Blocked PR

buy links, buying PR

[eboli]

As we know, buynig links in a higher PR site, we can get more PR. But, I have read about some webs have blocked its PR. Is that true? Someone know sometihing about?

[edit_g]

Yeah, it is true. I don't think anybody would appreciate me saying exactly which websites are affected, but they have a very high PR and their name has been mentioned a few times back in the supporters forum.

Here's the best tip I can give - if you must buy links for PR:

1.) Check to see if the site you're buying links from turn up in the backlinks of other sites buying links from the site you're considering.

2.) Check the profile of other websites buying links from the site - do they look like hard core SEO sites - or do they look like legitimate links?

3.) Accept that there are no guarantees as to what PR, traffic or benefits you may gain. If the website selling the links offers you any of this (or if they even mention PR) then stay away.

There will be a lot of people here who tell you to build links naturally, send link requests and write content and come up with innovative tools that people will link to. I agree with this 100% but the simple fact is that links get bought and sold every day - so I may as well give you some advice (you would probably do it anyway).

Also be aware that buying links can be a downward spiral into spending more and more money...

[cabowabo]

Good advice. My two cents is not to buy a link based purely on PR. While it does have importance, a positive ROI may never be realized. Check Alexa to verify traffic levels, look to see how many other links are on the page as there will be PR fallout if the page is overloaded with links. The more links, the more diluted the PR funnel will be to your site.

Cheers,

CaboWabo

[somerset]

You can easily spend loads on paid links, especially as most tend to be monthly terms. Its good to do an annual total and then really consider if it is worthwhile.

There are though some good directories where for a very low cost you can get a listing.

I know of one directory for instance, where you can get a lifetime listing on a PR5 category page for next to nothing. Plus they offer a sitemap option so you can get even your deeper links spidered quickly (or any pages you wish). This is a permanent page for just a few sheckels one-off.

[instand1]

My observation: some paid links did increase my PR but did not improve the ranking. Probably Google has ways to detect paid links, but does not want all offenders to know it.

[mfishy]

Probably Google has ways to detect paid links

Yes. They scour the 3 billion pages they index and check all the backlinks by hand. If they spot any that seem "suspicious" they get a court order to view the financial transactions of the sites in question. :)

Sure there have been a couple dozen or more sites that have lost their ability to pass PR, but it is very rare overall, as is any manual penalty. Algorythmically (word?), the buying of links can not be detected. Google does not know and has never known the reason why webmasters link to other sites.

I would look more at acquiring many links than focusing on one or two high PR links. This is particularly so if you are really trying to rank on a few specific terms where there is a lot of anchor text competition..

[billygg]

my understanding on what i see is, google correlates the type of link your recieving. yes, u may get a link of a PR 6 site, but, what does the overall take on the page look like. for example, if u have a site on lawn gardening, and u buy a link from a link farm with a general take on selling wood, then obviously your link is very irrelavent to that main site u get the link from. just a little tip, i deal with lots of websites from my company, and sites that are very close related that are linked together(almost same target words) place much higher, then a site with more links, but all to different targeted markets. just my tip tho :)

[kmsiever]

IMO, it is much better to get listed on a lot of websites with low PR than on a handful of sites with high PRs, particularly if that handful of sites is suspect.

snipped

[edited by: DaveAtIFG at 5:59 am (utc) on May 5, 2004]
[edit reason] Removed URL [/edit]

[ThomasB]

try that with a several thousand page site. Best luck, PR is easier, though not necessary if you have the right strategy and time.

[eboli]

ThomasB, can you explaina little bit more, please? About the right estrategy?

Thanks in advance

[kaled]

It may not be possible to detect bought links by algo, however, Google engineers can use their own search engine to find sites that are selling links. From there, it is a very short step to devaluing all backlinks from those sites by manual intervention. The sites selling links need not be penalised.

Frankly, I'm surprised that Google do not openly state that they operate such a policy - but I guess that's a judgement call.

Kaled.

[BigDave]

Google does not have to find sites that are selling links. They are more concerned with sites that create problems in the SERPs because of how they link. Often times these sites are also the ones that sell their links on high PR pages.

They do not care if you make money off your site. What they care about is that you don't wcrew up their SERPs.

[ThomasB]

BigDave, as they always say they're interrested in relevancy and diversity. And my guess is that they don't care about bought links if the site itself is helpful to the user.

[ByronM]

Yes. They scour the 3 billion pages they index and check all the backlinks by hand. If they spot any that seem "suspicious" they get a court order to view the financial transactions of the sites in question. :)

Google i'm sure has ways to map queries to results and see how they match. It wouldn't be terribly difficult to examine this relationship and see what results are based of "PR Buying" vs being a hub of information as the PR buying links will usuall be off topic and if you catch alot of off topics you can kill the "hub" that they are coming from.

If they're on topic and of relation to the content being linked you probably wouldn't ever be caught.

[ThomasB]

off-topic ... on-topic ... I don't see the point.

If you have a site about historic cars which has PR 7 and somebody comes to you having a PR 4 site about any region in the usa and gives advice on vacations there it can be very relevant. Or don't you think driving through the countryside in a nice car can be fun? But the intention of the link buyer might be PR, but for the owner of the site, who is into the topic of his site, it's fairly relevant.

As long as they don't do it manually it's impossible to spot without hurting too many innocent sites.

[mfishy]

It wouldn't be terribly difficult to examine this relationship and see what results are based of "PR Buying" vs being a hub of information as the PR buying links will usuall be off topic and if you catch alot of off topics you can kill the "hub" that they are coming from.

It wouldn't? :)

[instand1]

One way to detect "paid links" is:
a) do several links to different sites show up together on several sites?
b) does this group of sites show up always with the same anchor-text?
c) does this group of sites link back to a SEO or Internet Marketing agency?
d) does this group of sites have an "unusual" mix of inbound-links from high PR-sites? For example: too many links from high PR-sites?
e) does this group of sites show up in links always at the bottom of the page, as a link-list with no other text between the links?
f) does the words "sponsored links", "SEO", "Internet Marketing" or similar show up on the page?

On webmasterworld there have been several hints that links from the middle of the page, looking "natural", have more weight than links from link-lists at the bottom of the page.

[ThomasB]

a) do several links to different sites show up together on several sites?
b) does this group of sites show up always with the same anchor-text?
c) does this group of sites link back to a SEO or Internet Marketing agency?
d) does this group of sites have an "unusual" mix of inbound-links from high PR-sites? For example: too many links from high PR-sites?
e) does this group of sites show up in links always at the bottom of the page, as a link-list with no other text between the links?
f) does the words "sponsored links", "SEO", "Internet Marketing" or similar show up on the page?

a) who does it that way shouldn't complain.
b) who does it that way shouldn't complain
c) who does it that way shouldn't complain
d) I guess most highly complicated pages (studies for example) have links from high quality/PR sites only
e) who does it that way shouldn't complain
f) who does it that way shouldn't complain

Sorry for the repetitions, but be smart and get "natural" links.

[BigDave]

Like I said, Google does not need to identify paid links because they have no problem with them. So, if they do not need to identify them as being paid for, why would they bother?

They do not like people that sell PR specifically, and they do not like sites that link in such a way that the SERPs are adversely and dramatically affected. They do not need to know if the links on a site like that are paid for, they just need to know that their links are causing problems for the results.

[newsphinx]

Here's my example.

My site is a PR 7 travel site. We do not sell links on our site. We do have a link page which has a PR 7 also. I listed about 70 outbound links to our link exchange partners. Absolutely, the page does't transfer PR anymore. The links plus links to my owner pages do not exceed 100 limit. All the links are on topic travel sites.

Any comment on this?

[Chris_D]

Newsphinx,
Was the page called 'links.html' or 'travellinks.htm' or anything else with 'links' in the file name?

Thats what I'm seeing.... try changing the file name...

[newsphinx]

Chris.
Yes, the url look something like www.mysite.com/link/links.htm. I have read posts before that urls with "link" in them are blocked of PR. In fact, I saw, yes, and keep seeing link.htm or links.htm showing in link:www.domain.com check of other sites.

[friendlyseo]

You are all entitled to your OPINIONS.

My opinion is that even 1 non-reciprocal link from the "right site" can send a sites rankings and traffic through the roof.

Whether you buy it or not is irrelevant. The keys are "right site" and "non-reciprocal".

If you wanna advertise and spend money - great - if all ya wanna do is trade - good for you!

Doesn't mean lots of so so reciprocal trade links aren't good, they're essential. But the key is non recip and higher PR the better.

Study the biggest sites and that is what you see!

At least that's what I see....