homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.196.198.213
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor
Home / Forums Index / Marketing and Biz Dev / Link Development
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: martinibuster

Link Development Forum

This 62 message thread spans 3 pages: 62 ( [1] 2 3 > >     
Is reciprocal linking dead?
I heard it is..
helohelo




msg:419150
 1:31 pm on Jul 31, 2004 (gmt 0)

Is reciprocal linking dead? i herad google counts reciprocal links as less importent thetn a sole inbound link these days. Any clue?

 

martinibuster




msg:419151
 2:47 pm on Jul 31, 2004 (gmt 0)

That is a myth.

Nothing has changed.

It's not that reciprocal linking is counted less.

It's that one-way is counted more.

Crush




msg:419152
 9:14 pm on Jul 31, 2004 (gmt 0)

I cannot even see any evidence of one way links counting more. Recips definately do fine for me

Webdetective




msg:419153
 9:05 pm on Aug 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

I think really the whole issue is that reciprocal linking is good strategy that has been abused by some. I see this a lot with Zeus pages. Often I will see PR 6 on the homepage but PR 0 or Google toolbar PR scale greyed out on all their links pages. Link farms are a good example of reciprocal linking taken to the extreme.

Larryhat




msg:419154
 12:49 am on Aug 2, 2004 (gmt 0)

I must be missing something here.

Suppose Bob's pet shop links to Mary's restaurant, and vice-versa. Is Google going to know it, short of an idiotically comprehensive search which cannot be worth the bandwidth? ( Link farms are another matter, they should be obvious.) I would expect Bob and Mary to have the same benefit as any other organic links coming in, assuming page rank etc. are equal. - Larry

1milehgh80210




msg:419155
 1:09 am on Aug 2, 2004 (gmt 0)

The way most people do recip links is what makes them almost valueless.IMO
Buried on a page named links, with maybe 50-100 other links. The PR value, anchor text value and click-through value is low.
One-way or bought links are more likely to be on a content page that people actually see, with fewer competing links.

4eyes




msg:419156
 2:13 pm on Aug 3, 2004 (gmt 0)

Suppose Bob's pet shop links to Mary's restaurant, and vice-versa. Is Google going to know it

Yes - of course they do.

The processing involved is negligable compared to the PR calculation.

Illah




msg:419157
 11:30 pm on Aug 9, 2004 (gmt 0)

Recip links are being devalued in the sense that Joe's Used Cars repip linking with Mary's Hair Salon will be seen as a potential abuse of a link exchange. Joe's Used Cars recip linking with Mary's Auto Detailing will be just as good as a one-way link.

Basically Google is smart enough to know that recip linking is being abused. They are also smart enough to know that there are reasons that people legitametly recip. If you have a large percentage of irrelevant, off-topic links or are part of a cluster of sites that all interlink with one another, then you have a problem. It's an obvious link exchange scheme. They won't necessarily punish you, but you won't get much benefit from them.

--Illah

wellzy




msg:419158
 1:02 am on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

One way linking works for me. I swapped links for a year or so and now sites link to me and my PR has risen nicely.

wellzy

Webdetective




msg:419159
 2:06 am on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

But aren't most the sites who now link to you, poor quality link partners (mostly Viagra sites, etc..) with high PR on their home page but 0 PR on their links pages, where you are added to links page number 10 in their "overflow" links pages? That happens to me a lot.

[edited by: martinibuster at 4:03 pm (utc) on Aug. 10, 2004]
[edit reason] Per the Charter: No Solicitation [/edit]

chrisnrae




msg:419160
 2:10 am on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

"It's that one-way is counted more."

Would have to agree.

sit2510




msg:419161
 6:24 am on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>> "It's that one-way is counted more." Would have to agree.

But I have to disagree...

If you can rank well with reciprocal link, you can also do well with one-way links and vice versa

rj87uk




msg:419162
 10:24 am on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

>> '>>> "It's that one-way is counted more." Would have to agree. '

heh - I agree...

I have a small site only up for around 1 month...
I have a few 1 way on topic links in places where people would really see... and yes! click!

I am on page 3 for a two word term... just 1 space higher than this website that has 15 - 20 recip links and his pages looks fine...

sit2510




msg:419163
 11:30 am on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>> have a small site only up for around 1 month...

rj87uk,

IMO, it might be too early to run into conclusion that one-way link works for your 1 month old site. I guess what you are seeing is probably a temporary boost and there is a high possibility that your site will soon disappear to nowhere. Wait for the next 4-6 months, then you may draw a more concrete conclusion.

rj87uk




msg:419164
 12:29 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

>> IMO, it might be too early to run into conclusion that one-way link works for your 1 month old site.

Yes i understand about your point to laugh, but i have a few sites... 9 sites, but each time this has happened and yes these ones have been around for years ;)

sit2510




msg:419165
 1:39 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)


No, I have no point to laugh or chuckle whenever someone post different opinions...I could be right and at the same time I could be wrong...I just post my opinion.

Back to the issue

>>> 9 sites, but each time this has happened and yes these ones have been around for years

Currently many new sites don't show up in G serp perhaps of the so-called "sandbox". The past success of your 9 sites "around for years" should not be compared with your new site of around 1-month old this year. You see I also have many sites ranking greatly of today because of reciprocal links in the past years...so who is right and who is wrong. Perhaps neither sides are losers and that is the point I try to convey.

I speak about temporary boost regarding your new site, because it happens that I have similar experiences in rare occasions very recently. The longest boost for new site that I used to see is around 3-4 weeks that I recall before the site gets drop in ranking (not out of index).



rj87uk




msg:419166
 1:56 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

heh,

I know what you mean about the sandbox and new sites etc etc and i have heard about this boost ideas.

But yet not all of my sites are old... id say two of my sites are new (this yar) and yes they get around pg. 3 on google and stay there... then once 1 way links are in place then they go up

On the whole i would say that any link is better than no link ;)

digitalv




msg:419167
 2:43 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>> "It's that one-way is counted more." Would have to agree.

But I have to disagree...

If you can rank well with reciprocal link, you can also do well with one-way links and vice versa

Reciprocal links will help targeting for topics/keywords. One-way links will eventually make you an "authority" which will ultimately lead to better positioning. Kinda like that whole "miserable failure" thing.

rj87uk




msg:419168
 3:10 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

>> One-way links will eventually make you an "authority" which will ultimately lead to better positioning.

I agree. - Does google link to you? heh

mfishy




msg:419169
 3:11 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

<<I cannot even see any evidence of one way links counting more.>>

One-ways have ALWAYS counted more. In terms of PR, you are trading PR with recips. Also, most recip link pages have tons of links on them (diluting PR). This is not opinion but the way PR works. One way links can come from pages that are A) top level and B) one of only a few links

The reason recips work with google is anchor text is still THE big factor in scoring. In terms of all factors being include, one ways are better.

Webdetective




msg:419170
 3:27 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

The best links you can have is a listing in dmoz.org, Google directory or Yahoo directory, but those are very hard to get listed in, especially if you have affiliate sites.

rj87uk




msg:419171
 4:00 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

>> The best links you can have is a listing in dmoz.org

I have to disagree. I am sure there are many better places where you could get links.

And do you mean that they Directories are valued more? I again disagree. Im sure martinibuster has also said that there are better places and dmoz etc arent valued more...

But again :) It helps as a one way link is still good.

Skylo




msg:419172
 4:02 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

A legend of this forum once painted us a perfect picture relating to this exact same topic.
This legend told us (Wish i could find that link! Any help?) that recips will never lose importance but it is rather how we use these recips in our sites, keeping user relevance in mind!

The way in which one links is key. A links page with 30 recip links may count for something but not so much if these are "Shebba Widget Restaurant" linking to "Betty Fuzzy florist".
But for the sake of benefiting the user, one could mention somewhere inside "Sebba's" site that the floral arrangements are organised by Betties florist but using 'floral arrangements' as the anchor text where floral arrangements is a keyword "Betty's" is optimised for.

When linking ask yourself the question, will this benefit my user in any way? Will this link benefit my link partner? Am i benefitted by the link they put on their site?

I hope my point is clear. This does seem IMHO as the best way to link for the future. It has been a long day and i am now going to sleep:-)

ogletree




msg:419173
 4:07 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

I have seen a site that had only 3 links from links pages. The site was a PR5. It gets spidered a ton and ranks well. It all depends on the link page.

Wail




msg:419174
 4:21 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

Reciprocal linking is not dead.

Link building is rarely financially viable for corperate SEO agencies - but that's another matter.

People might tell you that link building is dead. They might be the same people who spook you about the dread "over optimisation", the "evil h1" tags and friendly "noindex,nofollow" robots meta that'll keep you safe.

[edit: tone the "scary sarcasm" down]

kosar




msg:419175
 4:40 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

would you say that inbound links carry more weight than outbound links now?

Wail




msg:419176
 4:56 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

would you say that inbound links carry more weight than outbound links now?

Yes, of course!

It's always been the case that it's better to be the site with 100 inbound links and 0 outbound links than the site with 0 inbound links and 100 outbound links.

chrisnrae




msg:419177
 5:15 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

"In terms of all factors being include, one ways are better."

Yep. I'd rather get 20 one ways than 100 recipricols. Not only for the authority issue, but for the non SE traffic as well. I have a 3 year old site with 50 backlinks and top ranks that hasn't moved in the SERPs in almost three years, even though there is a lot of competition with 100, 200, 300 and more links (and many of these aren't even affiliate sites - their actual companies). Difference is that the site I own has one ways that they either can't get, or haven't be ingenuitive enough to figure *out* how to get them.

Recipricol linking isn't dead but for a site you expect to have longevity, it isn't the smart way to build backlinks. My two cents.

Kirby




msg:419178
 6:57 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

When I first put up a site 6 years ago, I got links from sites that could and were willing to send me traffic since they thought it would benefit their users. No one ever asked me for a reciprocal link until 2 years ago. So my oldest links are one ways, my newest tend to be reciprocal.

Im sure Google appreciates the fact that my 3-6 year old links exist for a different reason than reciprocals. There are no strings attached. Their vote actually means something. At the same time, I still link to pages of value for my visitors where there is no way I would get a reciprocal link, such as .gov pages that pertain to my content. Im sure Google puts a value on this as well.

IMO the value of outbound links is be tied to the relevance associated with the link and the authority value that target page has in Google's eyes.

So is linking dead? No way. Is there a sliding value scale for links? Definitely. Google says build it for the visitor. I think this is underrated.

Webdetective




msg:419179
 8:32 pm on Aug 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

The way I see it, link popularity building is something that evolves from the ground up. When you start out with brand new virgin domain with 0 PR and 0 LP, you must start by exchanging links with different sites who don't care about your LP or PR, then as you build high PR, you can seek higher quality link partners who are more picky, and seek homepage link exchanges, etc..

The funny thing is I have seen links pages attain PR 4 with just 1 or 2 links on it, but at the same time, links pages with tons of links and 0 PR. This goes to show, it's quality of links that matters.

This 62 message thread spans 3 pages: 62 ( [1] 2 3 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Marketing and Biz Dev / Link Development
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved