homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.204.215.209
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Subscribe to WebmasterWorld

Home / Forums Index / Marketing and Biz Dev / Link Development
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: martinibuster

Link Development Forum

    
links from blogs
eljacko




msg:3840232
 12:39 pm on Feb 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

Hello I have a few links from blog wesbites but as all blogs they are growing and making my link profile look spammy. I have read that Google only looks as the website as 1 and does not count the rest of the links coming from it.

Is this true?

 

JohnRoy




msg:3840905
 5:17 am on Feb 3, 2009 (gmt 0)

It needs to be diversified. They look at the "community" youre site's in, before they judge it.

eljacko




msg:3841483
 8:17 pm on Feb 3, 2009 (gmt 0)

hello John, wh do you mean by community? ther are very good blogs, with very good revant themes.

seowizz




msg:3841509
 8:55 pm on Feb 3, 2009 (gmt 0)

I have a pretty strong opinion on this and have been in many debates about spammy looking links.

First of all Google ranks pages not sites therefore looks at the links from a page prespective. Secondly don't worry too much about having lots of links from the same top level domain. If google penalised sites on the basis of incoming links you could quite easily sabatage your competition within a week.

However don't expect much link juice to flow from the links.

Anymore questions let me know :)

martinibuster




msg:3841536
 9:12 pm on Feb 3, 2009 (gmt 0)

I agree with JohnRoy about diversification. Virtually every time someone comes to me because their site is bouncing in the SERPs and can't hold on to their spots, it's because of a lack of diversification.

In my experience it's good to mix up the communities from which you're receiving links. Over the years the rankings tend to remain stable, rock solid. Every site that has backlinks is a part of a community because they are linked to other sites that link back to each other, thus forming a community.

Shaddows




msg:3841927
 10:04 am on Feb 4, 2009 (gmt 0)

Taking the 'community' concept, an upsteam change (say a hub of the community has a series of outbounds to a site thats gone 'bad') can cause the whole interlinked community to get RELATIVELY devalued, lets give is a nominal loss of 10% link juice. If all your links come from that commnuity, you have just lost 10% of your backlink power.

Now thats an extreme example, but shockwaves and ripples happen constantly in the SERPs, as calculation is iterative and inductive feedback is the natural result. If your whole ranking power is from the same community, ripples through that community will be magnified on your site.

Conversely, varied profiles means a temporary loss of power from one source is dampened by the stable power from the rest.

@seowizz
First of all Google ranks pages not sites therefore looks at the links from a page prespective

That's a logical fallacy. Even assuming a page is ranked independantly, in a vacuum, it does not follow that the outbound influences are also considered independantly. In fact, a page is not ranked independently. The rank of a page is heavily influenced by the standing of the domain it belongs to. The behaviour of that site in giving links (e.g. link selling) will be considered sitewide, with any implications (e.g. penalties) also being applied sitewide.

That said, incremental links from the same domain will be LESS VALUABLE in their effect, but should NOT BE NEGATIVE, for the stated reason that otherwise you could destroy your competitors.

phpmaven




msg:3842435
 8:24 pm on Feb 4, 2009 (gmt 0)

If google penalised sites on the basis of incoming links you could quite easily sabatage your competition within a week.

That's an old argument that doesn't hold true anymore, in my opinion. That used to be the case, however beginning last year, Google has definitely started hammering sites based on what sites link to them. I've had it happen to my own site, and yes, I know for a fact that it was penalized for links that were purchased on certain blogs that were targeted by Google as link sellers.

My SEO at the time was a well known one who frequents the SEO conferences and actually spoke directly to Matt Cutts about my link profile after my site was buried in the serps.

I believe that Google has made the decision to penalize sites who are purchasing links even though there is the potential for someone to torpedo your site. I think that they finally decided that the rewards outweigh the risks when it comes to battling paid links.

At this point in 2009 I think that any technique for getting links that runs afoul of Google's guidelines is not worth the risk, unless the domain is expendable.

Google can and will penalize your site based on who links to you.

Mark

Quadrille




msg:3842990
 3:10 pm on Feb 5, 2009 (gmt 0)

If google penalised sites on the basis of incoming links you could quite easily sabatage your competition within a week.

It still holds true in most cases.

It's general knowledge that you could damage your own site on the 'bad neighborhood' principle, and there's increasing evidence that Google is targetting link sellers

I believe that Google has made the decision to penalize sites who are purchasing links even though there is the potential for someone to torpedo your site. I think that they finally decided that the rewards outweigh the risks when it comes to battling paid links.

I don't doubt your experience - though it's the first time I've seen a specific case of a link buyer being penalised - but I'd still suggest that this would probably have been a 'special case' rather than the norm (or the algo). It is much more likely, in my view, that this was a specific case with (from Google's POV) overwhelming evidence of who was doing what, including manual intervention.

I don't think the link-selling situation is dire enough for Google to give a license to destroy others' sites - even at great effort and expense.

But if we start to see regular reports like yours, I may have to eat my words.

[edited by: Quadrille at 3:35 pm (utc) on Feb. 5, 2009]

nealrodriguez




msg:3844047
 7:57 pm on Feb 6, 2009 (gmt 0)

Reputable sites that sell links won’t have their search engine rankings or PageRank penalized–a search for [daily cal] would still return dailycal.org. However, link-selling sites can lose their ability to give reputation (e.g. PageRank and anchortext).

[mattcutts.com...]

that said, my experience with this issue was when google started the 'paid link' hunt the buying sites didn't get penalized, but did lose page positioning because they had previously built it through paid links; it was also seen in a decrease in tool bar page ranking.

so if 1 out of 10 of your ibl's were paid you would lose that proportion of ranking; if 10 out of 10 of your ibl's were paid then you lost all your ranking.

same thing that has happened with article directory submissions and most directory submissions; they used to be worth a lot more. if your site's ranking was derived solely from such sources, it's exposure on the se's decreased due to the constitution of your link base.

Quadrille




msg:3844356
 10:11 am on Feb 7, 2009 (gmt 0)

so if 1 out of 10 of your ibl's were paid you would lose that proportion of ranking; if 10 out of 10 of your ibl's were paid then you lost all your ranking.

That makes very good sense; what we don't know is how 'sure' Google feel they need to be before devaluing those links.

They seem to have been pretty successful with industrial link sellers - and by extension, their customers (who may not have realised that they are paying for, er, nothing!).

But I wonder how far the algo takes them in the wider world? Google were inviting reports of link selling, which probably accounts for a few more actions (and a lot more comparing their findings with submitted reports!).

phpmaven




msg:3845330
 3:57 am on Feb 9, 2009 (gmt 0)

I'm not suggesting that you could easily sabotage a competitor just by pointing a bunch of spammy links to his site. But the notion that incoming links that are identified by Google as either paid or spammy cannot hurt your rankings or even cause a penalty to your site is just not true any more.

I was always in the camp that thought that the worst that could happen is that those links wouldn't pass "link juice", but that you weren't risking anything more than that. But I'm personally convinced that purchasing text links purely for the SEO benefit is a now a high risk strategy that could seriously hurt your site.

Of course there are those that would argue that this has always been a high risk strategy, and they may have a point. I think what is really telling is that my former SEO has completely changed his business model based on the fact that a few of his clients got hammered because of the obvious purchased text links he was getting for them. He now has gone completely "white hat", whereas previously his MO was that he would buy text links that weren't easily detectable by automated means.

Mark

gldean




msg:3846254
 10:51 am on Feb 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I don't think Google minds. The higher the pr the higher the link juice.

GD

Shaddows




msg:3846322
 12:21 pm on Feb 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I don't think Google minds. The higher the pr the higher the link juice.

GD


I'm sure you have reasons to think that although, in the middle of a discussion, I would have thought you would have shared them rather than simply stating an opinion running contrary to the consensus.

However, let me outline the opposing reasoning.

1) Google wants to return results based on relevancy
2) In a world without paid links, the "votes" that links represent are a strong indicator of value attributed by actual humans (webmasters)
3) Larry Page wrote an algorithm to take advantage of this, giving a nominal Rank. It was named after him; PageRank
4) BUYING LINKS DISTORTS THE PAGERANK ALGORITHM AND THEREFORE BREAKS THE VERY BASIS OF THE GOOGLE ENGINE
5) Google dislikes their core product being broken/manipulated and has taken steps to prevent it.

Thus, poorly done link exchange and link selling is not only frowned upon, but COUNTERMEASURES are put in place to fix or at least mitigate the problem.

nealrodriguez




msg:3846412
 3:10 pm on Feb 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I don't think Google minds. The higher the pr the higher the link juice.

and the 'higher' or more link juice you will lose once g finds out that you've built that 'juice' by paid means.

gldean




msg:3846805
 12:05 am on Feb 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

Thank you for the reply shaddows and see what your saying. I can also see you are a lot more educated in this field then I am.:-) I have been posting some of my links on PR6-7 sites as of late and it seems to working, not great, but working.

Regards,
GD

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