| 10:35 pm on May 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Great post. Looking forward to get working on this major project. Hopeful to get results?
"especially as you control the link text."
What do you mean with the above?
| 11:09 pm on May 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Link text (the blue underlined words you click on) are given a lot of credit by search engines in determining what the target page is about. So you'd rather have link text like: discount blue widgets than something like: Fred's Website.
When you ask someone for a link, no matter what you say, they often use whatever link text they feel like. Well, it's their website, so that's OK. But you'd really rather they kept it close to good keywords or phrases.
When you are writing a post on a forum, or setting up your signature on a forum, you get to choose the link text used. That's what I meant. Choose wisely.
| 5:35 am on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|When you are writing a post on a forum, or setting up your signature on a forum, you get to choose the link text used. |
The only issue is that nowadays Google automaticly detects Forums and rank those pages at PR0. So I'm not quite sure how much PR0 links counts (even if they have good text).
| 1:00 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|The only issue is that nowadays Google automaticly detects Forums and rank those pages at PR0. So I'm not quite sure how much PR0 links counts (even if they have good text). |
Where did you hear this? I have seen some forum pages that allow signatures with at least PR3 recently!
| 1:37 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Google automaticly detects Forums and rank those pages at PR0 |
STOP! Just stop! Break the vicious cycle of thinking links = PR = ranking =
There was a time when a link was a vote of website quality/character. Wouldn't it be something to go back in link-time before a link was a magic charm for manipulating PR?
Try getting your head aligned with this model:
Links = traffic = opportunity to create awareness that your website presents real value to the visitor = visitor appreciation = visitor generated buzz/word-of-mouth/email referrals = media pick-up = more visitors/traffic and more natural links = more traffic = the happy, productive exponential growth of links cycle
IF the manner in which you initially, proactively generate/spread links isn't an offense and is handled in a manner that invites the perception that the link is a bona fide vote (not spam, not pure self-promotion) then the early links just might do their job.
The hell with PR. Operate like search engines don't exist. Operate like what matters is people. Then, it may just be possible that as a result of people liking your website the search engines will also like your website. At least that's the way I thought it was supposed to work. Pity the poor search engine that can't configure its algorithm to rank websites that people actually value.
| 2:47 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Nice post treeline
| 3:07 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
good post as I really believe by developing links the way you describe is actually what all the search engines have as the natural linking method. I stll go out and try to get some links from sites I want my customers to look at for informational reasons. But as far as linking it isn't worth the time anymore as it has gotten to the point of blackhat linking and I really don't want to worry with all the issues...Sites change and become a drag rather than one that helps
| 3:42 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Excellent post Webwork. I agree with you 150%. I wish everyone thought as clearly as you do.
| 3:46 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Webwork - will you marry me?
| 3:52 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Great post, treeline and Webwork.
I just wonder why this thread is on the Yahoo forum. These techniches apply to every SE.
| 4:02 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>>>>> Then, it may just be possible that as a result of people liking your website the search engines will also like your website. At least that's the way I thought it was supposed to work. Pity the poor search engine that can't configure its algorithm to rank websites that people actually value.
How can they? As soon as anyone and everyone figures out what SEs are looking for they all manipulate for it. People going crazy over Header tags, people selling, buying, developing links and image text replacement (whoever heard of a negative 2000 left margin/). It goes on and on.
It's all OK when "we" do it, but not when "they" do it.
| 4:17 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
There's two sides to Webwork's suggestion, and I support both of them. Certainly building a site that people want to use and are excited about enough to want to link to it spontaneously can't be beat and is the best path to long term success.
Many small businesses are desperate to be found on the internet, and perplexed as to why they don't turn up. Not even for their formal name, or for widget repair in East Overshoe, South Dakota. Even a widget repairer with unusually clever web skills might wait a long time to get many links. They need a few good links, and they'll turn up well enough if they're not in too cutthroat an area.
I often get asked by people like this why Yahoo/Google/etc doesn't list them. They think their site is broken or useless, or the SEs are. Some spend a lot of money going to seminars and hiring web designers without ever being given the basic truth: Get some links and your website will be findable. The more the better, but even a few can get it started.
If you want to make the kind of good living off the web that some hint about in these forums, pay close attention to Webwork's suggestion, and note that the above list has many ideas that will accomplish this. The original question I was responding to was how to get started on getting links.
A few statistics that show the relative value of different kinds of content for one of my sites:
Overall traffic: Direct 18%
Search Engine 72% (thousands of keyword combos)
For a cool interactive linkbait feature: Direct 51%
Search Engine 26% (most entered name of website)
So what type of content gets you the most repeat traffic, and isn't prone to the whims of the search engines? Clearly good, original useful content. It does draw links. Note the higher referral numbers.
But that doesn't mean lots of sites can't benefit by going and asking for links from a variety of sources.
note: Direct traffic is bookmarked or typed in, Referral is from clicking on a link at another website, and Search Engine is from searching.
| 4:24 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Webwork - will you marry me? |
My S.E.O.* advises "No outbound links!"
Significantly Engaged Other
| 4:30 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Google automaticly detects Forums and rank those pages at PR0 |
Believe this if you want. It may even be true of some forums, or certain forum software, I don't know. What I do know is that clear jumps in traffic follow certain posts for specific keywords on a number of forums. In a good forum some of it is referrals from the forum. Most of it shows up from the search engines though. As I said, they're not the best links, but they do help.
| 4:34 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My $.02: Think co-promotion, collective interest, mutual real benefit. The business world is a somewhat clustered, somewhat cloistered, mutual aide and benefit society type of place, where the referrals are real indicia of a vote of confidence and/or quality.
A referral in the real business world is likely close to the model you want to emulate in your web based business.
What distinguishes referrals in the real live business world? All the talk about "authority sites" and related topics is likely more akin to what happens in the day-to-day business world than many of you appreciate.
All those tangential, remote, off theme, outlier links that you garner may add weight that sinks your website instead of causing your website to rise up.
| 7:29 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
So good guide for newbies like me.
| 8:19 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yeah, the hell with ever getting visited by Googlebot!
| 9:27 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Enlightened SEO is a fable. Only search suffering is real: Webmasters are a lot that is destined to suffer - about not getting inbound links, suffer about the latest Google update, suffer about the next update, suffer about ranking, suffer about algo cracking, suffer about SE traffic going down, suffer about links not counting, suffer about penalties, suffer about lost Pagerank . . .
All is suffering.
OTOH . .
"Live as if search engines did not exist" is a koan [google.com]. One must detach oneself from Pagerank if one is ever to find One-ness with the SERPs . . .
But that's crazy, right?
"I want to be a happy idiot and struggle for the legal tender" . . . . Now THAT's enlightenment.
| 9:57 pm on May 16, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yeah, the hell with ever getting visited by Googlebot!
Saying the hell with PR and getting the bot to visit are NOT mutually exclusive.
Links placed with a foucus on generating traffic are also likely to end up on pages that get bot visits often enough to take care of showing the bot the way to your site. Bots are traffic too ya know. :)
| 1:22 am on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
thanks for the info treeline :)
| 9:05 am on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Nice post, thanks.
Just a small point - links need to be chosen carefully, so they aren't to/from industries too far apart. The latest comments on Matt Cutts' blog make it very clear that irrelevant links may lead to a swift slide down the ratings under the new Google regime (and I take it he isn't just referring to link farms).
But a really good and helpful post, thanks.
| 7:15 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"There is no Search Engine"
There's a path tha leads out of suffering
| 12:30 am on May 19, 2006 (gmt 0)|
On Matt Cutts' blog he makes the following suggestion for 'good' ways to get links that should help you whatever search engine changes come along:
|As far as how to get back links, things like offering tools (robots.txt checkers), information (newsletters, blogs), services, or interesting hooks (e.g. seobuzzbox doing interviews) can really jumpstart links. |
Building up a reputation with a community helps (doing forums on your own site or participating in other forums can help).
As far as hooks, I’d study things like digg, slashdot, reddit, techmeme, tailrank to get an idea of what captures people’s attention. For example, contests and controversy attract links, but can be overused. That would be my quick take.
He's with Google, not Yahoo, but the ideas should be solid anywhere.
| 6:32 am on May 19, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Nice post treeline...but do you think its always possible to get links related to the product.
I mean forums are a good way to get links but then if google considers a PR0 for them then its of no use.
| 7:47 am on May 22, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Everything is good but the problem i am facing is that from when i have submited site map to yahoo they have not crawled my website.. can anybody tell me what is the problem.. link sttucture and everything is good though they have not crawled the website.. please guide me...
| 11:14 am on May 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
How bout we have a 6 month moratorium on trying to manipulate the search engines? Remove all things from your sites that are there only to gain search rank. Google won't know what to do since their algo is based on trying to eliminate spammers rather than trying to find good sites. When the 6 months is up and Google is kicking back thinking they have solved the problem, we can attack.
| 7:19 pm on May 25, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I used to had one site in niche A and other site in niche B.
I've found very hard to obrain links for those niches.
But now I've created on site which have several topics. For some of the topics it seems it is quite easy to obtain the one-way link.
Anyway, I feel stupid when I have to send 30-40 emails by hand asking for the link. It needs 2-3 hours and I got 2-3 links. Somehow I feel a bit stupid doing that. But when I see that some people like my site and they respond sincerely I feel better.
But anyway, those "chaise for links campains" are stupid to me. But there is no other way. If your main page is indexed in search engine it means nobody knows about your site.