Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Is this all just speculation?
Ive heard so many sides to this. One person might say "if you have a new site, its not natural to all of a sudden have 2k links pointing back to your site. It could set off red flags".
But then another person may say "of course its natural. What do you think happens when there is breaking news. Tons of people link to it sometimes thousands or hundreds of thousands) all over the web and quickly"!
So with all of this speculation, I'm interested to see if anyone has anything to say according to their "experience" in this matter.
On the other hand.. are you selling turnkey gift baskets? If so, its extremely abnormal to get a high number of links quickly.
Search engine spidering technology is extremely smart. Search engines are trending the rate at which you obtain links. You want to obtain links slowly but consistently over a long period of time in order to rank well.
My experience is that I can get a brand new site that is selling a mundane product to rank well in a 3-6 month period of time just as long as I obtain the links slowly but consistently. That means 30-40 links per month. No more than that especially when you your product or service is something that is fairly common on the web.
As I recall, this concept became widely discussed dating from a PubCon session in New Orleans, nearly four years ago in 2005. There may be some prior documentation or it had been discussed earlier, but I remember it as an "Aha!" conference where new concepts were being discussed, and this was one of them. Someone from Google described a process of link analysis where they classified sites into different niche buckets and analyzed the linking statistics of each niche. Travel sites tended to have a certain linking pattern, entertainment sites a different kind, etc. Taking these classifications you can drop in a particular site's link pattern and judge it against the statistical average. Like anything else about the algo there is only so far you can take it before anomalies like collateral damage take effect.
I've never met someone who was suffering from acquiring links too fast, or from a slow and steady pace. I have met some who have acquired less than optimal links and suffered instability in rankings.
Heres my problem. I have obtained a list of about 200 websites ALL which PR 5-8
Each of these sites have a place where I can ad my link. These sites are all very legitimate and were hard to obtain. No link farms or anything of the sort.
At first I couldn't wait to get my link listed on everyone of these websites then all of this talk about "natural linking" and not appearing "unnatural" got me paranoid.
My site is pretty new and I dont want to set off any red flags.
Ive thought about submitting maybe 1-2 a week or so.
But Im torn. Because according to some of the advice I get here at WebmasterWorld I should just go ahead and submit to all of them.
I have obtained a list of about 200 websites ALL which PR 5-8Each of these sites have a place where I can ad my link.
No one can answer exactly yes or no. However we can offer opinions. A more exact answer depends on many factors.
Is this a custom list created by people working for you who discovered them on their own?
Is this list part of someone's existing inventory of links?
Are these links offered to other people?
Will your links be on a page labled LINKS or something similar?
Will your link be labeled Sponsored, Advertising, or anything similar?
Will your links be in the footer?
Will your links be Run of Site (ROS)?
I suggest it is linking to whoever you like, whenever you want, and letting whoever wants to link to your site do so in their own time without any input from you.
Anything else is a "link scheme" on one level or another.
The links are legit.
mostly blogs, and forums from many different niches.
Im just asking If google sees a new site all of a sudden get about 200 pr5-8 links within a time frame of just a few days but only a hand full of low pr links will it set off a red flag?
Consider this, We Build Page's network of paid links was bigger than that and Google whacked it, causing Jim Boykin to make his famous I Have Sinned [storage.people.com] blog post renouncing paid links [webuildpages.com]. If Google can do that to a clever guy like Jim, what do you think Google is capable of doing to you and your fifty friends once your competitors get wind of your relationship and turn you in?
If that was your main site that ranked for 6 months then got whacked, not woohoo!.
points well taken!
Someone from Google described a process of link analysis where they classified sites into different niche buckets and analyzed the linking statistics of each niche. Travel sites tended to have a certain linking pattern, entertainment sites a different kind, etc. Taking these classifications you can drop in a particular site's link pattern and judge it against the statistical average.
a read a study alluding to the amount of links a story typically has pointing to it after making the front page of digg, and it broke down quantities by category - e.g. travel & places 200 links; tech industry news 600 links. i don't remember if those are the exact figures, but i have acquired about 200 links to a story after being featured on the front page of digg; i am not sure how it affected me in the search engines, but over 40,000 unique visitors in a 24 hr period makes me care less.
So,you're in right way,don't scare.
