By clicking “Accept All”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyse site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts
These cookies enable our website and App to remember things such as your region or country, language, accessibility options and your preferences and settings.
Analytic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.
we need to get backlinks to rank on Google
You don’t need backlinks to rank on Google.
No you don't.
Probably because they sell backlinking services.Are you sure guys? Because every book, article, and guide I've ever read about SEO says you do.
Nope, most didn't sell anything, they were just SEO books.Probably because they sell backlinking services.
It depends. If you're ranking for local searches and services, or for a relatively long tail and not very competitive search terms it's very different. Then the quality of the copy/content, technical SEO setup, and relevance to the search term locally mean you can rank well purely based on content.Are you sure guys? Because every book, article, and guide I've ever read about SEO says you do.
Paul.
Indeed. That's one reason we pay to be on this forum - high quality backlinks in our signature and posts.That’s what we’ve read and looked into. Our seo is almost 100% but need these backlinks- according to google![]()
No, your SEO is very poor. Not sure who has been helping you but they have missed almost all the key ranking signals.That’s what we’ve read and looked into. Our seo is almost 100% but need these backlinks- according to google![]()
Except they are all no follow and therefore have almost zero SEO value.Indeed. That's one reason we pay to be on this forum - high quality backlinks in our signature and posts.
Hmm we might cancel our membership then.Except they are all no follow and therefore have almost zero SEO value.
Isn't Google's entire algorithm based on quality backlinks?Backlinks on relevent sites are great for driving traffic to your site, but not via SEO.
Isn't Google's entire algorithm based on quality backlinks?
We rank #1 for a lot of competitive OpenCart-related terms, and getting high profile backlinks has been a big part of our strategy.
Paul.
No.Isn't Google's entire algorithm based on quality backlinks?
Oh yes of course, we wouldn't recommend paying for links from link farms, or link exchanges etc.Google are looking for are "natural" backlinks
Exactly, so many links do have value.The links that have value are independent citations, referrals and reviews
But far less so than your content. It’s your content that is important and is what gets you ranked. The citation gives authority to your content.Exactly, so many links do have value.
Paul.
All of which are a complete waste of time and effort. Unless they bring traffic to your site. The SEO value is negligible.But there are places where you can legitimately put a backlink like forums, directories, even social media posts are indexed sometimes depending on their settings.
So you're saying that Google is now able to judge the importance of a site based on the value of its content pretty much exclusively and ignores links from high value sites?The SEO value is negligible.
That being the case, can you back up these claims with examples of competitive keywords you've ranked without any inbound links?
Could that be due to lack of competition then perhaps?Many of my products are 1st page rankers without inbound links. Admittedly (as you know), I'm in a very niche market, so it's a lot easier to rank them.
Could that be due to lack of competition then perhaps?
A long time ago Google only looked at links, the original page rank (the whole logic behaved like an academic review & saw all links purely as citations), it could not really judge content, but this led to people ranking rubbish with hundreds of spammy links.So you're saying that Google is now able to judge the importance of a site based on the value of its content pretty much exclusively and ignores links from high value sites?
Oh no! I hope not - I have been shown the google analytics- they look all in the green? What bits have been missed!?? I’m a bit concerned now![]()
In summary - link building - it depends on what you are trying to rank for, and whether it's a local search or not. Research and analysis is needed to determine this.
Google’s Gary Illyes tweeted a confirmation of that statement:” ‘We need very few links to rank pages… Over the years we’ve made links less important.’ @methode #serpconf2024″
“I shouldn’t have said that… I definitely shouldn’t have said that”
Not sure what GA has to do with ranking. Just because a report is green doesn't mean everything is OK. It usually just means there are no technical errors.Oh no! I hope not - I have been shown the google analytics- they look all in the green? What bits have been missed!?? I’m a bit concerned now![]()
Not just backlinks, relevant niche edits or editorial links,That’s what we’ve read and looked into. Our seo is almost 100% but need these backlinks- according to google![]()
I'm glad you now admit that inbound links do matterBut as you move into more competitive keywords links may have more importance because your competitors have content that is a good as yours so Google needs a differentiator. Which means more referrals and citations from relevant (it's that word again), trustworthy and authoritative sites.
No, they may matter for some websites. They are not needed for most. You can rank a site for all sort of competitive keywords without backlinks. If you had taken @Tin’s course he explains how.I'm glad you now admit that inbound links do matter
You still haven't given any examplesNo, they may matter for some websites. They are not needed for most. You can rank a site for all sort of competitive keywords without backlinks. If you had taken @Tin’s course he explains how.