Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Well, I have a new website, with about 30000 indexable pages (I update the Sitemap everyday) and I wonder if "high" PR links (5, 6, 7...) can help to index my whole site faster.
I've included my site in directories, I've made link exchanges... But I only have about one hundred pages in Google (site:miwebsite.com).
I want to index (all) the pages as soon as possible, so I've decided to buy text links. Am I right? Can this help me to index my website? How long would it take (consider the PR)? How many links must I buy?
My website is developed in Spanish. English websites links can help?
And, third, he's said that those who sell advertising should use "nofollow".
All things considered this is an absurd statement. This is akin to asking all people who walk at night to not wear black hoods or risk being arrested.
The issue of link validation and credit is in Google's hands, not ours - right where it should be.
Buying for rankings should be reserved exclusively to PPC.
And I might ask why does everyone need to follow the preferred model of advertising? Why should advertising be exclusively reserved to PPC?
Why can't and shouldn't a website be a referral and advertising source unto it's own?
[edited by: CainIV at 6:35 am (utc) on Sep. 13, 2006]
I think it all depends on the relative content of the linking site. Just because a site has a high page rank doesn't mean that it is ranked higly for the keywords you desire.
There is a possiblity that authority factor of the linking site has an effect. I did a sitewide link campaign with what some would consider an authoritive site and it paid off. I did very little more in terms of inbound links.
I've always been confused by G asking for advertising links to be "nofollow" because with one mouth G says to ignore the SEs and run your site the way you would if SEs didn't exist. And then with another mouth they tell you how they'd like it done.
Also I wonder if the recent adwords QS increase has induced a recent increase in buying links?
[edited by: tedster at 1:25 am (utc) on Sep. 16, 2006]
My conclusions from this are that sitewide links can be good as long as you pick the right site. Some would consider the site i used an authoritive site or even a boutique search engine. So if you are going to do such a campaign, choose carefully.
Oh and the link campaign cost me quite a bit, almost $1000 a month. Initially i was only able to do this for 1 month and i did it again about 8 months later for a 3 month period, that ended a month ago.
Reliance solely on paid links for rankings is not wise, but reliance on any one form of marketing usually isn't.
I use them in the first phase of launching a new site. Once you have rankings and traffic you are able to trade links and look to increase traffic by other means.
I worry sometimes that Google will put every paid directory on a list and ignore the OBLs. It would be comparatively easy to do with their resources.
Money talks. If a business has the money to spend on advertising then it must be doing something right, right? They have profits to re-invest or financial backing. These are usually the hallmarks of a serious enterprise. The best directories do what search engines cannot do - a human editor assesses a site and they don't link to crap.
Just because you've paid for the review, doesn't mean the vote isn't valid.
IMO that's why paid directories will ALWAYS be with us and always help to rank.
The link brokerage firm pays you by your Alexa ranking not by your PR ranking, so you would think it was safe. Now I can't pass PR to my own sites. The site I sold links on showed up as a backlink for my other sites before I used the link brokerage firm and now it doesn't. I only have two other sites that this site links to. I didn't know what was going on at first.
I didn't no about the nofollow rule, so I suffered as a result.
A clarification haiku:
Buying links for PR: bad
Google senses much ;)
A tanka reply:
of a japanese haiku
is that it must have
at least one word mentioning
the season in which it's set
(Sorry for being so off-topic)