Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Is it really worth my money to pay for this or should i keep looking? I have looked for a while and these sites are all charging and if they arent charging they have useless sites, either low ranking or irrelevant.
Also My linking is going painfully slow. I have about 10 links and ugh i need about 500 more high pr links. Any tips?
Nose to the grindstone!
Building links is time consuming, there are no cheap shortcuts and even if you pay, nobody will put in the same care and attention as you.
I'd also add it's a great way to network.
I've never paid for link exchanges and never plan to. You build those strong relationships by contacting the webmasters of high PR sites and seek exchanges.
Either way, it will take some time.
You build those strong relationships by contacting the webmasters of high PR sites and seek exchanges.
I would modify that statement by removing the reference to PR.
At one time, many of my sites were high quality sites with 100% original and useful content in search of link partners. Some people didn't want to link to me because of my PR, even though I pointed out that they should look at my content and judge it by standards of quality, irregardless of PR. They were too blinded by PR to see the point, although I do recall a couple webmasters acknowledging the quality of the content, but that they didn't want to link to me without an exchange of PR. LOL.
Funny thing is that my quality content helped me secure tons of one-way inbounds, especially from .edu sites, and industry associations. Nevertheless, reciprocals were part of my strategy in the beginning, if only to find webmasters who were smart enough to recognize a quality site and link to it, and I let the others fall behind because I'm less interested in exchanging links with webmasters who have their own notions of SEO.
Well guess what? These sites are ranking very well and guess who missed out on forging a "strong relationship" with a quality website? Yep, those webmasters who are focused on PR.
Remove the toolbar when searching for link partners and focus on quality, real quality.
Regarding link exchange sites, we were just talking about that over here:
Link Matchmaker Services
Good experience or bad experience?
[webmasterworld.com...]
Those have been around for a few years and while some experience an initial boost, many of those have also taken a dive.
Otherwise I agree with martini.
I might add that I have been quite successful simply asking edu sites for a link. Generally these emails need to be custom and catered to ecah individual site.
Well worth it.
To do the edu pages for your site, try to use google: <allinurl="edu keyword">
They were too blinded by PR to see the point, although I do recall a couple webmasters acknowledging the quality of the content, but that they didn't want to link to me without an exchange of PR. LOL.
Pixel envy, sad condition. Most of those inflictied aren't even aware.
Pixel Envy (piks' el en've)(n): The feeling of discontent or resentment aroused by the qualities of another's toolbar or public PageRank display.
Pixel Envy (PE) is a neurological condition which results in involuntary spasms and vocalizations called tics. Symptoms are most pronounced around the months of January, April, July and October.
Symptoms of Pixel Envy include involuntary spasms like repetitive typing of domain names into PageRank tools that provide simultaneous multiple displays for which the afflicted become overly excited.
Those with Pixel Envy become delusional and attempt to hoard PageRank, refusing to exchange links with others whose toolbar PR displays values less than their own and believing that their own PageRank is somehow more powerful than anothers.
Many laypersons inaccurately believe that all persons with Pixel Envy syndrome have coprolalia - the uncontrollable and obsessive utterances of inappropriate phrases (such as Future PageRank or Predicted PageRank) - although the majority of persons with Pixel Envy syndrome may not.
Pixels' de la Goog'les syndrome - also called Pixel Envy disorder - was once believed to be very rare. Current research shows that Pixel Envy syndrome is not rare, and that the majority of cases probably go undiagnosed and undetected.
If you’ve just received a diagnosis, you may be in a panic, encountering a lot of myth and misinformation, and thinking Now What?
In the event that you’re beginning to panic, I hope the many stories of people with Pixel Envy syndrome here will encourage you to see the brighter side. We've known about Pixel Envy syndrome for about 12 years now, and most webmasters are still the nicest, most sociable, well-liked, high-achieving, friendly guys around.
You build those strong relationships by contacting the webmasters of high PR sites and seek exchanges.
Nah...I have to stick with this statement! :) Mainly because, most webmasters who think they have a quality site, won't contact the webmaster of a PR1 site, requesting a link exchange. Is it wrong? Who knows? Is it fair? Who knows? It is all a part of building and maintaining your own web business, and webmasters tend to choose to focus on the stats, quirks, ideas, etc., that comfort them.
At one time, many of my sites were high quality sites with 100% original and useful content in search of link partners. Some people didn't want to link to me because of my PR, even though I pointed out that they should look at my content and judge it by standards of quality, irregardless of PR.
Hey...I know what that's like, Martini. I traveled that same road back in 2002. When I developed my site years ago, I concentrated strictly on quality content and never asked anyone for a link exchange, or an IBL. Over the years, my site's popularity has risen and so have the tons of IBL's.
Either way, this is what many novice webmasters (not calling anyone here a novice!) have a problem grasping. They feel that if they join link exchange programs, or simply reciprocate dozens of links with other sites, they'll eventually get enough magical IBL's to boost their PR and search engine results. What many fail to understand is, the focus should be on quality and content, and all of those perks will eventually come...(with other hard work, of course!)
But the only reason I've ever emphasized high-PR sites is because I wouldn't recommend someone linking to a low-PR site.
Sure.... it may have quality content, but it is at PR1 for a reason. Could it eventually be a super-duper, 2-million pageviews-per-month site?
Sure it could be, but you can't predict the future and who knows where this PR1 site will end up.
A PR8 site is already established and probably won't lose its rank in a day, week, month, or even a year.
if you are cross-linking and google finds out about your "network" will your pages still have PR and be cached or will they kick you to the curb and take you out of their database altogether?
thanks,
afterburner
A PR8 site is already established and probably won't lose its rank in a day, week, month, or even a year.
that depends upon where those sites got their PR from. i can think of a couple of competitors who had PR8 for a couple of months, then went down in flames.
You build those strong relationships by contacting the webmasters of high PR sites and seek exchanges.
no you don't. you link to sites that are relevant for your users and provide your users with the best experience possible. by building a quality site, others are naturally inclined to link to you.
it's not a quick process. it takes dedication, patience, and vision.
That depends upon where those sites got their PR from.
Of course. A lot of, "fly-by-night" sites can obtain a PR8 and not survive for long. The point was directed at high-ranking sites with quality content, where their content is maintained for long periods of time. A site with this type of reputation isn't going anywhere.
You link to sites that are relevant for your users and provide your users with the best experience possible.
So... you would suggest linking to sites relevant for your users, even if they're crummy sites? Whether relevant to your niche or not, linking to crummy sites is never recommended.
By building a quality site, others are naturally inclined to link to you.
I agree. In fact, I think I alluded to this exact statement in an earlier post.
The point was directed at high-ranking sites with quality content...
You don't need high PR to be a high ranking site. You don't need high PR to have quality content. If you're going to link to content, link to it because it's good and because your users will find it helpful.
If you're going to exchange links, a quality site (even with low PR) can in some instances give you a lot more traffic than you think. Hear me out: I've been researching websites for AW advertising purposes and have found many PR 5 sites that get between 10,000 -100,000 visitors per day. That's relevance and high ranking. These are the kinds of monster sites that some people would overlook because the PR-o-Meter says it's a low PR site. What's even more interesting is that these sites don't even rank for the big keywords that my sites rank for, so I probably wouldn't have found them except from AW and the advice from experts who happen to know of "this useful site."
you would suggest linking to sites relevant for your users, even if they're crummy sites?
A relevant site that is useful to users will never be crummy. Never.
I am really focusing on relevant sites and i agree about the quality sites with good content. the "majority" of the time they come hand in hand with good PR's thats why i scan the site even if it is releveant to my site.
A problem is that everyday I am trying to dedicate to linking. I run down google and try random keywords. there is no science to what I am doing and in the beginning its fine i have a ton of people to contact but now I find I am sometimes contacting the same website by accident.
The question now is do you guys have a systematic way you go after links? I just get confused and confusion wastes time and if i accidently email someone twice Im sure thats annoying too!
any ideas would be greatly appreciated
Low PR, bad quality, no relevant content = Do not link to them
Low PR, good quality, relevant content = Consider linking to them
Medium PR, bad quality, no relevant content = Do not link to them
Medium PR, good quality, relevant content = Make an effort to link to them
High PR, bad quality, no relevant content = Do not link to them
High PR, good quality, no relevant content (I think this may be where Martini and I disagree, but I'm not totally sure. A site with a high PR, probably got that way due to popularity (impressions/day), which may not have anything to do with quality) However, I think that linking to a high-PR site may help your PR, but may not necessarily comfort your visitors with the best, relevant content. Basically, you have to choose between providing the best experience for your users, ...or... possibly improving your own PR by looking for high-PR sites, no matter the content relevancy.
High PR, good quality, relevant content = Definitely make an effort to link to them
A site with a high PR, probably got that way due to popularity (impressions/day)
No. A site with high PR gets it because of its links.
Linking to a high PR site just because it has high PR will not help you. Linking to a highly relevant site because it's highly relevant is what will help you.
Getting links from a high PR site is always nice, but choose the sites you link to based on quality and relevance, nothing else.
