|Sites using paid links dominating in the UK|
| 8:33 pm on Mar 6, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Been alot of shifting around these past two weeks on Google UK. This week, I've noticed that sites using paid links are dominating the top ten results in two of my heavy industries. Backlinks for these tend to be 20-50 links from each of several blogs/article sites in their respective "Sponsored Links" sections.
Each is a newcomer to a top ten that has had the same companies ranking for nearly a year now (mine included). The number 2, 7 and 8 spots for one of the top phrases has been taken over by sites using paid links that didn't rank in the top 30 before.
I see now why Google made such a big fuss and scare story over paid links ... they really can't spot them can they?! They need to scare everyone into not using them because they actually work. Time to contact some blog owners I think and get in on it before it's too late!
[edited by: tedster at 8:52 pm (utc) on Mar. 6, 2008]
| 10:33 pm on Mar 6, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Time to contact some blog owners I think and get in on it before it's too late!
I would say its time to report those paid links to Google. It can be done within Google Webmaster Tools:
Download data for all sites
Report spam in our index
Report paid links
| 12:58 pm on Mar 7, 2008 (gmt 0)|
>>>I see now why Google made such a big fuss and scare story over paid links ... they really can't spot them can they?!
Not quite. In some cases, they can spot them very well - proven by the large PR drop of many blogs and directories in the last 6 months. That apparently so far hasn't affected the link juice they're passing. In other cases, they've not shown that they can detect paid links.
If you're going to grab paid links, make sure it's not your primary link building strategy on your main site. Otherwise at some point you'll be left looking like the people that did so well out of massive recips a few years ago (which eventually ended). That being said, seems like there's some easy business out there right now by dumping some paid links to secondary site.
| 1:58 pm on Mar 7, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Otherwise at some point you'll be left looking like the people that did so well out of massive recips a few years ago (which eventually ended) |
Last I checked, recip links are doing just fine as well.
The only people who "lost" rankings were the millions of scared webmasters who got their recip links removed by their partners after MC made another similar PRONOUNCEMENT OF DOOOOOM about penalties, and bannings, and the like.
As internetheaven is realizing and I've been saying for a year and a half... :yawn:
HA, nevermind, what's the use?
I'll get 10 people claiming i don't know what i'm talking about after this post anyways.
| 4:18 am on Mar 9, 2008 (gmt 0)|
whitenight, in your view, any point in reporting any of this?
| 6:24 am on Mar 12, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Not sure I understand the question?
Reporting to Goog?
Probably not, they know well enough who buys and sells links.
And unless they plan on building a completely different SE that radically counts links different than the way they do now, then they are stuck playing this game of chicken where they reduce TBPR and hope to inhibit the link buying market.
Or did you mean reporting to this board?
Ha, i would hope that certain webmasters would use this knowledge to their advantage. Especially if they are trying to compete with the big boys who have always bought links and quite rarely have the best product on the market.
(see my arguments about Coke, McDonalds, and just about every other Fortune 500 company that spends more money on advertising/marketing than creating a vastly superior product)
And of course, then we could have frank discussions about the real value of buying/selling links without all the nonsense FUD issues getting interwoven in the scientific nature of ranking on the web.