Links are still the best way to achieve page one results, right?

[JackR]

For the first time in a while, I've been snooping on the backlinks my competitors have been buying: on blogs, in directories and on spammy and unrelated sites that clearly exist just to sell text links.

It's surely no coincidence that results #1 - #10 for a popular keyword search return sites with huge numbers of completely irrelevant backlinks.

I thought this practice has been frowned on by Google since at least 2008?

If so, why does link buying still work so well?

[Hissingsid]

Are we sure it is links that work and not anchor text?

Also I can't help thinking links are a bit like the old advertising story. "50% of my back links are working I just wish I knew which 50%"

Cheers

Sid

[ErnestHemingway]

@JackR

A lot of things come into play but I reckon you are using so called GURU tools Seomoz or MajesticSEO and such. Smart kids that get good links they get the sites to block those 2 crawlers from tracking.

Now you could scan the backlinks of a great site and just find junk, but the real links are far better and they are just hiding it.

@Tedster

Thanks for your comment, however I will have to disagree. Matt Cutts and Amit are amazingly HYPOCRITE and I will tell you that from running our site for past 10 years.

Spam sites dominate my vertical and I talked to MC at PubCon and then I went back and fourth with the reconsideration team they told me that there are a lot of links that I need to take down.

I never built those links unless I was on some super high end COCAINE I would never build such type of links to our site.

In any case they told me I have a manual penalty. But I told Matt. I thought you guys don't count all those junk links. He was SILENT and told me to get in touch through mail with the team.

So I feel Google is run by hypocrites, mostly lies.

[Lenny2]

I guess i should clarify what I meant by crazy. My own opinion is that by buying spammy links from questionable sources is only part of the reason for some success. Other than that you need (among other things):

1. Create an attractive web design
2. Create enough content to make the site "surfable"
3. Maintain products
4. Maintain an optimized user experience.


I guess, I do come at the issue from a perspective of a legitimate business... and a business that is 2/3 dollars and cents... and 1/3 my baby (ego driven I suppose) and thus to put up crap for craps sake and then maintaining crap and growing crap only to be taken down by Google sooner or later... doesn't sound like much fun. (clarifying this, I have one site... I don't have various websites like many webmasters here... So I can't "test" out nor can I afford to take risks with the site... and again my ego is more tied up into the site than someone that has 10 or 100 sites.)

Anyway the question was do spammy links work? and the answer sounds like:

1. Yes, particularly well when combined with some really good link building.
2. Yes,
3. Yes, but, not for long.

Be cautious:

1. don't get flagged
2. build slowly
3. Wait for it... sometimes it takes 30 - 90 days for google to "trust" the spam!
4. Don't whatever you do go to some public forum and talk about how you are building crappy/spammy links and how well it is working... you'll get slapped by google for that ;)

[JackR]

A lot of things come into play but I reckon you are using so called GURU tools Seomoz or MajesticSEO and such. Smart kids that get good links they get the sites to block those 2 crawlers from tracking.

ErnestHemingway,

I'm not using any software to build links - and never have. I'm happy for my site to be anywhere on pages 3-5 as I'm only really looking for visitors who search by business name and know exactly what to expect when landing on my homepage.

If only Google could fix their damn algorithm to ensure that the homepage actually stays in the index at the weekends as well as on weekdays!

[FranticFish]

If only Google could fix their damn algorithm to ensure that the homepage actually stays in the index at the weekends as well as on weekdays!

IMO the different result sets at weekends are no accident. I'd lean slightly more towards the view that the motives behind this are user-focused, rather than making the AdWords look more relevant.

Now you could scan the backlinks of a great site and just find junk, but the real links are far better and they are just hiding it.

Exactly. People may even go as far as to block Yahoo too; the potential wins in Google (certainly in the UK) FAR FAR outweigh any losses in Yahoo.

[Planet13]

yeah but even if they blocked yahoo and the other link development bots, the link operator in google would still provide SOME ability to find who links to a site (acknowledging that google does not display all the links to a site either in webmaster tools or using the link operator).

[Whitey]

Yes - but risky. OK if you are thinking always short term.

Excessive paid linking will get you a -50 penalty or have you on the cusp of a downgrade - unless you're a brand. Moderate linking may not be so bad.

Good content and usabilty for the long term is better and more sustainable.

[Hissingsid]

I've been doing a bit of research on the original topic of this thread and it would appear that number of root domains linking to a page is what does it, assuming other things are equal.