Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Last December Matt Cutts, Head of Google WebSpam Team, wrote a post which impressed me indeed:
Tell me about your backlinks [mattcutts.com]
Here is part of what Matt Cutts wrote at that post:
My favorite overall moment was when a totally legit company (micromatic.com) stood up and asked for advice. Overall, their site was great: good architecture and very crawlable. They had lots of really good backlinks, including industry-specific links. But I could also tell that they’d been buying some backlinks. And they were buying backlinks from the exact same place as one of the earlier sites! At the point when in a minute of typing, I can say: you guys are both trying to buy backlinks, and I can tell that you’re buying them from the same network, and here’s an example page from ketv.com where both of you are even on the same page, and it’s not doing you any good at all: that just made my day. Having a concrete demonstration is so much better than just making a claim, especially when one of the sites says beforehand that they’re not doing as well as they used to be. I told micromatic.com that they had a great site, so they should stop trying to buy backlinks and spend more money to reward their inhouse SEO who had done a great job on the crawlability and architecture of the site.
When you read that post you might get the same impression that I got; Google knows and penalize buyers and maybe also sellers of Backlinks. Not so, unfortunately.
However, it just happened that I know of a site (not mine) which purchased backlinks during the first 4 months or so of 2006. I know from which sites the backlinks were purchased. And I know approximately how much was paid for most of the purchased BLs. No rel=nofollow was applied, of course.
Then the current indications of PR update arrived. And I checked the PR of the site which purchased the said BLs.
WOW... boost in PR from PR4 to PR7!
And I checked the PR of the sites which sold the BLs.
WOW.. they retained their high PR!
Am I the only one who have noticed Google rewarding sellers and buyers of BLs?
Have you noticed the same?
Your feedback would be highly appreciated.
we’re pretty accurate at spotting them, both algorithmically and manually.
That really is not the same as "we’re 100% accurate at spotting them, both algorithmically and manually."
And finding exceptions really proves nothing.
Especially as you may be sure that "we’re continuing to improve" is equally tru of Google at this time.
joined:Dec 29, 2003
if they catch you, it's 100%. The point is that fear and uncertainty helps google and no one is sure if they will get caught
I also see all types of link schemes and purchased backlinks being rewarded.
I will give only one example but I have 12's of them:
- A site which sells consumer communications related items bought 100's of backlinks.
- All backlinks are sidewide
- All backlinks are on coding/website programming sites.
>> Questions: How website coding relates to phone cards? How can a website rank so well while it has virtually NOT even 1 natural backlink? How can a website rank so well when using almost 100% identical anchor text? How can a website rank so well when backlinks are almost 100% sidewide / same IP?
>> My thoughts: Time to go back to basics. If rankings are that easy...that's not going to be more accurate. I personally currently have more difficulties finding what I am looking for on Google (4 the first time almost).
At the same time legit sites go down of course. Anyway all could change rapidly. Rankings currently fluctuate a lot and what is there today (which is surprisingly not very good at all) could be improved tomorrow. Let's hope and trust the guys GGplex.
But I find that google has not been very active filtering those who BUY their rankings.
Note that I said "not very active" because I strongly believe that they could filter textlink buyers if they'd want to.
I agree. You can be very provocative but I for one always read your posts because they stimulate debate from which nuggets of valuable information arise. I often disagree with your assumptions or conclusions and your constant references to your own threads is deeply irratating, but hats off to you for the major contribution you make to this board. I for one have learnt a lot from your posts.