One way links are still king :)
Why link exchanges, I love natural one way links.
natural links. yeah right? You'll die of old age waiting...
|natural links. yeah right? You'll die of old age waiting... |
Then chase them. Or lure them.
No I will not die watching, but maybe you? I code a great tool which everyone needs, bam, that's it.
When they get reported for spamming and link exchanging they will fall in the serps and it will be a bit harder for them to work their way back up.
>>So should we do the same thing, I can not see any other way to beat him.
Go for it and let us know how you make out.
Or you could report them for spamming....
Why would you think link exchanges don't work?
Link Exchanges should be part of any overall link strategy. Just don't over do it.
If anyone wants some confirmation, this comes from Matt Cutts [mattcutts.com]: "Reciprocal links by themselves aren’t automatically bad, but we’ve communicated before that there is such a thing as excessive reciprocal linking."
I would suggest that you not use mass emailing to find reciprocal link partners, however. This has a way of 1) being discovered by Google, and 2) getting your email server onto spam blacklists.
Building a good backlink profile is not a quantity game. I know of an outrageously successful website that is happy to average 3 new one-way links for every 40 man-hours spent on the project. None of these links are ever likely to be devalued by any algorithm -- but the contacts are made one-at-a-time, and the relationships are nurtured intelligently.
In my sector I find it very difficult to endorse other sites due to poor quality and illegal content so I don't participate in link exchanges. I raise the quality of my site when I have time and get unsolicited links from other sites. When I want more links, I keep working to raise the quality even higher.
A few people misinterpret Matt Cutts, 'Chinese Whispers' kicks in and suddenly blogs & forums are full of people screaming "reciprocal linking is dead".
Maybe it is (or will be soon) for those with link directories on their sites, but those who carefully select their link partners are still doing fine.
One ways are no doubt better, but there is still value in reciprocal linking.
Note the use of the word EXCESSIVE.
Well even Matt Cutts stumbled on that site recently on his blog and was criticizing the link exchange with all the other sites.
So they know
But they still rank no.1 for a good keyword
"Why would you think link exchanges don't work?"
Some people believe the earth is flat, and a surge is a good thing. There is no explaination for why people believe crazy things.
Exchanging links is still the most fundamentally natural way for websites to link outside of themselves, and of course Google and other engines value valuable, genuine, natural linking.
Reciprocals still work for me.
Though I don't set my link building campaigns solely on reciprocals, but I still use them.
Relevant one-ways are the best ones, but relevant reciprocals are not dry either.
I usually set a target of getting links at a minimum ratio of 75:25 to maintain a balance and to avoid what Matt says "Excessive Reciprocal Exchanges"
25% One-ways (the more the better)
Clone site on a trusted domain and spam the #*$! out of that. Then it does not matter if you get caught.
I have been using a linking strategy for many years and have never had a problem. The crucial element, I believe, is related links. A linking strategy to garner any link is a bad thing. A linking strategy to garner related links is a good thing...
Oh, and by the way... adding a thousand links at once, whether related or not, is not a good thing. Adding related links a few at a time seems to work best. I think that is what is meant by "...contacts are made one-at-a-time, and the relationships are nurtured intelligently."