| 7:54 pm on Mar 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
to get a link from a page to which a good site links; opens up a realm of possibilities.
i have only gone link hunting recently for sites that can potentially drive a lot of targeted traffic, by checking the technorati rank, alexa, quantcast, pr; you could not only find the pages to which a trusted link points, but, although not as valuable, pages that link to that trusted site. you could get an idea of how good the link by performing your queries.
you may not get the link protein originally source from that trusted link; but you could find other neighborhoods that are just as good or better.
| 3:13 pm on Mar 19, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I've been doing this for 3 years...
and yeah, it works.
Takes a lot of research but once you've mapped the neighborhood, it's very easy.
| 5:08 pm on Mar 19, 2009 (gmt 0)|
While I don't think this can hurt I doubt it has added benefit just because the links are "2nd tier". I'd place this tactic a distant second when compared to the importance of a proper internal link structure. That being said this is a good suggestion, one that I use already as well.
| 5:36 pm on Mar 19, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I think it's a shortcut to identifying sites with decent backlinks that are outside of established ranking networks. Anything that is useful for finding decent backlinks is a good addition to other techniques.
| 3:31 pm on Mar 20, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|I'd place this tactic a distant second when compared to the importance of a proper internal link structure. |
i don't know; i have seen some blogs drive good traffic with poor metrics that make a "quality" link:
- low pr
- low alexa ranking
and i have seen links from sites with pr's of 5 and better; better alexa ranking and not drive any traffic; however, if it's for link protein, we're comparing eggs to eggplant. but i have boosted serp positioning landing one link coming from a site with pr 1 that is, nonetheless, very related to my niche.
so is it internal link structure? or 2nd tier links?
| 4:01 pm on Mar 20, 2009 (gmt 0)|
This method for identifying useful inbound links, a shortcut for helpfing find high quality links is far and away one of the more useful tips posted in this forum for awhile now. If you care about relevance, if you care about quality, then this tip is important.
|Death of the Man|
| 7:47 pm on Mar 21, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Then how do you get a link from those second-tier sites? Do you e-mail the webmaster and just ask? Do you offer money or a link of your own?
| 8:02 pm on Mar 21, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|Then how do you get a link... |
This discussion is about identifying high value sites. How one obtains a link is a completely different topic, in fact it's a vast topic. You may want to read our Link Development Library [webmasterworld.com] to get an idea of what is involved. Good luck. ;)
I was using this technique yesterday. Found a well linked dot mil site that was linking out to other sites. Couldn't get a link from the dot mil site because there was no contact information. So I went for the sites the dot mil was linking to.
| 1:17 am on Mar 23, 2009 (gmt 0)|
talking about dot mil; i know of a site to which .mil's point that has a non-official evangelist site filled with content on how to get fit for that part of the military and a gear store; and they have a section on which you could start your own blog; not sure if you could add links on the blog posts, but i have seen links without 'nofollow' links in the forums; if you could find a network with similar functionality in your vertical, you may want to explore it for branding purposes where you contribute and become influential in the community.
| 11:33 am on Mar 23, 2009 (gmt 0)|
this is all based on the TrustRank patent Google filed a few years ago, isn't it?
| 11:07 pm on Mar 24, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Related: is your friend
| 3:09 pm on Mar 25, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|this is all based on the TrustRank patent Google filed a few years ago, isn't it? |
TrustRank is a Yahoo! assigned patent
| 11:38 am on Apr 6, 2009 (gmt 0)|
There was an interesting discussion on this topic started by tedster in 2004. (I just read it for the first time.)
I don't know if there's a coined phrase for it. Link Juice Hopping? Assumed Grandparental Relevance?
Does anchor text work to the 2nd generation? [webmasterworld.com]
| 4:20 pm on Apr 6, 2009 (gmt 0)|
so it gives you another parameter to look for when seeking that 1st tier. similar or same anchor text in the 2nd tier may give you that xtra 'unf!'
| 12:40 pm on Apr 7, 2009 (gmt 0)|
That's pretty interesting, because I've believed that usually a link that sends traffic and a link that gives you a ranking boost overlapped A LOT (reminds me of the post link development=traffic development or something along those lines on here).
However, I've also believed that webmasters getting so much more search traffic than referral traffic was at least in a way a self-fulfilling prophecy, because they often seem to go for links they wouldnt go for for traffic purposes.
Actually, I'm in this situation right now: I have the opportunity to get a ton of links from such sites as the ones that wheel mentioned (.edu and .gov pages with 10-15 carefully selected links) for my new site - I've actually tried my approach already and one .gov site and multiple .edu sites have promised me a link already.
However, I came to the realization, that that will only give me search traffic and not much referral traffic.
So, I assume there still are many linking opportunities that'll send you a bunch of link juice, but virtually no traffic whatsoever?
If that's the case, and we're thinking long term (which we all should), will such links still count a lot in the future or will links that help you rank, but not send any traffic go the way of reciprocal links and the like in the future? (I've often heard about the concept of using user data, which Im pretty convinced will be done...and statements such as "why would a search engineer want to count a link that people don't click on",etc.).
I assume if we're talking links from very good neighborhoods - untapped areas (that your average commercial webmaster in your niche wont go for) - such as .edu and especially .gov links....then they probably still will count into the future (as long as links remain important). Agree/disagree?:-)