Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Now i have few confusions regarding the approach i should adapt towards gaining links. From what i have heard links from social media sites have been devalued as well as links from article directories, web directories and blog posts. In this case what do you recommend how should i start the marketing process?
I personally want to push my site on digg front page as it will give it an instant huge exposure which will then be followed by sending emails to an opt in email list then press release, directory submission e.g yahoo and botw, link affiliation, press release.
Now do you recommend this strategy of creating huge buzz and instant links? remember all the links will be of quality and not spammy directories or spammy blog posts and if you do not recommend of it please let me know why? Also tell me what could be a best practice to launch a site. I have spent thousands of dollars on its development and content creation and i dont want it to go down the drain. Help will be appreciated.
It seems all the reciprocal linking is frowned up on these days. Getting good quality natural links is tough these days.
As the wise Yoda once said, "You must unlearn what you have learned..."
Engineers from some of the major search engines have made statements in the past regarding excessive reciprocal linking because some webmasters were abusing it. Abuse means high volume (hundreds a day) with low relevant sites. They didnt say "don't reciprocal link". Many have clarified "its ok to have reciprocal links" and "reciprocal links occur naturally on the web".
It's easy for self proclaimed experts to say "get one way quality links". Easier said than done.
There is nothing wrong with reciprocals if you follow published guidelines which means maintain high relevancy and very low (natural) volume.
Fortune 500's reciprocal link every day. A major soda manufacturer links to and promotes a major airline and vice versa.
There is alot of FUD on the web warning you against reciprocal links. Most of that was written years ago when reciprocals were in the high abuse category. Or its written recently by those with their own agenda to sell you on a four figure a month "seo package".
These days, the warnings have been heeded and most experienced webmasters know they can exchange links with quality sites without any fear of being penalized. Those same webmasters know from looking at their analytics that the links generate traffic and have a branding function as well.
Yes, there are brand new webmasters hitting the web every day who unfortunately have read the wrong thing somewhere and go berzerk with high volume low relevancy reciprocals. They will learn eventually. Try not to take it the wrong way when one of their long winded link exchange requests hits your inbox. We are all new at this at one point or another.
If you don't abuse them, reciprocals still have their place and will always exist on the WWW where cross promotion is ever present and natural.
I can get a brand new website to rank with just a few dozen quality reciprocals in five months. They do still work as an SEO function. You just have to know what pitfalls to avoid.
So what you (cnvi) are saying is that it is OK to exchange links as long as they relevant to the topic/website? How does that play into the Google PR though? Would cross linking to other lower PR websites act as detriment to your own website? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time.
So what you (cnvi) are saying is that it is OK to exchange links as long as they relevant to the topic/website?
Correct. If the link opportunity is relevant, get the link.
How does that play into the Google PR though?
Forget completely about PR. Make linking decisions based on what benefits your end user, not how you think its going to affect PR. Remember all new websites start with low PR and a low PR website today may very well be a higher PR website next year.
Would cross linking to other lower PR websites act as detriment to your own website?
No. Keep in mind the search engines are crawling all of your links and making calculations based on the whole of your site. If you link to only high PR websites and your RLR (reciprocal link ratio) is 100%, it shows the search engines exactly why you are making link decisions. 100% RLR may be perceived as manipulation.
You want to link to sites that have low PR. You want to link to websites that don't link back to yours. And you do want to link to sites that link back to yours. You want a good even mix so that your activity is perceived as natural and not manipulative or scheming.
A site with a RLR of 40% and 50 reciprocal links will rank. It's not as complicated as the four figure a month seo expert would lead you to believe.
I get very random websites that pingback/trackback to my website, do they gain a benefit from my allowing that their pingback appear on my site and vice versa? Is there a detriment? I apologize for the seemingly elementary questions, but you appear to be very knowledgeable on the subject and I hope you don't mind me picking your brain.
Also do you know where I can find some resources that describe this subject in detail?
Again thanks for your time.
Regarding the "benefit" of them, I've seen abuse of trackbacks and pingpacks just like any other marketing method. I've read contradicting articles and research on what seo benefit they provide. Someone who has more experience in analyzing the use of trackbacks and pingpacks will chime in here and answer your question.
I personally want to push my site on digg front page as it will give it an instant huge exposure which will then be followed by sending emails to an opt in email list then press release, directory submission e.g yahoo and botw, link affiliation, press release.
Have you looked at the Library [webmasterworld.com]for this forum ? cnvi's comments are correct, and there is much more intelligent discussion about links in the library posts.
