Link swaps with low ranked websites?

Kent Brockman

I have a few requests for link swaps and am wondering if there is any benefit to having my website linked on websites with pr0, pr1, or even pr2?

The Apprentice

In a word yes .. It will give you added linkjuice to your own site. Preferentially your own niche specific area but tis still alas some juice

ket

Certainly, you can get benefits from relevant back links. You mention 'link swaps' if you mean reciprocal link then I suggest you don't do this, because Google will treat this you manipulate, unnatural links.

The Apprentice

yes but relevant posts in blogs from relevant sites can " be seen as natural" when trading comments about each others products and skillsets. You can see a lot of this in the "get rich quick.com sites about tools they use and sites they read regularly.

Its not hard to look for just scan for the outgoing links and learn from how they manipulate what and how they produce the content.

mneylon

The Apprentice wrote: »

yes but relevant posts in blogs from relevant sites can " be seen as natural" when trading comments about each others products and skillsets.

The problem with that is that most blogs' comments are "nofollow", so they probably don't count for Google (though they can drive traffic from humans to your site)

The Apprentice

Blacknight wrote: »

The problem with that is that most blogs' comments are "nofollow", so they probably don't count for Google (though they can drive traffic from humans to your site)

Yes that is true but google bot does cop on quickly enough if all your links are coming from "follow"
Variation would be great and there is if you look hard enough evidence that suggests or at least argues that indeed there is Some link juice from these "nofollow" posts.


And also i should retype or at least explain what i mean, most blogs posts are naturally wrote by the Content Writer or site owner etc. These will have significant value and its NOT specifically entering generic comments onto a post. The blog posts are wrote and tailored towards each other.

So for example if i had a problem with downtime on my site i could give Blacknight a valued link talking about his amazing hosting packages and how i wish my Bank was as efficient with returning phone calls when problems occur. Its giving added value to indeed to tailored post because NON generic and specific to my problems, my site and indeed creates a sense of authority From a website owner that talks openly about his problems and gives credit to a company that helps him out. It will create 1. Some seo value and no2 will Possibly (often) dependant on your style of reader create customers for the Host. Its really a win win scenario and it happens on absolutely every website out there you just have to look hard enough. In an ideal world its basically a link swop but its hidden in a blog post through a regular post.

Best of luck with it anyway dude.

Kent Brockman

Thanks for the replies. I had requsts via email from 2 online baby shops in USA with same target market but we are hardly going to have any effect on each others business, so it seems that will be of some benefit. Cheers

Is there anything to be gained from putting other links on my website (e.g links local hotels websites or other hotels where I have attended trade shows/fairs) without them putting my link on theirs? (apologies if this Question is as Dumb as it looks to me right now )

i have noticed that the few I've looked at are all pr5

LifeBeginsAt40

Build a website for your human visitors and not the search engines.

Repeat the above a few times in your head, because it really is the secret to online success.

If you think the links are to safe, non spam websites and you think the links will be of benefit to your HUMAN visitors then go ahead and link.

In my opinion (and to a certain degree Google) the PR rating system is out of date and not as relevant for backlinks as it once was. One of my websites has a PR3, I won't link exchange (or 1 way link) to a PR5 site if it is of no relevance to my website visitors, regardless of the benefit or not to me. My site was built for humans and if a link would be useful I add it to my site, that simple.
I have approx 580 outgoing links and about 1900 incoming links. The 580 outgoing links are all about my website niche, so providing a great source of info for my niche web visitors.

The very latest post from Google about website ranking also stated in HUGE big letters:

Build websites for humans not search engines!
Good luck and hope you get some Google love.

The Apprentice

Yes linking to other sites actually gives your site authority - meaning page rank, which google will ultimely judge on where your ranking on the serps should be ..

So yes, even linking to other hotel websites will actually provide some seo benefits but it must be in the same category or niche.. Simply linking to any pr3 or above doesnt help you its linking to your niche that does.

Kent Brockman

I see.

Personalised baby gifts is my niche but I have an events page on the website where we post advert/link to any events we are attending.

These events usually take place in Hotels around the country and hence my questions re linking to hotels (even though they are not in my niche)

The Apprentice

Well you wont obviously receive that kind of juice from that hotel section but you will recieve natural authority from link building which is another form of good seo.
Just keep doing what your doing and you will steadily grow up the serps. Asking people through facebook twitter are they attending, what could they reccommend you do to give added value will get some valid interaction via social mediums = more good seo.
People talking to other people through footbook, twitbot will increase it even more..

blue4ever

Just be very careful on how you go about that process - esp with the new tweek to the algorithm: Have a look here
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2171174/Google-Penguin-Update-5-Types-of-Link-Issues-Harming-Some-Affected-Websites

I you go over to Google webmaster central there are a flood of posts from people who have been hammered in the last few days

LifeBeginsAt40

Touch wood (you have to be superstitious in this game) my website has seen an increase in traffic since the Google algorithm tweaks.

Building a reputation with Google and other websites of worth, takes years. You have to write unique and engaging content that other websites want to link back to.

Simply participating in link exchanges is NOT the way to the top.
I have incoming links from huge national UK newspapers, links from other niche websites of great status etc.

I'm not lucky, no. I work damn hard to write unique content that people want to link to and over many many months those websites found my content and linked to it.
Google as we all know is a mysterious thing, a website needs to be established for a long time, with some heavy hitting links pointing to it, again for a long time.

Then, providing you don't suddenly turn your site into a mass of spam, the quality web traffic will start to arrive and the incoming links from respected websites will appear slowly.

It takes time. As I said, I built my site as a site for humans not for Google, I just followed good SEO advice and Google's advice.
If you do the same, build your website for your visitors then in time you should see other forums and websites linking back to you.

I personally would not concentrate on adding links to hotels/conference centres, as your business is about parenting issues. So that (in my opinion) is where your link and online relationship building should be going.

Kent Brockman

Its actually an e-commerce website I have, aimed at anyone purchasing gifts/presents for babies and young children.

I don't have a blog but am being advised that I should (it would be very easy to add it to my website as I built it in Wordpress).....but thats a whole new ballgame:D

LifeBeginsAt40

Kent Brockman wrote: »

Its actually an e-commerce website I have, aimed at anyone purchasing gifts/presents for babies and young children.

I don't have a blog but am being advised that I should (it would be very easy to add it to my website as I built it in Wordpress).....but thats a whole new ballgame:D

Hello, yes a blog is (almost) essential these days. They are a great way to introduce fresh content to a website on a regular basis.

Just try and blog about your niche and don't go for the hard sell approach, it puts people off.

Good luck with your venture.

link8r

The Apprentice wrote: »

Yes that is true but google bot does cop on quickly enough if all your links are coming from "follow"
Variation would be great and there is if you look hard enough evidence that suggests or at least argues that indeed there is Some link juice from these "nofollow" posts.

Don't know if I agree with this. Why is it bad to have no nofollow links? What if only one site links to you - lets say Microsoft. Are you telling me that you believe Google will penalise someone?

link8r

Kent Brockman wrote: »

I have a few requests for link swaps and am wondering if there is any benefit to having my website linked on websites with pr0, pr1, or even pr2?

Link swaps aren't a great idea. Google has been filing clever algorithms for years that downgrade link swaps. And I don't mean A-B, B-A. Even (A-B ; C-D ; D-A ; C-E ; E-A) are easily detected.

tricky D

link8r wrote: »

Don't know if I agree with this. Why is it bad to have no nofollow links? What if only one site links to you - lets say Microsoft. Are you telling me that you believe Google will penalise someone?

They're not bad so much as they just don't count for link juice so have poor direct SEO value. They do get clicks though, which is good, and may even result in some provision of follow links from elsewhere.

link8r

tricky D wrote: »

They're not bad so much as they just don't count for link juice so have poor direct SEO value. They do get clicks though, which is good, and may even result in some provision of follow links from elsewhere.

Hiya Tricky D. you missed my question a little. I know what nofollow is. My question was specifically: "how is having no nofollow links bad"

tricky D

I don't think they're that bad at all though some might be like link swaps which incur a penalty. They just don't give SEO link juice. Most of them are good as they get clicked by users which drives traffic which might result in a small percentage publishing a follow link somewhere else. Key concept here is they get clicked by users which reflects the mantra: design for users not search engines. That's not to say ignore SEO, it's a priority thing.

The Apprentice

I think you misread the post i didnt state that it was bad to have no follow links i think it quite good to have both. From a seo perspective on a scale of 1-10 do follow is indeed rated on outbound links to page rank etc (perhaps 5-10) and do follow would be in the brief areas of 1-2 lol..
Have just 1 site "microsoft" pointing to you and you might get penalized ?? Im not quite so sure that you would even show up on the radar.

The facts of the latest penguin update is that irregular links ie "ALL dofollow links" or "no follow links" are clear evidence that you indeed not adhered to googles implied "natural linkbuilding" stragies and i have seen evidence to suggest people and sites being penalized for this.
Although the goal posts have now moved and will continue to move google is indeed changing its game plan as to what is considered natural.
Say perhaps maybe 10 dofollow links and 1-2 no follow links ??? But you can bet your hat if u keep spamming the do follow links to the thousands the way some people do it you can be sure a slap is incoming either now or in the future.

So just to clarify its un natural !

link8r

tricky D wrote: »

I don't think they're that bad at all though some might be. They just don't give SEO link juice. Most of them are good as they get clicked by users which drives traffic which might result in a small percentage publishing a follow link somewhere else. Key concept here is they get clicked by users which reflects the mantra: design for users not search engines. That's not to say ignore SEO, it's a priority thing.

Hey Tricky- you're missing me entirely. I was replying to The Apprentice's comment:

"Yes that is true but google bot does cop on quickly enough if all your links are coming from "follow" "

link8r

The Apprentice wrote: »

I think you misread the post i didnt state that it was bad to have no follow links i think it quite good to have both. From a seo perspective on a scale of 1-10 do follow is indeed rated on outbound links to page rank etc (perhaps 5-10) and do follow would be in the brief areas of 1-2 lol..
Have just 1 site "microsoft" pointing to you and you might get penalized ?? Im not quite so sure that you would even show up on the radar.

The facts of the latest penguin update is that irregular links ie "ALL dofollow links" or "no follow links" are clear evidence that you indeed not adhered to googles implied "natural linkbuilding" stragies and i have seen evidence to suggest people and sites being penalized for this.
Although the goal posts have now moved and will continue to move google is indeed changing its game plan as to what is considered natural.
Say perhaps maybe 10 dofollow links and 1-2 no follow links ??? But you can bet your hat if u keep spamming the do follow links to the thousands the way some people do it you can be sure a slap is incoming either now or in the future.

So just to clarify its un natural !

Hey Apprentice - I completely and entirely disagree with you. You're drawing straight line conclusions. Firstly - and pedantically - this was your statement:

"Yes that is true but google bot does cop on quickly enough if all your links are coming from "follow" "

I didn't make any other statement. I didn't suggest that you said it was bad to have either follow or no follow links. It was specifically the suggestion that no having any nofollow links was bad.

This is untrue. You could have the following scenarios:

1. A site having 1000's of no nofollow links where a large majority are paid for = bad

2. a site having 100's of no nofollow links where non are paid for.

3. a site having <100 no nofollow links are paid for

I can't see Google at all in anyway penalising scenario's 2 & 3. I don't agree that its not natural. Its actually absurd in my opinion.

The Apprentice

link8r wrote: »

2. a site having 100's of no nofollow links where non are paid for.

3. a site having <100 no nofollow links are paid for

I can't see Google at all in anyway penalising scenario's 2 & 3. I don't agree that its not natural. Its actually absurd in my opinion.

Well ok despite what google think do YOU think that it was or is perfectly reasonable to assume my joebloggs.com website has 10,000 "no follow links" and it natural

And again same scenario ^ website has 10,000 "do follow" incoming links does this look natural to you ??

I might add that these website only have 1 or the other .. either do follow or no follow links .. THIS is what im saying in a pedantic way, what is your opinion on this ^ ?

link8r

The Apprentice wrote: »

Well ok despite what google think do YOU think that it was or is perfectly reasonable to assume my joebloggs.com website has 10,000 "no follow links" and it natural

And again same scenario ^ website has 10,000 "do follow" incoming links does this look natural to you ??

I might add that these website only have 1 or the other .. either do follow or no follow links .. THIS is what im saying in a pedantic way, what is your opinion on this ^ ?

You're changing the argument Apprentice. I didn't say having a ratio of 10k links to 0 nofollow was a natural arrangement, I challenged your assertion that having no nofollow links was bad.

The Apprentice

Oh my god..
Im not saying you said it .. i want to know your opinion

"My assertion that have no nofollow links is bad" .. is bad because its not natural.
I would like to know your opinion on this as to why u think its natural to have 0 no nofollow links ?

tricky D

link8r wrote: »

Hey Tricky- you're missing me entirely. I was replying to The Apprentice's comment:

"Yes that is true but google bot does cop on quickly enough if all your links are coming from "follow" "

Got it now.

Hmmmm, looking at the specs, it looks like follow is implicit only ie. all links are follow, unless given a nofollow, with no need to be explicit about it, so any explicit follow attribute might suggest, how do I put it, something less than ideal/worth flagging or investigation. However Google doesn't care too much about w3c specs.

link8r

The Apprentice wrote: »

Oh my god..

Tetchy much?

The Apprentice wrote: »

"My assertion that have no nofollow links is bad" .. is bad because its not natural.
I would like to know your opinion on this as to why u think its natural to have 0 no nofollow links ?

Hypothetical control situation: If a friend of mine sets up a new site for the first time and a hundred of his friends link to him to announce his site, then has he not created a site with 0 nofollow links? It isn't unnatural.

The Apprentice

No its not .. but how about 10,000 of his friends ??
Is he from china ? or parts of delhi ?


I stated above .. 100 odd.. he isnt even on the radar.. but start scalling it up ?? You know im 100% right but you don't want to admit it

link8r

tricky D wrote: »

Got it now.

Hmmmm, looking at the specs, it looks like follow is implicit only ie. all links are follow, unless given a nofollow, with no need to be explicit about it, so any explicit follow attribute might suggest, how do I put it, something less than ideal/worth flagging or investigation. However Google doesn't care too much about w3c specs.

Yes, indeed, all links by default are "follow" except where the domain itself is not listed or delisted (which means their links are by default nofollow).

Nofollow was the first agreed hint/directive accepted by the big 3 (big 2 or big 1 plus the other guy depending on your POV) and was designed to cut down on spam, particularly for social media sites. almost all twitter, facebook and other SM sites are nofollow. Obeying the nofollow is discretionary.

Google requires that all paid-for-links be attributed as nofollow. It doesn't have to. Also, the extent of nofollow is also discretionary. It may mean just not attributing authority or it may mean actually just not following (exploring/crawling) as a result.

After the very camp spat between twitter and Google, Eric suggested that they now obey the nofollow on twitter links to be literal - and will not follow any of their links. Whether or not this is practice, actual or even technically well understood/articulated by Mr Schmidt is another question.

However, the difference between detectable bad practice, actual practice and Guidelines from Google are 3 different, distinct items that are not mutually interchangeable.

tricky D

Flag for investigation. Could working out of Mumbai or could be the new worldwide pop sensation who everybody wants to link to. Mind you social media would soon impact giving nofollow.