| LED Digest 2052: Reciprocal Linking Myths |
|
|
|
================================================== The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" pair Networks: The LED's Web Host Hosting and Domain Reg. from a Trusted Leader pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest post, led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com .............................................. December 12, 2005 Issue #2052 .............................................. .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ==== NEW ======================= <Moderator Comment> ~ Feedback please --== Reciprocal Linking Myths ==-- ~ Joel Lesser ==== BILLBOARD =================== --== Link Popularity & Google Droppings ==-- ~ Muhammad Irfan ======== NEW ===================================== <Moderator Comment> Greetings LEDer, We haven't published in a couple of weeks. I hope you've missed it :-) I have been so short on time that something had to give... and unfortunately the LED Digest was it. I've got more time open now, and plan on putting a concerted effort back into the list. It's frustrating though, because I know under the right direction this list would continue to thrive, grow, and produce great discussions. It's just a matter of getting enough time to dedicate to it. I've tossed around lots of ideas lately about options for this list: selling it, ending it, giving it away, etc. I don't have any obvious solutions, other than to keep on doing what I've been doing. So if anyone has any ideas out there let me know. We could always throw it on ebay. :-) There may be a question that the list has reached the end of its natural life. I believe the list is still useful -- especially when discussions are lively -- but the archives alone are priceless. If they were plugged into a searchable database with a nice interface they'd be a goldmine. What are your views? Do you think the LED Digest is still useful - do you want to receive it? Give me some feedback here. Thanks. Here's a great post by Joel Lesser on recip. linking -- hope it gets things started again! Best wishes, Adam ----------------------- From: Joel Lesser Subject: Reciprocal Linking Myths I'm tired of reading misinformation about reciprocal linking and so this post hopefully will dispel some of the myths currently circulating on the Internet. In Michael Martinez's last post, he quoted from this article: In "The Truth About Reciprocal Link Networks" http://snipurl.com/kb9g [webguerrilla.com] he wrote: ------------------- "But we all already new that, right? Anyone who wasn't asleep for the last month knows that Google's last update was all about penalizing sites for reciprocal linking". ------------------- With all due respect to Mr. Martinez, how does the author of this article he quoted know that sites who reciprocal link are being penalized? Does the author work for Google? Be careful what you read about linking by self proclaimed "experts". The majority of what I read about linking on the Internet is misinformed speculation and downright paranoia. If you want to know what Google thinks of linking, go to the source. All you have to do is read the recently published Google patent and Google's webmaster guidelines. Before we go there, let's revisit why webmasters link with each other prior to when the term "link popularity" became part of the Internet marketing vernacular. Reciprocal linking with relevant and like minded sites is a unique and dynamic way to meaningfully enhance site traffic entirely apart from search-engine returns. If my site sells cosmetics and another quality site that sells similar products that are used by my visitor demographic wants to link to my site, I will link to it regardless of PR or rankings or what the search engines think of the target site. I will link to no PR sites if the site benefits my end user. When you link with quality like minded sites, you enhance the end user's experience by providing him or her with useful resources. Reciprocal linking is a low cost method for building like minded traffic to sites that share the same demographic. When you link to quality sites that benefit the end user, you also show the search engines that you link for the end user and not to inflate your rankings. The costs of reciprocal linking are also usually lower than the costs of hiring an SEO or buying traffic. The linking service mentioned in the article at http://snipurl.com/kb9g noted that the user "managed to pickup about 7000 new links in about a month and a half". This type of link building is what Google is working to address. Sites that reciprocal link in "natural" volume for the end user will not have problems with the search engines. "Natural" means do not exceed Google's speed limits for acquiring links. This is discussed in Google's recently published 2003 patent. The patent was published by Google engineers. My staff recently wrote an outstanding article about what we learned from the Google patent with regards to linking. Our staff spent dozens of hours and considerable financial resources consulting with our attorneys who know how to read patents. You can read that article in its entirety here: http://linksmanager.com/googlepatent.html. In the article, we discuss: -- Editor based linking. The Google patent specifically talks about gaining links without editorial discretion. Editor based means YOU decide who you link to - not a script or service. If you use a service that forces you to link with X number of sites (also called full duplex linking), this can be detected by Google and you are asking for trouble. -- Link volume. The Google patent specifically talks about link volume and how exceeding their speed limits can be detected by their algorithms. Don't ask me what the speed limit is because they didn't publish that. "Natural" volume means you exchange links based on what is best for the end user and not based on how many you can get in the shortest period of time. -- Avoid irrelevant linking. In the Google patent, they specifically talk about how irrelevant linking can produce a synthetic graph which can be detected. When you link to dozens of sites irrelevant (not related) to your own site, this can obviously be detected by the search engines. And linking to irrelevant sites serves no benefit to the end user. Finally, in Google's webmaster guidelines (http://www.google.com/webmasters/guidelines.html) , they specifically state: "Have other relevant sites link to yours." Linking with like minded sites is one of the best ways to produce qualified traffic when done correctly. But that means you have to do it right which means keep it editor based (don't link to sites that do not benefit your end user - toss link requests from sites that do not benefit your end user). Ask yourself: "Does this site I am about to link to benefit my end user?" If the answer is YES, link to the site regardless of link reciprocation. If the other site links back to you, great. If they don't link back to you, forget about it and move on. Watch your link volume. Do not link too aggressively. If you gain 25-50 quality relevant links every month, that is more than enough to build up quality traffic long term. Never link to irrelevant sites. When you do, you are part of the problem and you make the Internet worse for everyone. For the betterment of the internet, always make linking decisions based on what is best for the end user and you will have long term sustainable success. If you stray from these simple ethical linking guidelines, you jeopardize your rankings and more importantly, you do nothing to enhance the end user experience. Kindest Regards, Joel Lesser, President/CEO LinksManager.com http://linksmanager.com ==== BILLBOARD =================================== From: Muhammad Irfan Subject: Google droppings Hello everybody, I have a few web pages, but mainly http://www.fraserandbeyler.com and http://www.unwinestates.com. It's northern Cyprus estate web site. Something happened in a few days, it was on the 3rd listing, but now it dropped to 42. So the question is, there is something else, that Google is paying more attention, what is that? We have very good keywords, nice content and everything, So please provide some tips, some useful information, how can I get my web pages back. Best Regards Muhammad Irfan ------------------------------------------------------- The LED Digest is sponsored by pair Networks: pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains Copyright 1995-2005 Orange Wheel, LLC. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------------------------------------------------- |
