Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Thanks a lot guys.
I see it like this:
Buy links on high traffic sites, but don't buy for the traffic..... Buy for the link on the good, respected site, and it's bound to be spidered more often than a average kind of site. For instance, I got a link on MSN, and although I don't get a great deal of traffic, I know that MSN is a major player and thus my link is on there somewhere..
Know what I'm saying..............
and the second part was: if i stop paying for these links, will my pr go back down? or will it stay at the same level?
My advice would be to explore all the avenues you can find for getting links to your site that will be permanent, before you spend much money on text links that require repeated payments.
I heartily agree with Martinibuster that lots of "little" links will give you more stability than a few high-PR links.
I just found a great buy this week in the tech field. Backlinks show over 119 .edu, 2 .gov and 2 .mil with no other SEOed sites listed. Good buys are out there. It does take some work, but worth it in the end.
I do agree with martinibuster about avoiding many high PR links. It is best to stay under the radar.
In my experience in the link-buying space for the past 4 years, I have never seen a legitamate site be penalized for purchasing a one way link on a SINGLE PAGE of another legitame quality website.
With that in mind, important metrics to look for when determining the value of a paid link are:
-How many backlinks does the publisher have?
-The traffic of the publiser
-The relevance to your website
-How many links (paid or unpaid) will be on the particular page - more links are clearly less valuable than a page with 10 or less
For a more expensive buy, it may be worth while to track the success of existing advertisers that have already purchased links on those pages.
In your opinion, how well do you think Google can determine paid links?
And have you noticed any effective discounting of the value of paid links by the SEs?
With SEO, 'natural' is just the strategy behind an effective campaign. WIth any form of marketing, there always needs to be a strategy involved. Just like you might not want to send out a million emails in one day, or buy 1 billion impressions or keywords, you do not want to go out and overload on links.
As this marketing continues to mature, all consituants (SEO's, web publishers, advertisers, agencies), will learn to acheive this natural/best practices approach, which at the end of the day - will be to the benefit of the search engine.
I have seen many companies, in some cases large market leaders, that have bought links to complement their onsite SEO, to acheive a high ranking for thier respective keywords. Moreover, if companies are not proactive about SEO in general, search engine will not be as effective as they are. How else can you explain why 93 Fortune 100 companies do not rank for thier respective keywords becauase they never engaged in any form of SEO.
About your last question, I have seen for high quality advertisers who deserve to rank well, links have become even more effective - in most cases when an existing on site effort has been done.
Moreover, I believe search engine can stop paid linking if they wanted too, but that would not be in their best interest. The market needs the shake out itself, just like ebay has done with bidding tools and other value added services.
If you planning to buy links then vary the sites you getting links from.
e.g. PR 3 - PR 9(if you can)