Forum Moderators: martinibuster
So this guide is to learn how to do this the proper way and get new sites off to a flying start.
Linking for PageRank
The PR is Google's way of 'grading' a site's worth and is taken as a sign of status - with every site awarded a number (rank) that ascends with time and not solely based on content. PageRank is generally accepted as some sort of 'award' and although it's not official, apart from Alexa it's currently the only thing available with which to grade a site.
Many place great authority with the foolbar, and some trade, exchange and only deal with sites of a certain rank eg: PR6 and above, this is very foolish as a site can be really awful, possess little content or usefulness and still be given a fairly high PR (I've seen sites with PR 6 that are no more than shells)
not to mention missing out on real good quality traffic because of a bad judgement based on the little green bar. Some site owners refuse to exchange with sites lower than PR4, so it will largly depend on how desperate you are for links. The foolbar needs to be thought of more like a 'reward bar' as sites rise in rank and are given a higher rank with the passing of time, usually every 3 months or so. So a higher rank should give you some better status, and thus make it easier to obtain links, if human nature and incentive is anything to go by.
Linking for Traffic
Traffic is the most important and the main reason for linking. At the end of the day a website needs traffic to build more traffic, sales, reputation and presence on the web, and swapping links is the best way of doing it. For one thing it's free and the only cost is the time it takes to perform the exchange. The benefits are that links get spidered and can generate additional links, some sites will approach you and some will just link without your immediate knowledge. But not all links are equal in PR or traffic levels, so any unknown links may be untargeted and not favourable.
Try and get links on targeted sites as this will provide both sets of visitors with useful information and make life a bit easier for everyone. I'm always thankful for webmasters who go to the trouble of setting up a few pages of extra links that point me in the right direction and your visitors will like this too.
Approaching and asking for links
This is quite easy, well the approaching bit anyway - but it's harder to convince the bigger sites to link with you, if they are more established. Good sites just don't always link easily, and why should they give you a link when they can charge for it.
If you managed to get a few PR6's to link with you, then I say that's an achievement, but it's near impossible to get PR 7 and above to grant you that favour, especially when you are the new site on the block! As earlier stated, PR is given according to the time a site has spent on the web, so a new site can't expect to be a PR 4 status right away - it has to pay it's dues and EARN that PR.
How to approach webmasters
All you need is a simple email. Just ask politely saying their site is nice looking, targeted and would be useful to your needs and place a link to their site first. This normally does the trick - I've gotten hundreds of exchanges this way, and it works very well.
But some will refuse, or insist that your PR be higher before they exchange (even though their site has lower value), and some will even insist they get a homepage link in return for a recip page placement from them (yes, these parasites do exist) but most webmasters are kind hearted folks and are usually chuffed you approached them!
A word of warning though - DON'T use link exchanges paid or free! They only ever send untargeted and desperate pleas for links that won't provide decent traffic or refferals, and once signed up with these exchanges, it's very tough to cancel or unsubscribe from the emails and offers. Just beware that's all.
What is the desired amount of links on a link page, both yours and theirs, to make it SE friendly?
If there are many, the PR benefit passed on to the linked-to site will be very diluted, and the links page itself might look spammy to a SE. Although I can't say for sure, I believe link pages have the greatest benefit on both ends if the number is kept reasonable, like under 30. If there are less than 10, so much the better. Over 100, it looks like spam to most users, and probably to a SE as well.
The agenda is probably one of adsense, although affiliate schemes are another possibility. Yep, stick a big enough links page up and run adsense. No skill, no benefit for users and no brain required please apply here lol.
Joking aside, I doubt you'll find a good links page with less than 30 links on it. Reason is most of these pages are used for link exchanges,and if they don't add more than 30, where will their exchanges be placed? Any page with only 20 - 30 links,isn't a good resource anyway - so someone is going to go to the effort of buiding a page for only 30 links.... Seems like a waste of time and a bit pointless to me.
If you're going to build a page, then do it for some gain at least. And anyway, I've never seen one single recip link page with only 30 links to it - most I've seen have 50 plus as average, and the big ones have hundreds sometimes.
Any page with only 20 - 30 links,isn't a good resource anyway
Why?
The agenda is probably one of adsense, although affiliate schemes are another possibility.
Or they could be selling directory links, selling a product, promoting an emo band to fifteen year olds, they could be promoting a counter-cultural religion, they could be promoting a conservative lifestyle, they could be promoting a town, they could be promoting their bed and breakfast...
Good sites just don't always link easily, and why should they give you a link when they can charge for it.
Doesn't have to be hard. Spamming about.com with my links is my favorite pastime. Once a site is established, it's true they don't have to do recips etc., but I've managed to get great authority links because of the quality of my site.
The End of Reciprocal Links is Here
Nevertheless, I believe most (though not all) people who are actively promoting a business online do not want reciprocal links. In the last PubCon talk I gave about link development the show of hands in favor of one-way inbounds versus recips was dramatic.
Links are a commodity, especially in the atmosphere where no one wants to reciprocate, so more and more sites are selling links.
[edited by: martinibuster at 3:18 am (utc) on Nov. 4, 2005]
Sooo, over 50 links makes you some kind of plotting, underhanded scum and under 30 links means your resource page is crappy. I'm interested to hear the research that went into the theory that the optimal links page has 31-49 links. I've seen crap pages with 5 links and damn good sites with resource pages in the hundreds.
>>> What is the desired amount of links on a link page, both yours and theirs
The most beneficial links page, IMHO, is one that isn't a links page and one where the website owner has found creative ways to promote their partners. But, if a link page is the only option, go for one where you don't have to squint, scroll five screens or do a control+f to find your link.
Anyway, when it comes to a page with a hundred links, who reads through all of them? That's what SE's are for, to sort through the dross. Massive links pages exist only to scam the SE's. Imho, etc.
<Added>Hey, it's my third anniversary with WW - just realized.</Added>
[edited by: Stefan at 5:06 am (utc) on Nov. 4, 2005]
There is a site that has sat at #1 in G forever about a commercial topic that would make good money via Adsense - only it doesn't run adsense (amazingly enough) and 90% of the site is nothing but a collection of framed links. Set up well though (organized) and while the site is ugly, if I were looking for a ton of good info on the topic, that site would be a one stop shop. Granted, it is probably the exception and not the rule, but hubs do exist and can be done right.
>>> but there are a few things everyone seems to agree on. It seems keeping the links between 30-40 is preferred
Never say everyone. ;) I doubt any seasoned webmaster "prefers" a page with 30-40 links on it. However, that may be a "limit" that most set in their minds. The "preferred" or "optimal" links page would have a link to me, from quality content by a site well linked by other quality sites, and me only. And over forty-fifty links isn't a death sentence in my eyes. I'll take being on a list of seventy links from a *great* site.
Another thing to realize is - the number isn't the only thing that can make or break the quality of a links page. - well...
How many of those 10 or 20 or 30 or 40 links to a page pages do they have on the site?
Are they named links1.html, links2.html, etc?
Do they all haver the same exact content on it and the same exact link exchange diatribe?
Do they all have the same anchors and descriptions for link partners as 50 other sites those partners are exchanging links with?
Jjust because a site has 30-40 links and they all look mostly on topic (for now, webmaster could always get greedy in the future) doesn't neccessarily make it good. IMHO, anyway.
>>>when it comes to a page with a hundred links, who reads through all of them
The same people who will "read" 30 links a page broken into seventeen pages. We can be idealistic, but either way you slice it, almost no one reads a commercial site's links pages - except for SEO's who are counting the links. ;) For a legitimate list, most people with that sort of list size would have it categorized.
>>>third anniversary
Congrats. ;)
[edited by: sugarrae at 6:03 am (utc) on Nov. 4, 2005]
What! I totally agree with sugarrae, and find this statement completely wrong.
What's a good link?
That's easy - a link that is from a site that is related to yours, on a page with a reasonable number of links that is ranked by Google. This gives you relevance, PR share and you can be sure it's not excluded from search engines.
Relevance
This is very important; both from a user perspective and as far as the SEs are concerned. Why would you want to link to an unrelated site anyway? It looks shabby and is of no benefit to your users. SEs know this too and are likely to ignore such links, or even worse, penilise you for them.
Number of links
How many links are too many? We run this through a simple equation - page rank divided by the total outbound links on the page. If this is higher than 0.1 then we consider this a fair link. If this is less, then we're not interested. This means a PR3 page with 20 links is fine, where as a PR5 page with 60 links is not. As all our link pages give a PR share of at least 0.2, this is totally fair.
Ranked by Google
The fact is that not all link requests are fair and ethical. One-way links are more important, as this is a clean vote for your site, so some people use dubious measures to obtain these. One such method is to exclude their link pages from search engines, thereby making it appear that all their links are one-way (not reciprocated). By ensuring the page has PR, you know it's not being excluded from Google, at least, and that you are credited with the link.
Why site owners request PR3 or higher
Some time back it was felt that PR wasn't shared by G unless the page was over PR2. However, our view is different. It's not difficult and it doesn't take long to achieve PR3 on your link pages. If your pages are PR3 or higher, are on theme, and don't contain too many links, then you must have given some thought to returning good links. As we have gone to great lengths to ensure our partners receive the best possible return link, we expect the same from our link partners.
How to design your link pages
Create separate pages for each theme and carry the theme throughout the page. Do not add unrelated pages and make sure you only add related links to each page. Also make sure the category page is linked well within your site. If you provide an organized, related directory, then you should be proud to make this part of your site -- if you feel you need to hide it, then you're doing something wrong! Also, keep your links down. Nobody wants a link on a page with 100 other links (see above).
Who do I exchange links with?
Any site that meets the above requirements, matches your theme and has link pages. This is a time-consuming process, but you can start by searching for your own search terms (that you want to attract visitors with), then check the sites for link pages. If you manage to get links from these sites, then you couldn't be any more on-theme. Put their link up first and phrase your link request email politely. DO NOT demand a return link, as this is the best way to ensure your request is ignored!
Who should I not exchange links with?
Any site unrelated to yours.
Sites that have pages of unrelated links, as this throws out all theming efforts.
Sites that request a link, but offer to reciprocate from a different domain (three-way links). This is usually totally one-sided, as you give them a direct link from a site related to their theme, only to receive a return link from a directory (I know there are exceptions). This seems to be the latest approach from many dubious SEO companies. It appears that many sites have been set up solely for this purpose, whereby the site contains a few pages of content - usually about computer certification - but hundreds of link pages. These are totally black-hat and although they appear not to be penalized at this time, I am sure that such links will ultimately be discounted.
Finally, make sure you check your links on a regular basis. I know this is really time-consuming, but if someone's removed your return link you will want to know about it. Also check the home page of the site linking to you after every Google PR update. If they've copped a penalty, you could be affected by linking to them.
Why should I listen to you?
I just felt compelled to write this after reading this post. We only have about 250 tightly-themed links - nothing higher than PR5. These have been up for about 2 years and as a direct result, we rank on the first two pages of all major search engines for all our key search phrases (Jagger update notwithstanding). Others have many hundreds, or even thousands of unrelated, unorganized links, have very high PR, but do not appear anywhere. It's about SERPS after all, isn't it?
There's much more to say, but I only intended on writing a few pointers and this is getting out of hand ;)
Good luck!
Why site owners request PR3 or higherSome time back it was felt that PR wasn't shared by G unless the page was over PR2.
Webmasters look for PR 4 or higher. The reason is because G formerly only showed backlinks that were PR 4 or higher, giving people the mistaken notion that anything less that PR 4 wasn't any good. Now Google shows a randomized set. Nevertheless, webmasters continue in the old mode.
Yes, that too. But this mistaken notion has been common knowledge for quite some time, so perhaps it’s just that they know the value of their pages and receive so many link requests that they can afford to demand PR4 links.
Webmasters look for PR 4 or higher. The reason is because G formerly only showed backlinks that were PR 4 or higher, giving people the mistaken notion that anything less that PR 4 wasn't any good. Now Google shows a randomized set. Nevertheless, webmasters continue in the old mode.
martinibuster, I think you are on a crusade to see how many times I can disagree with you in the same thread. Normally it's just the once, ;)
Tired SEO industry hacks and lazy webmasters (not aimed at anyone!) are the main ones who look for PR4+ links. After all, it's the easy way out for a "consultant", isn't it? Nah, recips don't work, free authority links take too long, what you need is text link ads, thanks for the check, next client please..."
I'm not going to talk about "my sites" since we always get into stupid one-upsmanship games about whether or not this is a "competitive area". Suffice it to say that links to and from and up and down the (apparent) PR scale are working well for me and I don't really care whether they are on a page with 4 or 40 links.
What I do care about is what those sites are like. And most of the people I link to and who link to me (the sets are not the same) have one thing in common - they wouldn't have a clue what WebmasterWorld is. On the latest site, out of hundreds of contacts I've talked to precisely two people I would describe as webmasters - where it was beneficial to all of us because they "got it".
sugarrae and LegalAlien have already laid out most of what I do agree with.
The one thing that I would add is that I get replies like "Yes, we'd be happy to link to #*$!#*$!xx. We quite often get customers looking for xxxxxxxx and we are always looking for places to send them."
The reason why I quoted martinibuster above is the use of the word "Webmaster". I'm not interested in webmasters. If your idea of a link campaign is looking for pages with "Amsterdam Hotels" or "add URL" then, IMO, we're doing two different things.
Yeah maybe. Just count the links then measure that against the content each site offers. That will tell the story whether it's trying to be a resource or if it's part of some SE scam.
Good sites just don't always link easily, and why should they give you a link when they can charge for it.
This is true folks - the web is about companies flogging their ad space, Yahoo or Google anyone......
I believe they sell links with adverts for cash, even the small, medium sized websites sell their space, why shouldn't they? After all it costs them to keep it running and they are entitled to make a profit. Shops sell products and the web sells links, so why is that unbelievable.
There is no argument about something so basic and that's common knowledge the world over. Okay, put it this way,if you owned a really popular site and had a chance of making a killing by selling links from it - are you going to refuse that. (This question is only for intelligent folks - no smart answers please).
You commented on how links are a commodity. So I find it interesting that others think this can't be the case.
Sell links for money?
How dare they sell links from something they own - they can't, it's just not allowed. What sacrilege!
Sooo, over 50 links makes you some kind of plotting, underhanded scum and under 30 links means your resource page is crappy
Not necessarily, but a page full of links with nothing else kind of removes any advantage of having your link on that page. Er,if that's why people add links to them - I imagine they seek a free way of standing out and is why they do it. Perhaps they expect too much from these sites.
Research - hmmmm, how about a pair of eyes and reading between the lines and not being gullible. I'm sure you are fully aware of the type of site I'm referring to.
Congrats on your three years, btw!
Good lord. Do you have selective reading skills? No one is saying sites don't, shouldn't or can't sell links. Not one reply has said that to you. No one has said links don't have value and websites don't realize that. No one has said websites should just give links away to anyone and everyone. But it is NOT impossible to get a free link. I've told you before, just because a particular person can't make a girl roll her eyes in bed doesn't mean it's impossible.
>>>Research - hmmmm, how about a pair of eyes and reading between the lines and not being gullible.
And whose eyes would those be when you're posting in here for months on end about how you have been unsucessful at almost every type of link building there is?
>>>I'm sure you are fully aware of the type of site I'm referring to.
I am, but I was responding to your stereo type that they were *all* crap.
>>>(This question is only for intelligent folks - no smart answers please)
Must... not... take... bait
You're entitled to your own opinion Event King - my issues is that you state it as fact - when many people disagree with your opinions. SEO is not an exact science. A lot of it is opinionated.
My advice to everyone here is test everything you read yourself and form your own conclusions. After a while, you'll learn what posters are in sync with your own findings or say things worth testing.
...PR is Google's way of 'grading' a site's worth and is taken as a sign of status - with every site awarded a number (rank) that ascends with time and not solely based on content. PageRank is generally accepted as some sort of 'award' and although it's not official, apart from Alexa it's currently the only thing available with which to grade a site.
Not quite. There are a number of things one can use to grade a site.
1: Whois query
2: Quality backlink check
3: Does the site show up as a backlink to others
4: Ban check (is the site banned in Yahoo?)
5: Quality of the recip link page (the page names, title tags, etc.)
The foolbar needs to be thought of more like a 'reward bar' as sites rise in rank and are given a higher rank with the passing of time, usually every 3 months or so.
What does that mean? Are you saying that PR naturally increases with time? Or is it a sentence with no point? Here's the rest of the paragraph:
So a higher rank should give you some better status, and thus make it easier to obtain links, if human nature and incentive is anything to go by.
Higher PR will make it easier to obtain links from other webmasters who consider PR a commodity to be traded (as well as purchased). Professional webmasters commoditize PR and try to gain as much as they can while minimizing how much they give out. PR is a commodity. That is why having high PR will attract more webmasters willing to exchange links with you.
Contrary to your opinion, it's not a good thing
It's like when you're a kid with a box of chocolates. Suddenly all those kids that were beating you up on the playground want to be your friends. A poor choice for friends.
Because of the direction the algos are currently heading, the last people I want to exchange links with are people who read WebmasterWorld and are engaging in link trading schemes. These are exactly the types you'll attract with your high PR, and the neighborhoods you'll want to stay out of, because those are the people who will be tagged as link manipulators.
The ideal link partner are those who know nothing about PR. That's why I have been saying here for years that my favorite link partners are the small mom and pop MS Frontpage websites with sparsely populated pr 3 or less link pages. The first time I said that, a number of people posted they wouldn't waste their time with those sites. Guess what? My sites made it through Jagger, Bourbon, etc.
Traffic is the most important and the main reason for linking. At the end of the day a website needs traffic to build more traffic, sales, reputation and presence on the web, and swapping links is the best way of doing it. For one thing it's free and the only cost is the time it takes to perform the exchange.
Swapping links will only take you so far. With a great many businesses, reciprocal links is not an option. The big flaw in this "guide" is that it's not appropriate for everyone.
At a certain point you really have to develop alternative link development strategies, including purchasing domains and developing your own backlinks, purchasing backlinks, and many other strategies.
The benefits are that links get spidered and can generate additional links, some sites will approach you and some will just link without your immediate knowledge. But not all links are equal in PR or traffic levels, so any unknown links may be untargeted and not favourable.
As long as you don't link back you will experience no unfavorable issues. My popular sites have thousands of scrapers in their backlinks. Not an issue.
But not all links are equal in PR...
My advice is you shouldn't even consider the PR.
Try and get links on targeted sites as this will provide both sets of visitors with useful information and make life a bit easier for everyone. I'm always thankful for webmasters who go to the trouble of setting up a few pages of extra links that point me in the right direction and your visitors will like this too.
If you are interested in thankful webmasters, try this
Links are most useful when used as citations. I'm currently in the process of getting rid of all link pages and only linking back from within the text of my content, as a citation. Doesn't matter if a site recips, either.
If you managed to get a few PR6's to link with you, then I say that's an achievement, but it's near impossible to get PR 7 and above to grant you that favour, especially when you are the new site on the block!
Not true. It's as doable as anything else.
As earlier stated, PR is given according to the time a site has spent on the web...
Time has nothing to do with it.
How to approach webmastersAll you need is a simple email. Just ask politely saying their site is nice looking, targeted and would be useful to your needs and place a link to their site first. This normally does the trick - I've gotten hundreds of exchanges this way, and it works very well.
The problem with that approach is that the automated spammers use that exact template, as well as the prior linking. It helps to distinguish yourself from all the other recip emails floating around. Emulating them doesn't help.
[edited by: martinibuster at 8:40 pm (utc) on Nov. 4, 2005]
I've done what martinibuster is suggesting. I am looking less at PR and more at content and relativity.
Nicci
No one is saying sites don't, shouldn't or can't sell links
I know. My point is webmasters chase freebies, so to avoid paying for links. Therefore they must be against paying for links. For example I have a PR5 domain,and get offers every day from unrelated sites begging me to put totally untargeted sites on mine for nothing.
Should I begin wrecking my site with hoards of low quality and unrelated links - I don't think so.
Excuse me for refusing them - but I'm a business and do charge for this service. I worked hard to get the site where it is today, so why should I help somebody else - what's in it for me. And this is what big companies will say too,or do you think it's okay to ride on the back of a racehorse and reap the benefits from someone else's efforts for nothing.
So gain a couple of PR 6 or 7's and my stats will go through the roof. Is that what you're saying?
It's just when you say it's not impossible, that could be taken as a fairly easy thing to do, when there are far too many variables that can affect that outcome.
I'm saying that's a fact.
You don't get it, you obviously never will get it and I'm tired of explaining it to you.
>>> or do you think it's okay to ride on the back of a racehorse and reap the benefits from someone else's efforts for nothing.
If you ever so much as digested a word that I've ever said, you would know I'm not a toolbar chaser. I never said any such thing. You're dilluding yourself into thinking I'm saying what you want to hear so that you can somehow prove your imagined point.
<shakes head>
What happened to mutually beneficial? Surely this is the whole point of exchanging links?
If you accept link submissions via a form only, and just ignore the stupid link requests, then the idiots that still submit inappropriate links (despite your form page stipulating that such links will be ignored) don't end up spamming you when you ignore their submissions.
If you have a good range of on-theme and fair reciprocal links with individually chosen sites, then these are long term.
Reciprocal links are not just about being free, it's about creating long-term benefits for both parties. Besides, obtaining good reciprocal links probably ends up costing more in work hours for companies over the short term than purchased links, so it's not really for free. The difference is that the stand-alone guy can also achieve the same results.
Most of our link partners have been listed for about 2 years. Also, if you've checked the site that requests the link (or that you are requesting the link from), you'll know that they want to return good links and are motivated in increasing their own relevance and PR. So as time goes on, you'll get the same high PR that you would if you paid for it. The difference is that this costs time and effort, rather than money, but once established, it's free.
Arguably, a paid link is one way, but you'd have to spend a fortune for a good range of on-theme links; especially if you're hoping to achieve good SERPS with competitive keywords off the back of this. And this financial commitment never stops. The minute you stop paying for your links, the benefit is gone. Paid links are fake, expensive and carry a permanent financial commitment. None of this applies to good, targeted reciprocal links. IMHO
You mentioned:
Not quite. There are a number of things one can use to grade a site.
1: Whois query
2: Quality backlink check
3: Does the site show up as a backlink to others
4: Ban check (is the site banned in Yahoo?)
5: Quality of the recip link page (the page names, title tags, etc.)
I have some questions/reservations concerning some of the above.
Whois query
This only tells you the length of time a domain has been bought for and any personal details about the owner. Name, Address etc
Apart from that, what use is it?
Quality backlink check
Ahhh, now this could be useful - providing it's highly accurate, I use strongest links for checking on various websites links count, but have been told it's not that great. Is there a better way of doing this?
