That might sound a bit dramatic but no, it does not. I've been doing some research (during the early hours of the morning) and I'm amazed at the number of websites out there adopting the most insane techniques in order to climb SERPs.
I must admit, I was intrigued by the methods at first. I mean, who wouldn't like to get a week's work done in a few minutes? :) But you know what they say, "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is".
The biggest monster of all is the promise of instantaneous link share with thousands of quality websites. This basically involves joining a poorly code shabby directory which is copied many times over thousands of different domains. There's several things wrong with that:
- These pages offer no quality content what-so-ever, so they'll never be highly regarded by SEs.
- The number of outgoing links on each page means your site will get a minuscule tiny small fraction of absolute nothing - it really isn't much...
- The same pages are duplicated over and over again around the web and are promptly ignored and penalized by SEs.
Having said that, here's the big whopper....
- The most common requirement for these link-share wonders is that, of course, you place yet another copy of the directory and its thousands of badly coded content-less pages under your website.
- Adding thousands of pages to your website overnight will dramatically affect your content's keyword density. SEs like Google don't only examine an individual page, they also analyse the website as a whole in order to determine its 'theme'.
- Whereas incoming links cannot harm your websites(s) reputation, outgoing links can destroy it - very quickly. A link to a page is seen seen as a 'vote of confidence' to that page and its content from the website linking into it. Linking into bad neighbourhoods and low quality websites will damage your reputation - (ie.: SERPs rankings).
The most effect form of link sharing is and will always be one-way incoming links.
And the best way to get that is by having quality content.
And the best quality content should be found on your website.
Although traditional methods can be time consuming, you simply cannot go wrong. One week of quality content publishing is worth a million times more than every automatic FFA link directory that has ever existed ever.
* Small search engines - Anything other than Google, Yahoo, MSN and the likes...
6 comments:
I agree 99% with all that you say here, spot on, I want to work out how to get this linked to my Blog using Back Links...
Now, the other 1%, you state incoming links as producing the best result of all, but this is not the case, the best result is achieved by reciprocal linking with valid and purposeful websites, Google like to see you linking to other relevant websites as well as recieving links.
Thought I should correct you on that one. No doubt you'll chanllenge me.
Yes, outgoing links are important and
relevant outgoing links can actually add to the quality on your website's content. But nothing beats purely incoming links.
All search engines that matter (ie. Google) analyse the importance of a link or how 'genuine' it is. A link will weigh more if it is:
- A site-wide link (on every page of a website),
- Within content away from other links,
- Within content that relates to your website,
- Away from the beginning and the end of the page,
and most importantly:
- If it is a purely incoming link and you have not had to link in return.
I'd like to see this backed up, your website www.weclearjunk.com, came up very well and fast on www.freeindex.co.uk because of a reciprocal link.
Incoming links probably do carry more weight in terms of contributing to the overall site, but outgoing links also carry weight.
Finally, my view has been that the combination of an outward and inward link carries the most weight because this forces the search engine around in a loop which is knows and gives extra weight to. I think that is the key here.
Wheres your proof. I'm just hypothising
PRO reciprocal linking:
http://www.searchengineguide.com/degeyter/006390.html
ANTI reciprocal linking:
http://ezinearticles.com/?Search-Engine-Optimization-Tips---One-Way-Links-Versus-Reciprocal-Links&id=471420
Both articles have different ideas but both authors agree that purely incoming links from relevant pages are more effective than reciprocal links...
Freeindex.co.uk is the perfect example of the few cases where reciprocal linking works. The reason is, Freeindex.co.uk is a PR6 website of high quality content. They offer a free listing but in order to have a full page listing you have to link to them (which is only fair). WeClearJunk.com links back to Freeindex.co.uk so that, in return, their link appears within the context and related content of a page dedicated to them (see listing).
Also, the link share with Freeindex.co.uk is hardly responsible for their current SE rankings. But if BBC.co.uk were to write an article about rubbish clearance and link to WeClearJunk.com, I guarantee it would have an almost immediate impact.
I'm not cursing reciprocal linking forever. But it's not worth it sharing links with hundreds of websites willy nilly when a single link from a related content rich page is worth many times more.
Are reciprocal links losing their importance?
http://www.webpronews.com/expertarticles/2005/10/31/are-reciprocal-links-dead
In 2005 Google updated their algorithm to minimize the importance of reciprocal links....
I am new to the whole link building we are trying to get optimized the best we can. My Site is www.lightingtheweb.com. But when you read all these seo blogs about links and seo everyone has a different opinion. Is there one set standard on how to accoplish this task with out getting your site penalized.
Post a Comment