Can SEO be successful without on site SEO and just Link Building?

[glasses123]

Quick question for the experts!!

I have been getting conflicting information. One side says that quality links are the most important and other state On site coding and optimisation gain the best results????????


Any constructive arguments for or against?

Gavin

[Nixies]

It is possible to rank a page without the search terms on it at all (so no onsite optimisation), just by having a lot of backlinks with the apporiate anchor text. An example of this was 'miserable failure'. Bloggers got George Bush's Bio ranked in first place purely by linking to it ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3298443.stm ).

Also it is possible to rank on a term with no inbound links, mainly if the compertition is non existent. Say you decided you wanted to rank in first place on the man up word "Mangekkopetfreetoedriver" all you would need to do is get the page indexed, becuase it wouldn't be any where else on the internet you would rank first place.

In general links are stronger, just becuase without them you can always be beaten.

[sirearl]

There's no one without the other,they are probably of about equal importance.

Although either can get a low competition site up there.

Earl

[david64]

I concur with Sir Earl, of UKBF.

It goes a bit like this... In the early days of search, search engines relied on web pages to try and bring relevant results. The search results were rampant with manipulation. The people who could best figure out how search engines analysed pages could get to the top of the results easily. Google came along with the idea that you could use hyper-links to better tell what sites are about and how trustworthy they are. From this point onward it became harder to rank in search engines just by gearing your pages to search engine's on-site scoring systems.

So consider you have a web page that is all about scrumping damsons from Old Pete's Farm on the outskirts of Chipping Sodbury. Because the subject matter of that page is not going to be competing with lots of other sites, the page will rank highly for related terms. If we then start bombing links into the damson page from high quality pages with the link text "life insurance"; lets say we got more and better links to our damson page with "life insurance" link text than any of the sites on page one of Google for "life insurance". Search engines would be thinking, "This page is about plums, but the internet (links) are telling us this page is something to do with life insurance. There are plenty of other pages that tell us they are about "life insurance" and the internet concurs with this. I think we will rank this page at position 42 for 'life insurance' because we have better candidates."

There are three ways you can tell Google what your site is about:
-On page factors
-Links pointing to it
-Domain name and URLs

The more you can use those to tell Google about your site, the higher you are likely to rank.

When you say people have been telling you that on-site is better. That is not true. When you want to rank for competative terms, its just not possible to do so without links confirming to search engines what your pages are about and that they are of merit. On the other hand if you don't put any relevant text on your page, you are going to be compeeting with people who do have relevant text on-page as well as inbound links.

What you might be getting confused by is people promoting good quality content as a way to get better search engines rankings. This doesn't really have too much to do with title tags, this has to do with producing the best quality content - be it in the form of words, images, code, videos etc. - so your site becomes the online authority on that topic. You are not going to become the online authority on a subject by tweaking your titles and renting a loads of links from TextLinkAds. Authority sites don't always rank on page one for their realted terms. For example none of the SEO companies on page one of google.co.uk are considered authority sites. There is a big difference between ranking in SEs and promoting yourself online. My advice would be if you are thinking long term is to look more at promoting yourself online without really paying much attention to search engines. When SEO newcomers try and DIY rank their site, they can sometimes get banned because they end up making a massive mess on the interveebs.

[edmondscommerce]

the answer is yes, but likely only for a short time

its possible to shoot to the top of the serps with large amounts of backlinks but you wont stay there without good content (or good quality links)

[quikshop]

A small number of high quality inbound links are worth significantly more than hundreds of 'web farmed' links to and from poor quality websites.

Content should always be your first priority, both in terms of SEO and the visitors experience, i.e. useability, relevance and presentation of content.

[Toni Anicic]

It is possible to rank a page without the search terms on it at all (so no onsite optimisation), just by having a lot of backlinks with the apporiate anchor text.

This is true. I have achieved this several times even for some pretty competitive keywords.

[fisicx]

This is true. I have achieved this several times even for some pretty competitive keywords.

How long did these pages stay there?

Google is changing the whole way it ranks pages, inbound links have nowhere near the same value they used to.

[Toni Anicic]

It's still there, it even has malicious software on it, but that doesn't prevent it from ranking 1st place on Google LoL. So it's been a solid 3-4 years now. No mention of the term on-site and is ranking number one :)

[sirearl]

How long did these pages stay there?

Google is changing the whole way it ranks pages, inbound links have nowhere near the same value they used to.

Not sure I agree with that ,I think there may have been a lessening of importance for links from minor sites,but still think links from authority sites carry the same weight.

Have noticed a dissproportionate amount of importance given to keyword rich domain names.

Earl

[SFD]

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=click+here&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

Ranks top purely from backlinks

[fisicx]

Not sure I agree with that ,I think there may have been a lessening of importance for links from minor sites,but still think links from authority sites carry the same weight.

You are correct, I was thinking about the 'submit to 1000 directories' type links.

Another thing I noticed is the 'more text' option google provides - spammy coment does better than relevant content.

[fisicx]

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=click+here&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

Ranks top purely from backlinks

Hardly competitive though. It doesn even seem to generate enough traffic to feature in the keyword tools. click+here+adobe gets 140 per month but that's only because this is a famous example of how to not do anchor text.

[SFD]

Hardly competitive though. It doesn even seem to generate enough traffic to feature in the keyword tools. click+here+adobe gets 140 per month but that's only because this is a famous example of how to not do anchor text.

So, if it's not competitive, how easy would it be for you to rank a site for those keywords?

[fisicx]

That result has been there for a very long time so I couldn't tell you how easy it would be. The OP asked about ranking purely on inbound links. The general concensous is that it is quite possible to do so for an uncompetive term but much more difficult for a popular search.

Here's an opposing example. I rank #1 for 'navigation guidelines'. There are no inbound links to this page - a brilliant result I thought except only 210 searches per month.

In other words, with a bit of effort you can rank really well for an uncompetitive search but since this isn't going to bring in much business so there's not a lot of point.

[serendipitybusiness]

You are correct, I was thinking about the 'submit to 1000 directories' type links.

Another thing I noticed is the 'more text' option google provides - spammy coment does better than relevant content.

Yes your right, this kind of tactic can do more harm than good, however a good solid link pop campaign coupled with matching on page seo is the way to go every time.

Hope this helps

[edmondscommerce]

It's still there, it even has malicious software on it, but that doesn't prevent it from ranking 1st place on Google LoL. So it's been a solid 3-4 years now. No mention of the term on-site and is ranking number one :)

hehe all good

[glasses123]

so getting the feeling that both must be done but links are most important!

All a bit confusing when everyone has a different 'gauranteed' ladder to success:|

[david64]

Yes, you need to do both. Although always keep in mind people who will visit your site and your reputation. If your are stuffing your site full of keywords to manipulate SEs people will not read your site. Likewise, if you are going all over the internet commenting "Thanks. Nice post." on dofollow blogs you are going to get a reputation as a spammer.

All a bit confusing when everyone has a different 'gauranteed' ladder to success:|

That's because there are different ladders to success. There are infinite ways to promote your site online - there is no fixed path to the promised land. Also keep in mind that SEOs and IMs can only comment on what they have experience on and a lot of the time they will comment on things they know nothing/little about or don't have sufficient experience. There is a lot of parroting and blind faith in he SEO community.

[sirearl]

there is no fixed path to the promised land.

well I certainly hope there is ,or I been wasting my time for many a year.:D

Earl

[KidsBeeHappy]

And don't forget that onsite SEO is not the same as SEM.

Getting people to your site is great, but getting them through it and converting and paying is better.

A website that cannot get people through the shopping cart is worthless, even if it sits at number 1 for the search term. (With the exception of selling the domain to someone who can convert customers)

[LBtrading]

These sorts of questions are a bit silly no offence intended,

But why would you spend 6 months doing link building and not spend one day doing some basic onpage.

Most niches that people are in you dont need the most advanced onsite techniques, just some basic factors covered and then some consistant link building techniques are normally enough to rank for some good traffic and converting keywords. Im not saying this will work for terms like "car insurance" as gocompare can vouch for their tactics ha,

You wouldnt do one or the other that is not seo, just seems a bit of a pointless question anyone that spends time building links and has "welcome" as their title tag on every page is an idiot.

[glasses123]

The question was relevant as many SEO companies offer off site only link building without on site work and gaurantee results!

Of course you need content, that goes without saying as you would'nt spend time or money marketing a website with 'welcome' on it.

Just wanted opinions as to what has the most importance. 20% onsite 80% off site?

Does that sound about right?

[OldWelshGuy]

Link building is 100% the most important thing for ranking (As regardless of any content you CAN get a site to rank for ANYTHING with enough quantity and quality of backlinks.

Content is 100% the most important thing for conversion, as unless you have content that takes people through AIDA and builds the trust needed, you are not going to convert the traffic.

Content without traffic is useless
traffic without content is useless

So MY answer is, they are BOTH equally important to the overall BUSINESS success.

[beadell]

Link building is 100% the most important thing for ranking (As regardless of any content you CAN get a site to rank for ANYTHING with enough quantity and quality of backlinks.



Just what I was waiting for.....:D

Cheers James

[admagic]

It is possible to rank a page without the search terms on it at all (so no onsite optimisation), just by having a lot of backlinks with the apporiate anchor text. An example of this was 'miserable failure'. Bloggers got George Bush's Bio ranked in first place purely by linking to it ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3298443.stm ).

Also it is possible to rank on a term with no inbound links, mainly if the compertition is non existent. Say you decided you wanted to rank in first place on the man up word "Mangekkopetfreetoedriver" all you would need to do is get the page indexed, becuase it wouldn't be any where else on the internet you would rank first place.

In general links are stronger, just becuase without them you can always be beaten.


Google closed the door on pure "google bombing" as a direct result of the bush incident.

As a result - it is believed that google looks for relevance before accepts link juice - these days presumably LSI relation, even if specific expressions are omitted. Hard to see how else they prevent bombing

[sirearl]

Link building is 100% the most important thing for ranking (As regardless of any content you CAN get a site to rank for ANYTHING with enough quantity and quality of backlinks.

Content is 100% the most important thing for conversion, as unless you have content that takes people through AIDA and builds the trust needed, you are not going to convert the traffic.



disagree.:p:rolleyes:

Earl

[OldWelshGuy]

Disagree how, why, come on young man spit it out ;)

[sirearl]

Disagree how, why, come on young man spit it out ;)

You mean for nothing,blasphemy.:eek:

Got enough problems with all these young guns after me butt.

Just don't agree with the way you are saying that one aspect has more relevance in ranking , and the other for sales.

Plus there are some other major factors to consider these days.:|

Earl

[admagic]

You mean for nothing,blasphemy.:eek:

Got enough problems with all these young guns after me butt.

Just don't agree with the way you are saying that one aspect has more relevance in ranking , and the other for sales.

Plus there are some other major factors to consider these days.:|

Earl

You should become a politician earl.

Cant fail to be more popular than the present lot
"uncle albert for PM!!", Id vote for that

You are a master of hiding the message in such obscurity and round about terms, that it is no longer possible to determine whehter there really was a message...somewhere there!!

[sirearl]

You should become a politician earl.

Cant fail to be more popular than the present lot
"uncle albert for PM!!", Id vote for that

You are a master of hiding the message in such obscurity and round about terms, that it is no longer possible to determine whehter there really was a message...somewhere there!!


Blimey you don't expect me to be explicit do you.?:eek:

Bad enough having the UK young guns after me poor old hide.

I have to cope with the Transatlantic celebrity SEO crowd spewing out there bleeding E-Books.:|:)

Aparently according to OWG there's gangs of the bleeders all conspiring with each other.:|

At least I only talk to myself.:D

Earl

[admagic]

Blimey you don't expect me to be explicit do you.?:eek:

Bad enough having the UK young guns after me poor old hide.

I have to cope with the Transatlantic celebrity SEO crowd spewing out there bleeding E-Books.:|:)

Aparently according to OWG there's gangs of the bleeders all conspiring with each other.:|

At least I only talk to myself.:D

Earl

I am a member of two such gangs....

I talk to myself too. But thats probably a sign of something else.

[Tin]

I talk to myself too. But thats probably a sign of something else.

Talking to yourself isn't too bad, it's when you start paying attention and having a conversation back... that's when you need to worry!;):D

Ray

[Ali-v-8]

Talking to yourself isn't too bad, it's when you start paying attention and having a conversation back... that's when you need to worry!;):D

Ray

oh oh. i thought that was normal behaviour.:eek:
I'm just gonna have to leave my self a message and tell me its over. :(

But i'm so good looking :p

[U9Design]

Link building is definitely the number 1 factor in SEO. Period.

[Ali-v-8]

Link building is definitely the number 1 factor in SEO. Period.

Read the posts through out the forum. Have a cup of cocoa, go to sleep and when you wake up learn about SEO.

That is one of the worst statements ever.

What do you base your statement on.

Are you an Indian link building company

[fisicx]

Link building is definitely the number 1 factor in SEO. Period.

Rubbish.

One of the strongest ranking factors is my site's content.http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/10/good-times-with-inbound-links.html

[Ali-v-8]

Rubbish.

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/10/good-times-with-inbound-links.html

Have you been to his website.
Don't like calling a website but "Lotus jump sources thousands of websites, blogs Q&A platforms and news sources for your keywords"

slap me with a fish if i sound dumb but WHY?
Would you not just ask the client then get a keyword tool.

[z3nyt]

i have a website that was a web design company website and ranks for the 1st place although now it is link directory website.

search for combination like "web design england" or "web design england uk"... and you figure which is the website because is on 1st

[ride]

Domain name age is a heavy factor for SEO.

[GreatSEO]

I think it depends on the SEO expert and how they work sometimes it is better to get the onsite structure sorted whilst doing the link building and other times it is better to get the site structure where it needs to be for the conversions before you start the process of the link building so that when you do start ranking you get the all important conversions.

Regards

Dave