| 12:07 am on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I got 30 sitewide links from 2 different websites and im nervous. 5000 from one website is not recomended.
| 12:22 am on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I wasn't informed that this was going to be a sitewide link and that's the reason I went for it.
The link is up two weeks and got listed in Yahoo Link Directory recently.
I was stunned when I saw it was sitewide which got me reall nervous.
I am working now that the webmaster get this resolved immediately.
Thanks for your advice.
| 7:56 am on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
F_Rose - Sitewides definitely do send a signal that the link(s) are purchased.
Chances are that this won't directly hurt you, but it might cause any links from that site, including yours, not to be counted. So, you might be spending money for a link that's not doing you any good.
I'm not sure how fast they flag these things, but I assume that 5,000 links from the same site get flagged pretty fast. I'd suggest you cancel the contract (if you can) and explain to the site why.
| 12:24 pm on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Google has flagged it before we even had a chance to cancel contract.
They dropped us for our keywords drastically and some keywords they dropped us completely..
I am working on cancelling the contract.
Will the keywords come back once the link is removed?
[edited by: F_Rose at 12:24 pm (utc) on Mar. 9, 2007]
| 12:25 pm on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I have bought sitewide links from two pr5 sites, one with 700 pages and one with 100. They have given me great result on the keyword.
I didn't buy them for the ranking, but for the traffic - so I never worried about what the SE would think.
| 1:07 pm on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Should I cancel the link all togetheir or just take off the sitewide issue and keep one link?
| 1:09 pm on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I would say with the problems everyone is having with SERPS at the moment its too early to tell whether it will hurt your site.
| 7:14 pm on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Google has flagged it before we even had a chance to cancel contract. |
They dropped us for our keywords drastically and some keywords they dropped us completely..
It's hard to be sure that the drop was just for the links...
a) Did they drop you to a position that was lower than what you had before you bought the links?
b) If so, was there anything else going on... say with other links... that might have caused the additional drop?
| 7:28 pm on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Purchased links are generally frowned upon by the major search engines as its indicitive of SERP manipulation. They like natural IBLS and have ways to determine if links are payed for.
Concerning natural IBL's, where you aren't paying for the sitewide link, as long as you don't link back to the site, it should not affect yours negatively.
If it did, then it would be to easy to mess with your competitors rankings by just doing a sitewide link to them from your site.
You may not get full credit for all the links to you, but you shouldn't get dinged for it.
| 7:57 pm on Mar 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Hi, just thought I'd throw my two cents in. All of the SE's have new link filters in place. You will definitely get smacked down hard if you get hundreds or thousands of links from one domain all at once.
From my experience only one link from another url is even going to be counted by the SE's. Yahoos! Site Explorer will give you an idea of how many links you have from each url.
We have approximately 5,000 links listed in Google Webmaster and Yahoo Link Manager from this particular site?
Oh No! All with the same link text?!
Yes you will be in the link spam radar now for a little while. One categorized link per url is all that will do any good. And if you are going to purchase a link like this ask that one link be placed on a high ranking and high traffic page. This way hopefully the link will bring you traffic and Google love. However 5,000 links suddenly appearing may bring you traffic but not SE love. Look at this from their point of view. You or an alias could possibly own the other url, besides it being an obviously purchased link. Or you could fast track a blog to create thousand of outbound links(there is software to do this so G,Y, and M are on the lookout).
You are better off getting listed in second tier directories(one way of course, might cost ten bucks) if you are trying to boost your rankings. Also, if you can have a competitor with a higher ranking than yours swap links with you(reciprocal linking is not dead just stay on the focus of your site and don't bother if you are going to be on links_42.php).
I would either demand a refund, you have been taken advantage of!, or demand a link on their home page only.
Just speaking from experience hope this helps!, Dan
| 2:26 am on Mar 10, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|They dropped us for our keywords drastically and some keywords they dropped us completely. |
It's doubtful that Google.com counted and applied this link to you this fast. More likely, you ran across one of these terrible DC's that of late have been throwing many sites around from top ranks to buried ranks.
My bet is if you check your rankings on another DC things are normal.
| 4:30 am on Mar 10, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I think it's worth mentioning that I'm familiar with a couple of sites that have been around for years that have sitewide links to each other, with common ownership clearly stated. Google has always shown much love to both sites. Both appear to have a lot of independent IBLs, many of which are one way, and if you check out the whois, they're not hosted together.
But if you look at the other engines, MSN and Yahoo don't show any liking for either those sites at all, they're buried for their keywords.
| 2:17 am on Mar 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for all your advice..
Perhaps the fact that we have paid links to our site caused our keywords to drop?
If that's the case how do you get links to your site without purchasing them?
Is it that wrong to purchase relevant links? How could Google detect paid links?
| 6:51 am on Mar 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|If that's the case how do you get links to your site without purchasing them? |
You need content on your site that's good enough, controversial enough, notorious enough, or in some way attractive enough to motivate people to link to you. You then need to promote it enough, I feel, to get people to consider it.
Note the "Library" link in the upper left-hand corner of this page, just above the forum title. There's a lot of good information in there. Read and study it, and then adapt it to your situation.
Here's a post that immediately came to mind...
Link Development vs. Traffic Development and Staying with the Times
Popularity Has a Whole New Meaning
Here's a classic post from Brett that you've probably seen, since you've been around WebmasterWorld for a while, which still contains many truths about what you need to do...
Successful Site in 12 Months with Google Alone
26 steps to 15k a day
And follow discussions in this forum for a while. Search site:webmasterworld.com on Google for posts about link-building and traffic building.
[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 7:27 am (utc) on Mar. 11, 2007]
| 6:49 pm on Mar 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
PS to the above... note further discussion about this particular situation in the Google Forum...
Purchasing Links - Is it a problem?
| 10:00 am on Mar 13, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I think there might be some factors that are unknown here that makes a big difference.
1. Is your site new?
2. Do you have a lot of links from trustworthy sites?
If not then maybe you should consider removing the site wide link.
But don't forget that there are a lot of sites that have built there link value on sitewide links. Different kind of free templates often feature a link to the creator and they generally have a high page rank and tend to rank pretty good.
A blogroll on different sites generates value.
I made the "mistake" of getting the same kind of sitewide link as you did when we were fresh out. In the beginning it really hurt us but today when we have a lot more links we start to see a great value for the keyword from the original site wide link.
Just as always if try to get a good mix of links and don't be afraid of short term loss for long term gain.
| 2:41 pm on Mar 13, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I got a site wide last month that I did not pay for. It was on a PR5 blog. It moved me from a SERP 103 to a SERP 19. Overture says that keyword gets 12000+ per month though it is probably more like 5000 per month. All that said, I have had really good success with a site wide link. I do have an opportunity to get a PR6 site wide but just to be safe I am going to wait a month or two for the link. The last thing I want right now is to get slapped by G.
| 2:29 pm on Mar 18, 2007 (gmt 0)|
It's an interesting issue with sitewides.
I don't know about link buying, but I've had some good and some bad experience with them between same ownership sites promoting this exact fact, same ownership.
From what I see the following parameters are at play:
- Are the pages you get the links relevant to the link text?
- Are they trusted?
- Is your site trusted?
- How many is too many? ( 300 is not. 3000 is. But where are the thresholds? )
If the answers are yes, yes, yes, and around 10-300, it's okay.
Otherwise they either got discounted or made the target site disappear for the phrase used, even if it was the company name.
A pretty reasonable measure is not to do them at all.
While doing SEO for a pretty overpopulated theme, I noticed the competition paying for regular advertizing space on local online newspapers. Or the online version of the local newspapers, whatever. These newspaper sites were obviously well endorsed by sites with ultra-high trustrank ( I tracked their links too, and they were ) as being probably the only english language resources in the area that weren't the offspring of US or UK media.
The ads featured many links, some were banners ( image links ) some were text links, some java dropdowns, so most of them wouldn't even be seen by bots.
But the ads became sitewides, and stayed there for a very long term. Obviously long enough to pass enough "juice" with them to get the targets out of possible penalties that this spamlike linking structure would indicate.
And they rank top 3 for everything.
It goes to show this is a race between linking structure and relevancy related penalties, and the "juice" that's passed. There's an uneven balance though. So sitewides only work for and from the most trusted sites.
You don't need them.
A single top-level page link of recommendation gives almost the same results.