collect every bit of data they can and they'll use as much of it as they can. The thing is I see people here debating all the time about things how many keywords to use in meta tags or what keyword density should a page have. Those same people usually have awful content or no content beyond a couple of sales pages. There are so many factors that search engines look at. You have to use your time wisely. Unless and until you're creating great content that people want to share and link to it's not worth worrying about how to optimize a few html tags, especially when the contribution of those tags to ranking decreases year after year.

seolman
11-09-2012, 06:45 PM
For most businesses there is a huge difference between what they would write for a printed brochure or catalog vs. what they put in their website. There shouldn't be that much difference. Content should be written for the audience not for Google and it should be so well written it will be recommended (aka linked to) by bloggers and other interested parties.

vangogh
11-09-2012, 07:08 PM
Exactly. It's about writing for real people. If you create good content that real people want and want to share then you've created it well for search engines too. Again I don't want to suggest you can't tweak things for search engines or optimize your writing or what you do with tags. But until you have that good content the other stuff is irrelevant.

I see way too many questions and debates about the less useful stuff when the more useful stuff has been ignored.

merlot105
06-27-2013, 03:39 PM
This is a lifesaver post! Thanks. Will be link-earning from here on out!

patrickprecisione
06-28-2013, 10:08 AM
This is a lifesaver post! Thanks. Will be link-earning from here on out!

How do you earn links? Content, content, content!

I'm sure some of you will disagree but the fact is that there are some industries out there that have an easier time earning links than others. Some companies can create better content simply because they have more to work with.

vangogh
07-02-2013, 11:51 PM
Yes and no. Sure some topics are easier to write about, but I've yet to find an industry that couldn't be written about. It's not really any different than before the internet and search engines. Some industries naturally get talked about more and are easier to advertise. Some industries naturally have more customers than others.

You can create content around anything. If your industry doesn't make it easy, you have to get more creative Take the Will it Blend (http://www.willitblend.com/) videos. I'm sure many companies selling blenders said you can't create content around blenders. Apparently you can and well enough to make people want to watch and link to the content. Most people think too literally when it comes to content thinking they need to talk directly about their products or services. You don't want to do that. You generally want to talk around them. Talk about something related to your business that would be of interest to the same people who are likely to become customers.

patrickprecisione
07-03-2013, 08:18 AM
Yes and no. Sure some topics are easier to write about, but I've yet to find an industry that couldn't be written about. It's not really any different than before the internet and search engines. Some industries naturally get talked about more and are easier to advertise. Some industries naturally have more customers than others.

You can create content around anything. If your industry doesn't make it easy, you have to get more creative Take the Will it Blend (http://www.willitblend.com/) videos. I'm sure many companies selling blenders said you can't create content around blenders. Apparently you can and well enough to make people want to watch and link to the content. Most people think too literally when it comes to content thinking they need to talk directly about their products or services. You don't want to do that. You generally want to talk around them. Talk about something related to your business that would be of interest to the same people who are likely to become customers.

That's not exactly what I was saying. What I meant is that certain industries (let's say the entertainment industry) can create better content than others. When I say "better", I mean content that will earn a ton of links.

I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm just saying that certain industries cater to a more connected audience, who are more inclined to share content.

HeadStartSEO
07-03-2013, 03:59 PM
Hey guys,

I wanted to join this forum to comment on this thread. I've been doing SEO for a number of years now, too many to recall really. I've done white-hat, black-hat, even gray hat.

I first started with some underground black-hat stuff (like private forums no one knows about, $5,000 just to enter them. This was an affiliate marketing group of guys making 20,000+ weekly.. The Good Old Days!) and some of the stuff still works. One thing to remember from this is to never take Google for their word. This is because they simply don't want you cheating their system, if there is a system. Cheating can always happen, there’s no way around it. It’s not that they are lying to you, they just have an interest in keep people from trying to cheat their system.

Some say even the disavow tool is a way for them to find these bad link networks. This makes sense because you would only be removing links that are bad, right? Why wouldn't they use that data? You're telling them, hey, I this link is bad.. This one right here!!, so I want it removed. Google is most likely saying, oh bad link... thanks!!

While I don't suggest long term black-hat for long term SEO, there’s lots of gray-hat stuff that people can do that will last the end of time, such as pumper sites. It doesn't go against Google as long as you make these sites useful! Making bad pumper sites just means that you're asking for it. In fact, Google says, hey we want you to make useful sites. This is only if you make a few of these sites, and link them to you, and others... done in the right way, I'm not sharing how to do this, so don't do it if you don't know what you're doing.

Most SEO will never be natural, since your asking people via email for links or trying to link bait something. The only way it becomes natural is when places like Moz get loads of people linking to them. If you didn't send that email, then you would never have that link, right? Any kind of link building will never come naturally, and lets face it... Links are still the most powerful thing.

I would suggest to anyone that on-site SEO is the biggest thing right now for anyone starting out. It's something you can control, focus on and get right. It's something that will make you better than people that are just thinking about off-site links.

For every client I have, I don't even touch off-site SEO until on-site SEO is completed.. This is more than just making sure your keywords are on the page, it's about design and errors on your site from The W3C Markup Validation Service (http://validator.w3.org/).


One thing that I find my clients and other people asking me is how to earn links.

The fact of the matter is that good content is a start, but no one will find it unless you market it. This can involve trying to get rankings for it, social media or press releases. The simple truth of the matter is that you're going to have to build some links since most of the time in small business, no one will really link to you. For example, my main client is a large ecommerce site with around 2,000 products for wholesale customers.

People aren't going to link to him often, since A) people don't want to tell people that they’re buying products from x company, and marking prices up to make a profit to sell to you the customer, and B) competition won't link out as well.

While I agree that there is enough business for everyone online, most people don't see it that way. They are stuck in the old mindset of a business, the head-to-head world we all once knew about.

Marketing is all about reaching out whether it be through social media, SEO or getting links. This is often the case unless you're a big brand, or have something really cool. Most likely, you won't get enough links to rank for keywords just because of that. You will have to build some, but it’s the quality you build them up to that will matter the most.

vangogh
07-03-2013, 06:04 PM
I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm just saying that certain industries cater to a more connected audience, who are more inclined to share content.

That's a fair point and also true. Sure it's going to be easier for some industries than others, but that is true for any aspect of business. My point is really that even if you happen to be in an industry that maybe doesn't have the connected audience or the quick and easy topics, that you can still create great content that attracts people and links.


I wanted to join this forum to comment on this thread.

Welcome to the forum HeadStartSEO. You make a lot of good points. I agree that you can't always take Google at their word. What they're telling you is more what they ideally want to happen than what necessarily does or doesn't work.


The fact of the matter is that good content is a start, but no one will find it unless you market it.

I agree. I think it's important to remember that no matter how you promote it good content is a big part of the equation. It does have to start there, though you're right that it doesn't end there. Once you've built a large enough audience for your content, I don't think you need to do as much promotion as your audience will do much of it for you. However, until you have that audience you do still need to work to promote what you have.


For example, my main client is a large ecommerce site with around 2,000 products for wholesale customers.…People aren't going to link to him often

I'd amend that to people aren't going to link to his product pages. If the site has informational pages in addition to the product pages I don't see why people wouldn't link to them. It might not specifically be his customers that end up linking to the informational pages either, but as long as the content is good and it's promoted it should be able to earn links the same as any other site.

BrendaBlueDock
07-03-2013, 06:16 PM
This was a very helpful video, thanks for sharing!

HeadStartSEO
07-03-2013, 08:44 PM
I'd amend that to people aren't going to link to his product pages. If the site has informational pages in addition to the product pages I don't see why people wouldn't link to them. It might not specifically be his customers that end up linking to the informational pages either, but as long as the content is good and it's promoted it should be able to earn links the same as any other site.


Yes, that is true, but the simple fact of the matter. Most people won't be able to create an amazing blog. If you sell something really specialized. Then it's a far easier to content market then. Although, most people either don't know how to make amazing post, or won't be able to produce really high end articles less they have some background in the area. I've only seen a few really good blog content from mid-size to larger e-commerce stores.

Although, don't not try, it's all a learning process.

vangogh
07-04-2013, 01:10 AM
That's true. I definitely won't pretend it's easy to simply jump in and have a good blog. It's hard work. Not everyone can write articles others want to read or create audi and video people want to listen to and watch. The thing is it's becoming more important that sites have good content if they want traffic. I think people can learn to find their content creation niche. Some will be better suited to writing and others to producing media. If not then you hire someone to do the work.

Sadly I think the case with sites that aren't producing great content is because no one is trying. It's not easy, but I don't think people put much effort into trying.

HeadStartSEO
07-04-2013, 12:32 PM
That's true. I definitely won't pretend it's easy to simply jump in and have a good blog. It's hard work. Not everyone can write articles others want to read or create audi and video people want to listen to and watch. The thing is it's becoming more important that sites have good content if they want traffic. I think people can learn to find their content creation niche. Some will be better suited to writing and others to producing media. If not then you hire someone to do the work.

Sadly I think the case with sites that aren't producing great content is because no one is trying. It's not easy, but I don't think people put much effort into trying.

I agree, its like a game.. you have to rank for your content to be found... but you have to have good content to get nature links. Its like a chicken and egg thing. Really today, each business owner has to be a publisher.

My man Sean, did some youtube videos of his resorts Sean ResortRebel - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/user/BadLadzResort). He got tons of traffic from it, and all his resorts are full. Although, no everyone can show some videos of beautiful beaches we all dream about.

I think most business owners just don't talk to others about their ideas, and don't get tons of critical feedback. I think that's what people need them most during this process. Also, it kind needs to be private, so people don't see you talking about your tactics

vangogh
07-04-2013, 05:09 PM
Yeah, with the chicken and egg thing you need to do something at the start to get the ball rolling. You have to get out there and get noticed in other places and through that bring people back to your own site. Whether that means participating in online communities or guest posting on other blogs or whatever you do something to promote yourself to start building an audience around your content.

I agree that many business owners don't talk about their ideas. We get people here all the time who are seeking advice, but are leery of sharing their ideas. In fact often the questions are how to protect their ideas before they've even developed them to be anything worthwhile.

Harold Mansfield
08-12-2013, 09:32 AM
How to earn Quality links????

=> Google loves quality and fresh content. Create quality and fresh content with your targeted keywords. Find high pr do follow sites like directory sub site, social bookmarking sites, forum posting, blog commenting etc. and submit your website link to those high pr websites. Submit 1 unique article to 1 article directory website. Don't put same content to many sites. Google penalize if they will find dublicate content.

None of these methods carry much weight anymore. Self linking and self manipulations carries far less weight than natural, earned links. I'm afraid this is old information.

vangogh
08-20-2013, 02:04 AM
Spammers generally aren't known for the quality of their information. :)

patrickprecisione
08-21-2013, 08:49 AM
For most businesses there is a huge difference between what they would write for a printed brochure or catalog vs. what they put in their website. There shouldn't be that much difference. Content should be written for the audience not for Google and it should be so well written it will be recommended (aka linked to) by bloggers and other interested parties.

I totally agree with you... but it's hard to take you seriously with the Marty Feldman avatar :p

jakeepool
08-24-2013, 06:48 AM
Today, august 2013, one has to have a dedicated team of reporter, who take reports from actual users and try to understand the issue, if any. Then come out with a solution to it after consultation with experts. After that blog this experience and facebook it twit it reddit it stumble it digg it. There is nothing wrong in taking links as everyone is spreading a word about their business.
What is wrong is not having good content and spamming for link
SEO Hosting - Matt Cutts On Quality Links & Link Building - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ws83x5Vz0A)

Fasttrack
11-15-2013, 02:03 AM
They say Link Baiting is one of the most effective Link Building strategies. :)

Osprey
11-28-2013, 06:46 PM
I know people struggle with getting other sites to link to their's. It's not always easy and unfortunately that leads to people taking shortcuts and ultimately ending up with links that don't help and recently can even hurt.

Over the years there have been many tactics for building links. Google made a couple of algorithmic changes earlier this year that devalue many of the links people built. Worst case is that some of these links can now actively hurt where your pages rank.

Rand Fishkin posted a video to SEOmoz this past Friday all about links. The video, The Death of Link Building and the Rebirth of Link Earning (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-death-of-link-building-and-the-rebirth-of-link-earning-whiteboard-friday), is a little over 10 minutes. In it Rand looks at some traditional ways people have gone about building links and compares those methods to what he's calling link earning equivalents.

If you're unsure how to get others to link to your site, then you definitely want to watch this. It's a good guide to earning links for your site.

thank you for posting this - A small part of me wants to do those shortcuts sometimes. I get so busy and sometimes I think it just might work. :) Glad I stuck to my guns! :)

PayForWords
01-05-2014, 10:23 AM
Thanks for sharing.

I've never actually done paid links but...

I have reached out to hundreds of people and simply asked for a backlink.

Of course, I only asked those in my niche and that had quality sites.

Osprey
01-06-2014, 11:31 AM
Thanks for sharing.

I've never actually done paid links but...

I have reached out to hundreds of people and simply asked for a backlink.

Of course, I only asked those in my niche and that had quality sites.


do you consider pagerank? or do you just ask everyone in your niche?