Keeping Your IBLs Relevant

What is your definition of a trashy reciprocal link?

[martinibuster]

So I was looking at a recip link page of a non-marketing related industry site, and they've got one section devoted to links they've exchanged with seo sites.

If one is interested in exchanging relevant links and having the website mapped to relevant neighborhoods, does a recip page like that suck?

Am I being paranoid?

[Crush]

MB to be honest all recip pages suck. Some are just stuctured better than others.

[sugarrae]

I fully admit to being paranoid. ;)

If the sites they were linking to made *you* go hmm, then I wouldn't bother with the link. Honestly, link building isn't a desperation process - webmasters, especially experienced ones, know they can afford to be picky. :)

[LostOne]

"and they've got one section devoted to links they've exchanged with seo sites."

I'd stay away from that arena. I'd rather stay off the questionable radar. SEO can be a scary word IMO.

[neuron]

suck? Well, I guess it would suck if you didn't get a link from them. I mean, there's all those other marketing related sites that are getting links from that site, and if you cut yourself out because the site is not 'relevant' (even tho they have a relevant page linking to all sorts of other marketing sites), then you will never be able to compete.

For the sake of illustration, let's synonomize link popularity with education, and grades with quality of links. Everyone knows a 4.0 is better than a lesser grade, but if you can only maintain a 4.0 grade by taking one class per semester, it may take you 10 years to graduate; whereas, if you study hard and take as many classes as you can, you can finish in 3 years with a 3.0 average. If the question is 'who is going to make the most money between the two examples students over a period of 5, 7, or 10 years, then it seems quite plain that the student who sacrificed his high grades for more grades will be the winner.

There is a cut-off point for relevancy of links with varies with every site owner.

To phrase it best as advice, I would say make every effort to get the links as relevant as possible, but never let a lesser grade of relevance stop you from getting a link. If all I can get is a URL link, then fine, give me the link. If I can get my keyterms as anchor text, then all the better, but I never ever never turn down a link.

I'm sure you'll do fine, entering the corporate world at 28 years of age with your 4.0 grade point, but will you ever catch up with the guy that graduated when he was 21 with a GPA of 3.0 (who now perhaps has more advanced degrees)?

I was quick on the relevancy bandwagon of links long before it ever became necessary. As a result, my sites always move up in the updates (can't move up any more). However, in truth, relevancy has never been as important as the early adopters expected it to be, and certainly not as much as the johnny-come-latelies who "only take relevant links" bozos that parrot the trend today.

I have a site that is ranked #1 at all 3 major SE's for it's two major 1-word keyterms, and it is all due to reciprocal linking. The most significant thing about that site's #1 ranking is that there are no sites in the same industry that link to it.

Yes, I always get my links as relevant as I can, but I never let relevancy stop me from getting a link.

[Crush]

I know what you mean neuron but links pages suck as in their usefulness. I never turn down a link either unless it is from an adult site.

[edited by: martinibuster at 9:38 pm (utc) on Aug. 3, 2005]
[edit reason] spelling [/edit]

[neuron]

the above makes it sound like I link without discretion, and that's not the case. The standard is always "is this site worth linking to?" in most cases it is not. However, if the site is worth linking to, then usually I will take a link from them any way I can get it. Sites that link without discretion are never even considered for reciprocal links.

The sites I get links from do not have to be properly SEO'd for their keyterms, let alone my keyterms, for me to want to get a link from them.

[sit2510]

>>> For the sake of illustration, let's synonomize link popularity with education,

Great example, neuron!

[neuron]

The 2nd most significant thing about that example site above is that it is #1 for it's main keyterm with less than 2000 receiprocal links, and the site that used to be #1 for years and is now #2 has more than 500,000 backlinks, and many of those are .edu links. The keyterm is part of their domain name just like it is in my domain name. I think the difference is the keyterm is our main business, and that same keyterm is only an ancillary modifier/descriptor of their main business. Like we sell "wholesale widgets" and they sell "widget manuals".

My point being that if a site with less than 2000 reciprocal links can beat a site with 500,000 one-way backlinks, then reciprocal links can't be all that bad, can they? Note also that many of those 500,000 one-way backlinks also come from .edu's.

Why does this site with less than 2000 recips outrank the site with 500,000 one-way backlinks? Because I got links from a lot of sites that have a link directory page that links to topologically similar sites as my own, and the other site gets links from sites that are not topologically similar to my main keyterm.

So, get the link.