| LED Digest 1918: The Linking Issue |
|
|
|
================================================== 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 adam,led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com ............................................... January 12, 2005 Issue #1918 ............................................... .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ==== CONTINUING ================= --== Problems for Linkers ==-- ~ Aaron Wall "You can either try to recreate the web, or allow the work of others to work for you." ~ John Gergye "...for most links are the only way to top rankings." ~ Shari Thurow "I have never believed in reciprocal linking because the fundamental concept is flawed..." --== Keeping the Harvesters at Bay ==-- ~ Charles Oertel "I use a contact form that has the email address encoded on the server..." ~ Bill Davison "Believe me Will Bontrager's solution for email harvesting is effective." ==== BILLBOARD =================== --== Dropped by Google ==-- ~ Mark Mucke --== CSS Cross-Browser Issue ==-- ~ Michael Linehan ~ Martha Retallick ===== CONTINUING ================================= From: Aaron Wall Subject: Linking > I spend on the average US$5000 a month advertising both > online and in print media... WHY would I want to attract people > to my website and then, when they get there, send them to > some other website? Especially when considering that about > half my traffic is from PPC advertising, I just do not see the > point. - Robert Bass, LED 1917 Why link to related merchants: Creating quality logical business partnerships is a good longterm business strategy. They may cross sell stuff for you. Reciprocal promotion is not something that is new to the web or link building specific. Why link to related information resources: You can either try to recreate the web, or allow the work of others to work for you. To each his own... aaron wall ------- new post - same topic -------- From: John Gergye Subject: Linking Robert, The photography on your site is absolutely stunning. Good job. And I'm glad to hear you've got a marketing model that works for you. Mixing free search engine traffic and PPCs is smart. Alas not everyone can invest $5K a month on advertising however. Now assuming a robust 7% of those visitors you attract through your myriad marketing methods buy, that still leaves 93% who don't. That's waste traffic. And if you don't have a way to cash in on them it's well, a waste. One way to cash in would be with Adsense. Which I assume you don't use for the same reason you don't do links. It would siphon off visitors to other sites. Yet since that 93% are not going to buy from you and perhaps never will, what's the big deal if they go to a link partner's site? Especially if by having links you rank #1 for your focus keyword instead of somewhat lower? Three you've cheerfully ignored the fact that links on other sites can send you a healthy dose of traffic. Maybe netting you more visitors than you give up? Then do you have any evidence that would support your assertion that most links are on link farms? This is a term thrown around rather loosely by some. I don't consider pages of reciprocal links to be link farms. And don't believe Google does either. Yes, SEO rules do change. Often because of abuse by over zealous webmasters who assume if a little is good then lots must be better. Leaving the search engines no choice but to diminish the value they give to the suddenly over used tactic. Yet since links require more work than most are willing to invest I don't think there's much chance they will go the way of any on page "tricks" others have resorted to that no longer work. Still let's not make it sound like you fell off the turnip truck and landed those top SE rankings by accident. As I beg to differ that you "never once conformed to these ridiculous "standards". Your site is a text book example of conforming to SEO standards. Your focus phrase "vintage glass beads" appears in your title tag, your meta description tag, your keyword tag (although you have done a bit of keyword stuffing there which I'm sure you engaged in before it became all the rage or as you put it gibberish?) , in your H1 tag and sprinkled through out the content of your home page. Which pretty much covers the major on-page optimization bases, right? Then too this niche is fairly non competitive. Which is an understatement. Looking at the number of competing pages in Google there are next to none compared to other niches. Unfortunately not everyone has that luxury either. So the only way to come out on top in most instances is with links. While using the difficulty tool I turn to confirmed that "vintage glass beads" is an outright slam dunk compared to most search terms I analyze. Typically well optimized content alone can land top rankings in niches like this. Which is why it's smart to ferret these out. Since the competitors aren't that seo savvy. Which is just what you've got. So yes, in your case links aren't that important. While I'd suggest you'd get more benefit than cost from links you may not. But for most links are the only way to top rankings. Just didn't want some to perceive you lucked out with those top rankings. When you got them through a combination of a super easy niche and solid on-page optimization. Nor did I want anyone to conclude from your experience that links aren't important. In most cases they make the difference between being no where and now here when it comes to search engines. Best, John Gergye ------- new post - same topic -------- From: Shari Thurow Subject: Linking Hi all- This is in response to the interesting discussion thread about linking from LED #1916 and #1917. I would like to contribute my 2 cents on the topic. First, linking as an online marketing strategy certainly isn't a dead issue. I believe it is misunderstood, but it isn't dead. (1) Reciprocal linking I do not and have never believed in reciprocal linking because the fundamental concept is flawed - link to me and I will link to you. If you find a site's or page's content to be particularly useful and believe it will benefit your visitors, then link to the page. If you won't link to another Web page because they would not grant you a reciprocal link? Perhaps you didn't find the content as useful as you thought you did. For example, we have a Links section on our Web site, and one of the sections is a set of stock photography links. I link to the stock photography sites that I use most often. Do I expect them to link back to me? No. Their content is not less valuable because they won't link to my site. (2) Sending visitors away from site This link development myth has existed since I first started designing sites back in 1995. I remember clients insisting they didn't want a Links section of a site because they felt it would send prospects away. The reason I feel this myth continues to thrive is that people just don't understand Web design and marketing. The pages that you want to keep visitors on, primarily, are category and products / services pages. The home page, too. Category and products / services pages are pages that convert visitors into buyers, sort of a direct sales type of page. That is their purpose - to convert. A Links page's purpose is to assist your site visitors in becoming more knowledgeable about a topic. And it's great PR. Take my photo links section as an example. A site visitor might not be ready to purchase a design service from us, but they might be interested in finding some stock photos. We helped them to useful resources. Result? Visitors remembered our site as being helpful and useful. They don't view our site as a giant ad. (3) Web analytics I know many people who view their site statistics as a snapshot of what everyone else sees. I am very fortunate in that I have seen and analyzed lots and lots of Web analytics data since 1995. Believe me, every site is unique. Making a blanket conclusion about a Links section is often an incorrect one. I am amazed at the link development many of my manufacturing and construction clients get from having a useful Links section. And the qualified traffic their sites receive from having a useful Links section. (4) Incoming and outgoing links To response to Peggy's post, no site is penalized for incoming links. No one has control over who links to their site. But you have complete control over the sites you link to. Search engine software engineers have been stating this for a long time. Go to SearchEngineWatch.com's SearchDay archives if you want to read specific quotations. As a search engine marketer, link development is fundamental. It is very difficult for a site to get long-term search engine traffic without it. But the focus should always be on high-quality links, not a lot of what I call "Fred's Bank" links. But SEMs need to do it correctly AND site owners need to have patience. Link development takes time. However, the results are cumulative and long-term, which is why I don't think linking is "dead." Okay, off my soapbox. Sincerely, Shari Thurow, Webmaster/Marketing Director ~ For Free design and marketing tips, visit us at: http://www.grantasticdesigns.com/tips.html ------- new post - new topic ------- From: Charles Oertel Subject: Harvesters > The interesting thing is that I got some spam even with > the image. This may be because I published it on a > contacts page in the form: Email: [image] - Peter Lapinskas, LED 1917 I suspect that any email address that has been used by one of your customers running MS Outlook (no matter whether they typed it in from an image or got it some other way), finds its way to spammers through viruses that read your customers' Outlook address book. I use a contact form that has the email address encoded on the server (never on the web page) and I get lots of spam through it. I believe we have Microsoft Outlook to thank for this state of affairs (people are starting to call it by a more appropriate moniker: LookOut!). regards Charles Oertel FineBushPeople.net ------- new post - same topic -------- From: Bill Davison Subject: Harvesters Believe me Will Bontrager's solution for email harvesting is effective. However, like any other solution it must be used as it is designed. Therefore, if you use Will Bontrager's "Master Spambot Buster" script, do yourself a favor and also use it in your forms. Leaving an openly visible address there defeats all your efforts!!! If you have any doubts about whether a harvester can collect an email address Will also provides a means to test it. http://willmaster.com/possibilities/demo/RetrieveEmails.cgi However, don't just test your domain name... follow the instructions and test each separate page on your site. Bill Davison bizwebpage.com ==== BILLBOARD =================================== From: Mark Mucke Subject: Problems with Google Ranking I currently am experienceing some problems with my site in Google. If I search by domain name, it brings up the site perfectly. If I however use the Google ranking tool (googlerankings.com) it does not find my site under specific keywords. Some days it is listed (like yesterday) under a specific keyword @366 in the list, but it never shows for the keyword it has been optimized for. What can be wrong? is it the backlinks? In May this year we have totally revamped the site, and since then the problem persists. If someone has an idea, it would be great! Thanks Mark Mucke ------- new post - new topic ------- From: Michael Linehan Subject: CSS > We're trying to build without tables, but our > CSS skills (or lack thereof) are showing. - Tom Anson, LED 1917 Hi Tom, My own attitude about this is "Why bother?" For myself, I decided I don't need to be at the bleeding edge. Sure, it's coming. I'm researching and learning about CSS layout, but I'm in no hurry to implement - especially for layouts that are very easy to do in a table. One site I found on CSS had dozens ad dozens of hacks and workarounds --- if you want to do this, here's what to do so you're compatible with IE5; if you want to do this, here's what to do so you're compatible with Mozilla. This went on for pages. When I've had a programmer do it for me, it was way more trouble - and money - than it was worth. So, especially when you say "lack thereof", I'd say "keep it simple for now". Michael Linehan Marketing Alchemy www.marketing-alchemy.com ------- new post - same topic ------- From: Martha Retallick Subject: CSS I'm not a CSS guru, nor do I play one on teevee, but one of my nearby neighbors fills both of these roles quite handily. Name's Lance Willett, and you can find him on the WWW at: http://design.fautrever.com/ Hope this helps! Martha Retallick "The Passionate Postcarder" http://www.postcardmarketingsecrets.com ------------------------------------------------------- The LED Digest is sponsored by pair Networks: pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains © Copyright 1995-2004 Adam Audette. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------------------------------------------------- "Nurture your mind with great thoughts." - Benjamin Disraeli |
