homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.198.130.203
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

This 67 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 67 ( 1 2 [3]     
Content is king? - Cash is King When it Comes to Links
My analysis shows that all the top sites in my niche buy links
surfgatinho




msg:4012678
 11:29 am on Oct 24, 2009 (gmt 0)

After many years of building what is easily the most comprehensive site in my niche I am beginning to realise that great content alone is not enough.

I have the content, I have the visitors looking for that content but the related monetised content is so competitive that I don't see why anyone would link to yet another site selling bla bla.

I do OKish in the SERPS for some of the competitive terms but am getting pushed out by sites that just focus on the money stuff. Looking at their back-links they are all buying them.

So there we go. Is anyone going to try and dissuade me from doing the same or is that just the way it is?

 

Marvin Hlavac




msg:4025241
 1:49 pm on Nov 15, 2009 (gmt 0)

Yes, but wouldn't that be easier to manipulate than links?

wheel




msg:4025254
 2:51 pm on Nov 15, 2009 (gmt 0)


My theory is that someday soon one of the big 3 are going to figure out that actual behavior from real people is a way better more accurate way to gauge a site's importance for a keyword

You can't gauge direct human behavior. You can only gauge what you see their computer's doing.

First, that's what links already do - attempt to measure human behavior/motivation/action. there's nothing that suggests that some other measure of computer action (call it what you will) is going to be a better, less manipulable guage.

Secondly, whatever it is,can be manipulated. And I bet that pretty much anything that can be measured like that is easier to manipulate than links and harder to detect.

londrum




msg:4025265
 3:38 pm on Nov 15, 2009 (gmt 0)

you can't really gauge the meaning behind a link either.
people might say something like "this place is better than this place", and link to both. or they might say "whatever you do, don't go here"

or maybe they have a football page, and list all the official team sites. but does that mean they think any of them are any good?

people might talk about a site for any number of different reasons without intending to give them a vote.

plus, you've got the problem of links from years ago. people can change their minds about stuff. i might have voted for the republicans four years ago, but that doesn't mean i want my vote remembered when the next election comes up. that old vote should be classed as totally irrelevant.

Lorel




msg:4025352
 9:31 pm on Nov 15, 2009 (gmt 0)

I saw on a recent Matt Cutts video from Pub Con that Google is getting pretty good at discovering paid links and they just remove whatever benefit they might have. So no need for a big house cleaning now - just a little bit of dusting here and little bit there.

martinibuster




msg:4025464
 12:48 am on Nov 16, 2009 (gmt 0)

Google is getting pretty good at discovering paid links...

Google is getting better at finding yesterday's low hanging fruit, paid link schemes many people abandoned years ago. Google's automated paid link algo is imperfect and has been creating false positives throughout 2009, resulting in innocent sites losing their traffic.

Makaveli2007




msg:4025752
 12:39 pm on Nov 16, 2009 (gmt 0)

My theory is that someday soon one of the big 3 are going to figure out that actual behavior from real people is a way better more accurate way to gauge a site's importance for a keyword. Bounce rate, time on site, return visits, ect. are a much better actual test of a site than simply counting links.

Not that I care a ton about defending Google & Co lol, but I find comments like this kind of surprising...Have you considered that Google has a bunch of brillant people working dilligently on trying to improve their search engine?

And then someone simply knows that they're completely wrong and will soon find out the ultimate truth..my money would be on Google's team over your guess :-).

Then again, if they employ too many mathematicians and statisticians it might take them a few years to find out how to tie their shoe strings hehe.

Lorel




msg:4025985
 6:58 pm on Nov 16, 2009 (gmt 0)

My theory is that someday soon one of the big 3 are going to figure out that actual behavior from real people is a way better more accurate way to gauge a site's importance for a keyword.

Wasn't this in Google's recent patent(s)? :)

This 67 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 67 ( 1 2 [3]
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.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved