Forum Moderators: open
> 4 different domains
So they own domains...so...build 4 domains yourself.
There are a few site networks out there that will turn a PR7 or PR8 with little to no effort. I guess money still talk......
KG
http://www.google.com/technology/
PageRank ExplainedPageRank relies on the uniquely democratic nature of the web by using its vast link structure as an indicator of an individual page's value. In essence, Google interprets a link from page A to page B as a vote, by page A, for page B.
I hope the US democracy does not end up working this way!
I wonder what one could sell a vote in the US elections for?
I know it's just "business".
A business model that expects to make it on the Internet through getting everything for free usually fails.
I don't think they would want to penalize for this but like the post said just not give any value. I also think it is possible for Google to find what links are paid for, especially with human interaction.
bobothecat
>>What's wrong with Google counting paid links? If a site can afford to buy relevant links - so what... it's advertising.
It is advertising but most of the time they are trying to buy PR or Backlinks, the whole point of the natural serps is you can't buy your way in.
Even though people get away with it, this is not in Google best interest to allow. I would think Goolge would want to keep the Nat Serps a clean as they can.
I hope the US democracy does not end up working this way!
I wonder what one could sell a vote in the US elections for?
I know it's just "business".
hmm.. so do you endorse link exchanges that is basically saying I won't vote for you if you don't vote for me?
I don't understand why people get so excited about people that buy links or advertise on other sites (think it's envy if nothing else). Do people complain when companies spend money to advertise their products/services via radio, print, television or other medium?
Look, if you are trying to make a living off of your business whether it be online or offline and you set your your advertising budget at $0 - you will have a long wait, waiting for word of mouth to support your business. That's the way it's been in business - that's the way it will be IMHO.
People have to quit whining and get off their wallets if they have a business, product, or service they are trying to market/promote and expect to compete with those that are willing to spend-money-to-make-money.
If people have more money (and/or aren't afraid to spend it)they can do lots of things to get traffic, build their presence or just out do you.
It's not something I'm always happy about, we have been on both ends, but it's a fact.
So please, don't just assume that if it wasn't for those pesky paid links you'd have the whole pie.
St John replied "Why didn't you stop him?"
"What me!?I am only one man!"
"So is Hitler"
So please, don't just assume that if it wasn't for those pesky paid links you'd have the whole pie.
Exactly!
Some are so tied to concentrating on a few keywords/positions they don't realize that their competition is using advertising and/or PPC "wisely" at a fraction of the effort to draw traffic for hundreds/thousands of related terms at a very reasonable cost.
C
1) That Google and other search engines don't devalue obviously paid links. They corrupt the search rankings in many cases. And it can't be difficult for the engines to identify a large portion of the paid links.
2) That people at Webmasterworld defend paid links and compare them to advertising. There's a reason newspapers force advertisements to be printed in different typeface than their news stories. It's so readers can tell them apart. Paid links distort the search engine results.
Corrupt the search engines in what way? If it's spam - they'll get caught - and usually dealt with accordingly.
"2) That people at Webmasterworld defend paid links and compare them to advertising. There's a reason newspapers force advertisements to be printed in different typeface than their news stories. It's so readers can tell them apart. Paid links distort the search engine results."
Paid links equal: Yahoo Directory, and god know's how many other paid-for-inclusion sites. I think you answered your own question ... don't know if you've realized, but print media is much different than the Web.
If you're being beat because someone else is buying links - boo hoo - figure out what they're doing and do it better, or be prepared for possible lower rankings.
Just like life ... the Web isn't fair.
added: Sorry for the cut-and-dry response, but the "whoa is me syndrome" is not a good excuse when it comes to running a business on the 'Net.
[edited by: bobothecat at 10:51 pm (utc) on Oct. 19, 2004]
I don't know why but I still see sites doing well on Google just buying text links. You would think Google would be smarter by now and not get gamed by this, but in my opinion it still does.
Me likes. :-)
1) That Google and other search engines don't devalue obviously paid links. They corrupt the search rankings in many cases. And it can't be difficult for the engines to identify a large portion of the paid links.2) That people at Webmasterworld defend paid links and compare them to advertising. There's a reason newspapers force advertisements to be printed in different typeface than their news stories. It's so readers can tell them apart. Paid links distort the search engine results.
And how do the above comments not pertain to link exchanging schemes?
Why would they (SE's) devalue links/advertising that are paid for and not links that are exchanged? To me purchasing advertising/links are a whole lot more natural than exchanging them... when was the last time you saw advertising in any other medium that competitors advertised back and forth with each other? I can see it now.. Ford Motor CO. having GM logo's in all their brochures and visa-versa.
People that believe that exchanging links is fine, but buying them are wrong, must just be cheap or something...
... or amateur Webmasters that expect 'pie-in-the-sky' for nothing ;)
Bought links aren't advertising - they're bribery.
Again...and how is this different from link exchanges? Seems everyone makes these comments, yet doesn't explain why purchased links/advertising should be frowned upon, but not link exchange schemes. I stand by my thoughts that purchasing is a lot more natural than link exchanges...
I guess AdWords,other PPC, and all media advertising is bribery by that standard. If someone works and gets a high traffic site - why is it so wrong for them to sell advertising on it?
edited for clarity
Old StoryEvery morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed.
Every morning a lion wakes up. It knows it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death.
The moral:
It doesn't matter if you are a lion or a gazelle. When the sun comes up, you better be running.
Build your own one way links or buy them from someone else. Time spent complaining about how fiar it is or isn't certainly isn't part of the ranking algo.
In the same way, there is a difference between a TV advert and "product placement" within the actual feature, the second of which in some cases goes against codes of practice - for good reason.
ps: I often find the term "amateur webmaster" intensely patronising.
Page rank is Google's substitute for a human review. It succeeds because although it has many faults, it's the only metric there is for dealing with billions of web pages, since it can be done in an automated fashion (as opposed to semantic analysis which would not be feasible with today's computing resources).
Thanks.
You can put up the best site in the world, it still needs some starter links for people to see it in the serps and realize how 'wonderful' it is in order to link to it 'naturally'.
That comes down to money
$paid adv./links or
$ppc
This statement by google has always bugged me. Its wrong in several ways.
First, unlike a democracy, votes are not equal. Page rank makes some votes worth much more than others. Hardly democratic.
Second, unlike a real democratic election, voting is not secret. You must tell everyone how you vote.
I like to think of linking as an endorsement. Getting a link for a high PR page is a celebrity endorsment. Some celebrities give their endosrments away free and others get paid for it. I dont have a problem with either situation.
... it's just a semantics debate
No, it's about understanding the difference between different things. Once again, I'm not complaining about anything other than people not seeing the difference between one thing and another thing. An advert should be seen for what it is - an advert. A bought link that doesn't look like an advert isn't an advert... it's just a device.
As it happens, I don't believe in link exchanges just to increase PR, nor buying links just to increase PR. Neither is "natural" and therefore is against Google's philosophy (I believe). I've made my choice, as you've made yours.
And when you file your taxes at the end of the year - how do you claim this expense? Other than advertising - I'm not sure how you could justify calling it anything else. :)
