Buying Links
- 13th Jun 2007
- Leave a Comment
Vanessa over on the Google webmaster central has Posted up How to report sites that are buying and selling links to manipulate results and deceive search engines. She also added “Links that are purchased are great for advertising and traffic purposes”
So here’s the problem and I do feel sorry for Google here, If people stop linking altogether their search engine will fall apart, basic opic scores will never be good enough, So really it’s down to intent of the link, and in fairness the only person that can really say what that link was purchased for is the person that is buying the link, Not the site COMPETITOR..
so before you start reporting links if I worked for Google I would mark your websites and check them out, and not just the sites listed in your webmaster central account, you see unlike Google I would use you IP address you use to login into your google account , run that though the logs, check out what you have been searching for, what sites you visit and checkout those sites backlinks too, I still visit my own websites and client sites more than any other site ( apart from Yahoo, Google and MSN ), and what if a site in your industry gets pinged don’t you think that company will take some kind of action, I mean wouldn’t you..
DaveN
4 Comments | Leave a comment »
How the hell am I supposed to know the intent of a link on a site. How do I know that the reason that link is there is because it was paid for and is only there to boost serps.
This is driving me nuts, there are so many other groovy things to be talking about. I know we have to, because Google has made it so and there are so many other things to talk about.
I what the hell, I just wanna rank my sites, not waste time snitching to help Google boost their share price.
Stuff that, hire some warm bodies to do it, webmasters have enough on their plate. And anyway, there are so many ways to get round this it’s a joke. Paid reviews for example, or pay someone to write linkbait. You pay someone to write content to get you links, that’s links that are created from the exchange of cold hard cash.
Maggot Farmer!
Before we start getting angry about the whole buying link phenomena, consider the fact Google would not ask webmasters to report paid sites if they already had an algo for it.
Every SEO knows that in order to rank in Google you need links. In order for you inbounds to look natural you have to mix up your (paid high PR sites) with your crappy low PR newbies in order to make you link profile look natural.
I will continue to buy links in directories I feel that will boost rankings, but I’ll add 5-10 crappy ones to make my PR 5 link look more natural. If you don’t reciprocate the link all that you have lost is money and the time it took to find the site.
I have seen too many people get hung up about this and I ask why? Cause buying links is the only way you can rank a site? There are more directories out there than I can could count and there’s numerous ways of gaining inbounds to your site.
We cannot get mad at this we must evolve, we’re SEO’s for crying out load!
I might add to this post that those that choose to complain about this news from Google may not really be thinking two or three steps ahead of the game.
Many changes that Google and any other search engine makes to their algo are done because of the SEO community finding ways past the search engines existing set up.
Bryan is right that there are MANY directories out there and in my opinion, most of those directories are MF-PR (Made for PR) and nothing else. I don’t blame Google for addressing these and seen it coming long ago.
My $0.02
One of original concepts behind Google was the ‘backrub’ concept which to all intents and purposes was based around the theory of inbound linkage (which I would suggest in its infancy didnt even consider the effects of paid and recipricol based link programmes)
FIrst Google targeted reciprocal link programmes, now paid links. \
Talk about getting back to basics …..