| LED Digest 2639: Link Trending |
|
|
|
==================================================
The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" Data > Information > Knowledge > Wisdom http://www.AudetteMedia.com : the LED's Publisher Boutique Internet Marketing: SEO, SEM, Social Media http://www.SEOToolSet.com/training/ : the LED's Premier Sponsor Bruce Clay's Search Engine Optimization Training & Certification ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest adam, led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com .............................................. May 5, 2008 Issue no. 2639 .............................................. .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ==== CONTINUING ================= <Moderator Comment> --== Triangular Linking ==-- ~ Joel Lesser "The search engines are trending how often you obtain links!" --== SEO for Flash ==-- ~ Shari Thurow "...the situations where Flash was clearly the best solution, overall, has been rare." ~ Maty Matyszak "It's good to see Richard Graham on this list - we are in the same business..." ======== CONTINUING =============================== <Moderator Comment> I changed the name of my recent post to: The SEO Guide to Information Architecture http://www.audettemedia.com/blog/seo-guide-information-architecture It's on Sphinn here: http://sphinn.com/story/43882 -Adam -------------------- From: Joel Lesser Subject: Triangular linking > What's the current thinking about > "triangular linking"? Since reciprocal > links have been devalued, does this > strategy make sense? Are there any hidden > dangers? Is there a right and wrong way to > do it? - Scotty West, LED 2638 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/2052/190/ Yes Scotty, it's been discussed here many times in the past but do not worry about that. We have not discussed it in a while so this subject was due for an update. Full disclaimer: I am the inventor, owner, president, ceo, janitor, feline relations mgr, etc of LinksManager.com, the web's original editor based link management software service (and the only link management software with an issued patent USP#:7,082,470). I have 11 years of experience in link building. I have seen all of the games come and go through the years and with regards to three way linking, I can shed a lot of light on that subject. Almost every day of the week, we get a phone call on our sales line about 3 way linking. Webmasters want to know if we can do it for them. Our first response is "why three way link?" - the answer we almost always hear back on the other end of the phone is "because its good for rankings and the search engines cannot detect it". Hogwash. The search engines can detect anything including classic link exchange, three-ways, four-ways, five-ways, six-ways, seven and a half dozen ways, I could go on and on but I am starting to sound like Willy Wonka! Folks, when the search engines spider your site, your site and it's link strategy are being forensically probed like you have never imagined. It's worse than a rectal exam. The search engines are trending how often you obtain links. That is so important for you to know it's worth repeating again. The search engines are trending how often you obtain links! Hard disk space is cheap and Google knows exactly when you obtain links, what your trend is, and what types of links you are obtaining. Ask yourself, "does participating in three way linking benefit my end user's experience?" Is what I am doing helping my end user find related links to my products?" If the answer is yes, then I suspect you are having to go out of your way to match up three sites to interlink with. Seems like some hassle to me. If you participate in a software or service that forces three way links, then it's possible (likely) that you will be linked with sites not completely relevant to your own and in a volume that will create a synthetic trend line that shows the search engines you are not obtaining links naturally. The search engines tell us in their guidelines to make linking decisions based on what benefits the end user. I don't see any end user benefit to three way linking. If it smells like chicanery, it probably is. We wrote an article about three way linking a while back over on our sister site. If you want to learn more about how dangerous this practice is: http://linkpartners.com/article_three_way_linking.html Scotty, also said: "Since reciprocal links have been devalued" Scotty, how have reciprocal links been devalued? Do you make this statement because a self proclaimed "expert" blogged it? Or is this based on your own personal experience? With my 11 years of experience in the world of link building, please let me explain what has and has not been devalued. Google modified their webmasters guideline last year to state "avoid excessive reciprocal linking". If you read Google's 2003 patent "Information retrieval based on historical data" ( http://peek.snipurl.com/26nt0 [uspto.gov] ) which features their invention for what they call their "Exemplary Search Engine 125", you will see proof that at least Google (if not all search engines) are trending the rate at which you obtain links. You will also notice in section 77 that the patent states: ----------------- "A typical, "legitimate" document attracts back links slowly. A large spike in the quantity of back links may signal a topical phenomenon (e.g., the CDC web site may develop many links quickly after an outbreak, such as SARS), or signal attempts to spam a search engine (to obtain a higher ranking and, thus, better placement in search results) by exchanging links, purchasing links, or gaining links from documents without editorial discretion on making links.." ----------------- Sorry for the long quotation but it's important for readers of this post to know that my comments are based on FACTS, not based on chest thumping "expert opinion". The SEO's who are spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) on the subject of reciprocal linking no doubt have ever studied Google's patent(s) or participated in editor-based relevant link exchange for the end user. So why did Google modify their guidelines to state "avoid excessive reciprocal linking?" Because hundreds of software and services are now available that provide full duplex methods for obtaining links - making problems for the search engines. Full duplex means that the user made no editorial discretion on making the link. Full duplex means you pay your $50 to Blackhat Link Building Services and that company auto-links you to 500 sites overnight. The search engines do not want you obtaining links in this manner because it does not benefit the end user. That type of fully automated link building is what causes the search engines problems. To state that "reciprocal links have been devalued" is completely untrue and is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Yahoo! and Google's guidelines does NOT state "do not reciprocal link". Their guidelines only state to avoid "excessive reciprocal linking". The search engines realize many webmasters in competitive retail markets (for example) will not link to a related site unless the link is exchanged. That's good ol' fashioned marketing 101. Coca Cola links to Delta Air Lines. Delta links back to Coke. They promote each other because they target the same target market. Nothing wrong with it. And the search engines realize it. We have thousands of clients world wide. They all participate in traditional link exchange. Since our software is strictly editor based, we see almost all of our users do very well in the serps while a few do poorly. It's like watching a farm of petri dishes grow. We scrutinize those who do poorly and in almost every case, the user is attempting to link with sites irrelevant to his/her own and usually in a volume higher than we recommend. We see the search engines reward sites with good serps when the site obtains links slowly and only links up with quality sites highly relevant to their own. This makes for an open and shut case. Reciprocal linking has not been devalued - unless you are doing it wrong. Link exchange is alive and well on today's web - especially within small business / hobby / niche related sites. Sure it is not the right solution for all types of sites but it's a classic marketing method that has not been devalued, unless you are participating in games such as 3 ways or other trickery. Joel Lesser President/CEO http://LinksManager.com -------- new post - new topic -------- From: Shari Thurow Subject: Flash SEO Hi all- This is in response to the discussion thread about Flash SEO and specifically, the responses to the question: > Why use Flash at all? - Michael Linehan, LED 2637 These responses: > So if designers are still limiting their skills > to static sites, all I can say is good luck to > them in the long run. - Barb Sybal, LED 2638 > In fact if it wasn't for google loving text so > much my viewers would love to have all my sites > completely flash based! - Richard Graham, LED 2638 Okay, I'll bite because I am a designer/developer. There have been a few occasions when Flash was the best technology solution. One was for an online construction calculator which involved calculating the area (far more complex than a rectangular area, but still including rectangles) of the construction and corresponding parts. The other was for a site that had to be available on a regular browser as well as a museum kiosk. Those are the two situations that stand out in my mind, from my professional experience. And that is what made me write: the situations where Flash was clearly the best solution, overall, has been rare. Our firm didn't jump right in because we really, really wanted to use Flash. We didn't use "oh these people think it's cool" as an excuse to use it. We didn't use focus groups. We didn't use Web analytics. We used usability testing and heuristics, because we want to measure task completion, efficiency, user confidence, etc. You know, all of those wonderful things that usability professionals measure. I am certainly not saying that Flash shouldn't be used, and I am 100% confident that you will always find someone with the case study that proves the opposite of my opinion. (Well, they think it proves the opposite but they haven't really tested it, have they?) There are industries and situations where task completion, efficiency, etc. is considerably higher with Flash. That is my point. I test. Sure, I've used Web analytics for years. Focus groups, too. But I test. IMHO, Jakob Nielsen has always been dead on with his observations about Flash. No developer should walk into a Web design situation with the assumption that Flash is the best solution. Or AJAX or whatever. Listening to users (field interviews are great) and to business owners (their business goals), and then balancing those goals by using the appropriate technology -- that is the best route. My 2 cents. Sincerely, Shari Thurow, Founder and SEO Director Omni Marketing Interactive -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Maty Matyszak Subject: Flash SEO > My websites revolve around learning > languages, so the big advantage for me of > flash is sound. Plus all our in house > graphics were originally designed in flash > and come out to be smaller file sizes in > flash. - Richard Graham, LED 2638 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/2053/190/ It's good to see Richard Graham on this list - we are in the same business and have come across his site in different contexts before. Like him we do EFL (English as a foreign language), and before you can sell to visitors in our line of business you have to show them that you are sincere about your service and product. We resisted flash for some time, simply because a some of our users - and they come from 100+ countries - don't have the latest computers or fastest connections. However, teaching requires as fully interactive an experience as possible - and with some exercises, until browsers embed sound better, that means flash. I agree flash is not essential if you are an out-and-out web merchant - ebay and amazon don't use much flash. But the web is not (and let us pray it never becomes) just a giant shopping mall. We sell stuff, but that is only a part of what we are doing. For some of the rest, we need flash. With relation to SEO, this works - because we have people who give us natural links. The best kind there are. Try searching for English Games (about a quarter of a million sites have that phrase) and see what you find. Maty Matyszak www.english-online.org.uk (c) Copyright 1995-2008 Orange Wheel, LLC. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Better late than never! |
