Breaking SEO News on Paid Links...........

WHUK

Free Member
Aug 23, 2007
524
28
London, UK
The site could be ran by someone who has the time, or money, or influence to get loads of links from other sites, without having to pay directly for them with cash.

A site ranking well for a particular keyword does not always equate to quality in google, it may do often, but not always. It often just means they spent more time and money on SEO than the competition did.

I am not talking about particular keywords but most related keywords for your site. You can rank well for a particular keyword by using some blackhat technique but not for all. Even if you rank well you will not enjoy same position in SERP.
IMO your site will rank well if you have quality unique contents for your site rather then getting backlinks by paying them. Recently Google have dropped many sites who were trading links for getting top position in SERP.
Quality contents for your site will surely brings your visitor back to your site.
 
Upvote 0

ken_uk

Free Member
Jul 27, 2007
2,213
240
55
So what Matt is really saying, in effect, is Page rank is something that

1. Is valuable, If it was not valuable there would be no point in controlling it, nor any method in place to do so.
2. Is worth controlling - if it didnt matter if you lost any, you would not want to control the loss of it in the first place.
3. Can be lost, and is worth not losing as its obviously a limited resource, or you would not be bothered about losing some.
4. Is controllable to some extent, therefore a real tangible, controllable thing to some extent.

Are there many other things on the planet that are valueable, that people wish to have, that are real resources, that are not on the marketplace somewhere?

The nofollow tag was introduced by Matt & Co as a sign that you dont editorially vouch for the link, that you have not checked it, ie blog comments etc. It also now suddenly means the link is paid for...

I may be old fashioned on this, but I always thought things like parameters in html tags etc should be clearly defined, and unambiguous. Not open to to mean one thing or another.... Also, when did google get the power to introduce new tags in html? (Curious on that one, is it in the HTML standard? or is it a unnoficial one, not looked that one up, still half awake at the moment)


It also means the google search engine has gone from being a tool that simply serves up what is available on the web, with some generic advice on how to write pages for users etc, to a company that is telling people what to do on the web.

They are big enough to do so, and they fully realise that (or they should do..)

Googles entire ethos, write for the users, not the search engines has gone out of the window with this one move.

They could have done this years ago, but they waited until they were nice and safe in a position of dominance before they did.

It will be interesting to see if they get any flak from the anti-trust/competition/monopoly laws etc in time.
 
Upvote 0
1. Is valuable, If it was not valuable there would be no point in controlling it, nor any method in place to do so.
2. Is worth controlling - if it didnt matter if you lost any, you would not want to control the loss of it in the first place.
3. Can be lost, and is worth not losing as its obviously a limited resource, or you would not be bothered about losing some.
4. Is controllable to some extent, therefore a real tangible, controllable thing to some extent.

My takeaway from it was simply you can use it as a tool to make some pages more important relative to others - rather than the strict importance of PR in itself.

But again - a tiny order of magnitude IMO
 
Upvote 0

ctabuk

Free Member
Dec 6, 2007
79
1
Lincolnshire
Hi, I have not had time to read every post here - but I would add this - Google knew that it had problems the minute it saw so many people advertising Toolbar PR links as a method of SERP - which was never the case. It had created an economy based on that silly greenline and now the birds have returned to roost. It had to do something but draconian methods could be the start of a war between webmasters and Google.
 
Upvote 0
I was pondering the 'how could you measure website quality in the light of link abuse' conundrum yesterday and had a eureka moment. Surely, I mused, bounce rate must be a useful metric. Well what do you know perhaps it is ;)

d

Just think of the user metrics data they collect now via Analytics, Webmaster Tools, Google Toolbar etc........

...........does anyone really think all that is just for the benefit of Webmasters....................;)
 
Upvote 0
I am unable to post the link until I have reached 15 posts - and I hate people that do so by posting - I agree etc etc - Your Google Site Map - if you don't have one - search it and add it to your site - or you can do a quickie by doing "mysite" with the ""

Sorry - I don't understand what you are trying to say - or the relevance to this thread :|

Could you clarify?
 
Upvote 0

ctabuk

Free Member
Dec 6, 2007
79
1
Lincolnshire
Ray - hi the poster wanted to know the quality of their links - you suggested one route and I another - but I would not suggest the toolbar route - frankly I got rid of mine years ago - Using a little imagination as suggested -www sitereportcard dotcom is also a pretty neat way of taking a look at a site.
 
Upvote 0
Ray - hi the poster wanted to know the quality of their links - you suggested one route and I another - but I would not suggest the toolbar route - frankly I got rid of mine years ago - Using a little imagination as suggested -www sitereportcard dotcom is also a pretty neat way of taking a look at a site.

No - you have totally lost me now -
  • Which poster?
  • What did I recommend?
  • And what are you trying to recommend?
 
Upvote 0

ctabuk

Free Member
Dec 6, 2007
79
1
Lincolnshire
Just think of the user metrics data they collect now via Analytics, Webmaster Tools, Google Toolbar etc........

...........does anyone really think all that is just for the benefit of Webmasters....................;)


In response to this posters question about the quality of the site - Now Ray - I'm new here - you do not know me from Adam - please trust me I do know what I am talking about -and I dislike showoffs - but if I ask you politely to search my username would you mind doing so please - Many thanks David
 
Upvote 0
In response to this posters question about the quality of the site - Now Ray - I'm new here - you do not know me from Adam - please trust me I do know what I am talking about -and I dislike showoffs - but if I ask you politely to search my username would you mind doing so please - Many thanks David

Now you are just being rude, as well as factually incorrect.

If you actually read the thread, you will see that quote was carrying on the debate.

Red-Evo had posted something about bounce rates, and my post was in response to that.

Nothing to do with link quality - not even close :rolleyes:

Here is a link to that post - please read it properly
 
Upvote 0

ctabuk

Free Member
Dec 6, 2007
79
1
Lincolnshire
Can we start again - in order to ascertain the strength of a website it is a good idea to check your internal pagerank - that you can do through a Google site map - now I am never rude in forums - and I have a dislike for flamers. Once I have reached the 15 I will produce the link. Cheers David

Oh and the post read 'how could you measure website quality in the light of link abuse'
 
Upvote 0
I'm new here - you do not know me from Adam - please trust me I do know what I am talking about -and I dislike showoffs - but if I ask you politely to search my username would you mind doing so please - Many thanks David

Hello David - ctabuk is a name I recognise instantly.
I have seen you.... well basically everywhere :D


Welcome to the forum.. best regards
James.
 
Upvote 0

ctabuk

Free Member
Dec 6, 2007
79
1
Lincolnshire
Thank you James - It is great to see a UK Forum on business - I look forward to being here.

The paid link debate is all about the Toolbar Pagerank - Google basically messed up big time when it started to see posters advertising 'buy links from my pr6 site' an economy had been born.

Originally the toolbar pagerank was an accurate reading of a sites internal page rank - but then SEO hackers realised that they could access Google's algorythm systems - who remembers the pagerank predictors? They used the same software as the hackers. So Larry Page (pagerank Stamford University) of Google decided to feed artificial data via the toolbar and announced a 1 month delay in updating - anyone who understood pagerank immediately sussed that the info would have to be false and not a reflection of pagerank. But by now the damage was done and Matt Cutts became literally their PR Man. I moderate in WebProWorld and we interviewed Matt Cutts - they knew that had problems - hence all the paid links debacle. Now Google are hitting adsense sites too. The night of the long knives is with us :D
 
Upvote 0
Can we start again -trics in order to ascertain the strength of a website it is a good idea to check your internal pagerank - that you can do through a Google site map - now I am never rude in forums - and I have a dislike for flamers. Once I have reached the 15 I will produce the link. Cheers David

Oh and the post read 'how could you measure website quality in the light of link abuse'

David, I dislike flamers too. But you have still not read the context correctly.

Red-Evo put forward a theory that user metrics such as bounce rates etc might be a better alternative to measure a sites importance moving forward *instead of* link popularity

And I was agreeing with him.

PLEASE - read it properly :)
 
Upvote 0
*Sigh*

I was pondering the 'how could you measure website quality in the light of link abuse' conundrum yesterday and had a eureka moment. Surely, I mused, bounce rate must be a useful metric. Well what do you know perhaps it is ;)

d

ctabuk

You still don't seem to have read the post and taken my reply to it in context.

1. On this thread we have been discussing paid link abuse
2. As you can see above - Red Evo put forward a theory that a better metric for measuring the quality of a website might be bounce rate in the future - *instead of links*
3. I followed up by saying all the tools Google has developed sure are collecting all that data - and I doubt it is for our benefit :)
 
Upvote 0

ctabuk

Free Member
Dec 6, 2007
79
1
Lincolnshire
OK - let's leave it there - life's too short - but I agree with you 1million percent that the spyware used is not for our benefit - I carry just one toolbar Stumbleupon - that way if I see topic related IBL's hanging around I can zap them into my sitelinks.:D

In fact if you use gmail which I do - you can no follow it - simply take out the cookies - you have to reload each time - which is a pain - but at least it cannot track you whilst surfing.
 
Upvote 0
OK - let's leave it there - life's too short - but I agree with you 1million percent that the spyware used is not for our benefit - I carry just one toolbar Stumbleupon - that way if I see topic related IBL's hanging around I can zap them into my sitelinks.:D

At last - we agree on something :D

BTW - that link does not seem to be working - I want to read it - perhaps the site is down - I'll try again later :)
 
Upvote 0

ctabuk

Free Member
Dec 6, 2007
79
1
Lincolnshire
I've just been in it
Half’s SEO Notebook

Search Engines | Blogs | Marketting | PHP/MYSQL | CSS




How To Exploit The PageRankBot Tool

Building a good house means more than buying a pine dining table or 1080p Plasma TV (more “quality” content) or telling your friends about the new house you’re building (marketing). You gotta know how to use hammers, drills and nails too.
If you rather build a good site than worry about supplemental results, why are you reading SEO blogs? Come on, be honest. When’s the last time you read an SEO blog that talked in-depth about optimizing a dynamic page for fast page loads or repeating graphic elements on a page to create a sense of unity or using element size and position to establish a visual hierarchy?
Never, right?
But if you’re a control freak like me, read on.

WTH Does It Do?

Though some of you guys gave me positive feedback via comments and email about PageRankBot, I’m not sure if all of you know exactly what to do with it.
Inspite of the misleading name “Supplemental Results Detector”, its not a tool for detecting supplemental results. You have site:www.domain.com/& and site:www.domain.com/* for that. There are also other tools out there (I think Aaron Wall has one and sitemost just came out with a new tool).
I don’t really care how many of my pages are supplemental, but I do care when a page that deserves to rank in the SERP goes supplemental. One way to address that problem is PageRank distribution management. That’s what I built this tool for.
Tactics

First, figure out which pages on your site are important and which pages aren’t. Ask yourself is this page valuable to my visitors? If the answer is no, the page can go. You might also ask yourself what is this page supposed to rank for? If the answer is “contact me” or “privacy policy” then ask yourself why the hell would I want traffic for “privacy policy” and am I out of my mind thinking I can rank on the first page for “privacy policy” alongside Google, Sun, Apple, Adobe, and NY Times?
But if your “contact me” page contains your email address or IM information and your clients find you by Googling for your contact info, I would keep the page in the main index.
To mark unimportant URLs, multi-select URLs that are unimportant, then Edit > Toggle Importance.
toggle-importance.jpg

Now flag supplemental URLs. Some of you wish the tool does this for you automatically. It doesn’t. Instead, label URLs returned by site:www.domain.com* command by going to Edit > Mark Page As > Main Index.
mark-as-supp.jpg

You can use the search tool to find URLs. For example, the following image shows a search on seo4fun.com for urls containing the word “pagerank”:

Now go to View > Filters > Hide Marked, which hides all the URLs you just marked. Select all the URLs you see, and then set their status to supplemental.
Find Your Link Targets

To manage internal PageRank flow, you add internal links to your site. Decide which page you’re going to add a link on (link source) and which page you want that link to point to (link target).
To fish out your link “targets”, view only supplemental pages and sort them by PageRank (View > Filters > Show Supplementals and then click on the PageRank column). The topmost URL marked “important” is your best candidate:
1. The page is important to you (you feel the page deserves to rank in the SERPs).
2. The page is supplemental.
3. The page with the highest PageRank = easiest url to pull back into the main index.
supps-by-pagerank.jpg

There’s your link “target.”
Note: If your site has multiple “entry points” (i.e. not all inbounds point to the home page), PageRank flowing into your site from those entry points will change the dynamics of how PageRank is distributed. In that case, take the PageRank values this tool gives you with a grain of salt.
If you’re anal enough to want to account for IBLs pointing at specific pages, then you can “add juice” by going to Tools > Simulate Backlinks. First, set the home page TBPR (use a float, like 4.2 for more accuracy). Go to View > Column Filters > Approximate TBPR. That will show you approximate TBPR numbers translated from raw PageRank numbers. Choose a URL, and adjust as needed using the + and - keys.

Find Your Link Sources

There’s a few ways to figure out your link “sources.” One way is to find the page with the most PageRank bleed. (Don’t believe PageRank bleeds? We’ll argue about that in another post). Amount of PageRank bleed depends on percentage of outbounds to inbounds and a URL’s (non-visible) PageRank. For example, a PageRank X URL with two outbound links and two internal links would bleed (X/4)*2 PageRank. Bigger X (increased number/quality of IBLs pointing to a URL) means more PageRank bleed. More internal links means less PageRank bleed, even if the number of outbound links stay the same.
Let’s not get too obsessed with PageRank bleeds though. You can solidify Google’s trust in your links by linking out organically. A site that doesn’t link out needs a strong set of credible, trusted IBLs to “validate” with Google (e.g. amazon.com). Consider your outbound links a part of your link profile and a key ingredient in proving to Google that your linking habits are 100% natural with no artificial colors, flavors or sweeteners (yeah, I know that was bad).
Link from Pages with the Highest PageRank Bleed

First, limit results to URLs in the main index by going to View > Filter > Main Index Only, so you only link from URLs in the main index. Then sort by Outbound PageRank (click on the “Outbound PageRank” column header. If you don’t see the colum displayed, go to View > Column Filter to activate). The topmost URL with the biggest outbound PageRank is your link “source.”
outbound-pagerank.jpg

Link from Pages that Flow the Most PageRank

Another way is to find a page with that flows the most PageRank with each link. Go to View > Filter > Main Index Only. Then click on the “Increment” column header, which sorts the result in the order of PageRank flowing per link. The topmost URL with the biggest Increment bar is your link “source.”
increment.jpg

Connect the Dots
 
Upvote 0
Now Ray - I'm new here - you do not know me from Adam - please trust me I do know what I am talking about -and I dislike showoffs - but if I ask you politely to search my username would you mind doing so please - Many thanks David

Hi David,

I don't need to look you up - I know who you are (I read SEO stuff online for at least an hour per day, so whilst we have never chatted I am well aware of your standing in the SEO/webmaster community)

So, it is great you have joined UKBF and I look forward to your contributions - I have respect for you.

That said, I'm not going to blow smoke up your backside, and I'm not gonna crawl under a rock if I think I have been misquoted, whether you are Aunt Sally, David Castle, or even Larry Page for that matter :)

As for your last post - it will make an interesting read - although it is juicy enough to have been a new thread - instead of taking this one off topic :)
 
Upvote 0

ctabuk

Free Member
Dec 6, 2007
79
1
Lincolnshire
Just a quick pointer - how old and established a domain counts tons in Google. I use this as a metric over PR anyday.

Yes of course the age of a site will assist in SERP - but these days you can set up a mini site with a competitive URL it will shoot up on Google - then drop out - a bit like the sandbox (which I don't really believe -because of the following reasons:D) - as soon as it drops you add ten pages -longtail html - link them based on other competitive keywords the site will come back. I did this recently with 5 .org.uk's they are all now on page one or two - so if there was a real sandbox there are certainly some ways out of it:cool:
 
Upvote 0

quikshop

Free Member
Oct 11, 2006
3,644
714
54
Wolves
Yes of course the age of a site will assist in SERP - but these days you can set up a mini site with a competitive URL it will shoot up on Google - then drop out - a bit like the sandbox (which I don't really believe -because of the following reasons:D) - as soon as it drops you add ten pages -longtail html - link them based on other competitive keywords the site will come back. I did this recently with 5 .org.uk's they are all now on page one or two - so if there was a real sandbox there are certainly some ways out of it:cool:

Interesting but this is 'playing the system' to a certain extent, the age of a web address has value regardless of what techniques Google decide to filter out or punish.
 
Upvote 0

ctabuk

Free Member
Dec 6, 2007
79
1
Lincolnshire
I agree - in fact I'll go further - once a site is say 5 years old then adding new content is not the b and end all of SERP - Classic example being famous people - I play guitar - Terry Kath was a hero of mine (Chicago) his site has been top on Google for as long as Google has been around - but it has no new content - it is as was.
 
Upvote 0
Getting back to paid links. I have lots of pages on my website dedicated to regions and rivers of the world one page per river. Eventually their will be over 500 pages. Only started the project a few months back but already the pages are creeping up the rankings due the main sites ranking.

Now I have already had lots of offers from companies wanting to place a link in the text to their company and pay me for it. This would in no way devalue the copy in fact I think it would enhance it as all the links would go to companies that are operationg on the rivers but I would only want one link going out from each page.

Question is does this break the paid links rule? And if so how does the G know I am being paid for these links?
 
Upvote 0
Getting back to paid links.
Thank you - back on topic at last :)
Question is does this break the paid links rule?
In a word yes. And more importantly, Google now seem to saying they will penalise the link seller - not the buyer (as per this thread, and the official links)
And if so how does the G know I am being paid for these links?
Well some will say they can't. But in your case - you have a site which I presume does not really link out, and now you want to put 1 unique outbound link to each of 500 pages.

I could work that out, I think Google could too - easily - you have obviously just become a link seller

In this case - what is more important, your business, or quick few quid on the side?????
 
  • Like
Reactions: adventurelife
Upvote 0
Thank you - back on topic at last :)
In a word yes. And more importantly, Google now seem to saying they will penalise the link seller - not the buyer (as per this thread, and the official links)
Well some will say they can't. But in your case - you have a site which I presume does not really link out, and now you want to put 1 unique outbound link to each of 500 pages.

I could work that out, I think Google could too - easily - you have obviously just become a link seller

In this case - what is more important, your business, or quick few quid on the side?????

Good points, I am sure they would not notice a few but they would 500 as I currentley have very few outward links. Shame, not about the money as that is not here or there but I actually think it would enhance the copy and usefulness of the pages. Not worth the risk though.

Thanks for great points
 
Upvote 0

ken_uk

Free Member
Jul 27, 2007
2,213
240
55
As Ray said, you can nofollow the links to keep google happy.

As for selling links, people could argue - why not go through one of the various companies that sell text-links - who advertise via google adsense.

If they are good enough for google to take their money for advertising them, it surely it must be ok to use their services ;) - otherwise google would not be plastering them on loads of sites via adsense....

Google's guidelines include both the buying and selling of links that pass PR as against their guidelines, so they can penalise either side should they so wish, or even both.....

If google is going to penalise because a load of one way links pop up on a site, one per page, then whats to stop people from putting up a 500 page site, and linking to one competitor per page?
 
Upvote 0
Upvote 0

Latest Articles

Join UK Business Forums for free business advice