Minimum 4 star researcher please.

I was until recently going to organise reciprocal links from other
websites to my website. One method open to me was to submit the site
to various directories such as yahoo and lycos and ODP. The other
option was to exchange links with sites that had similiar content and
also purchase links. I will in every instance try to ensure that the
link phrase reflects my target key-phrase and the landing page also
reflects the key phrase.

Is this still beneficial? or will it be considered to be underhanded SEO?


As an aside i have detailed my opinion below.

My opinion is that if you are prepared to invest in your business both
in terms of the quality of the information contained in your site and
spending money to promote your site, purchasing links should not be
penalsised. As it appears to be currently. I appreciate that relevant
content and quality results are the basis for the success of google,
however i sell widgets and now my target key phrase has slipped from
no 1 to unranked and been replaced by academic papers on widgets or
shopping portals, listing paid for results about widgets. There seems
to be no increase in relevancy there?

Feel free to answer the question without commenting on my opinion.

Regards

anonymous2

Hi there,

A link exchange strategy can work under certain circumstances. The
power of including a keyphrase in such links appears to be over.



Key Phrase
----------
A month ago, having a single link phrase in every link to your site,
and using that same phrase in on-the-page optimizing, was an extremely
powerful strategy, albeit in a grey-area of Google's guideines.

With the Florida update there have been a huge number of sites
targeting commercial keywords drop out of the search results. Debate
is continuing, and an agreement on what has caused this is far from
being reached. I have been in discussions involving many experts in
the field, and this is my own take on what has happened:

1) Google uses the words in and around links to a page as a ranking factor

2) Either due to the introduction of stemming in the search results,
ot just a general desire to make results more relevant, Google
introduced a filter to dampen the affect link text has on sites that
are using link text to influence search results

3) Link text works great for non-commercial sites, so the filter only
affects commercial keywords (possibly those that are bidded on in
Google Adwords)

4) The filter dampens the affect of all links pointing to a page,
internal or external

5) The filter only kicks in when it sees the same keyphrase repeated
over and over again

6) The filter might then also look for on-the-page optimizing for that
phrase, and possibly determine whether a page is being overly
optimized

7) Sites affected by the filter almost always drop a few hundred
spots. I think that this is because link text was the only factor that
had them so high in the first place, but it could also be a set
penalty

The affects of the filter can be seen by making a search at Scroogle,
a site designed for that purpose:
http://www.scroogle.org

Some SEOs have reported fixing the problem by reducing the amount of
on-the-page optimizing. Others are busy changing incoming links to
include a variety of keyphrases, instead of just one.


Reciprocal links -  one website
-------------------------------
Google is going to be aware of when A links to B, and B links to A. If
the majority of links to your site are reciprocated, then Google has
every reason to suspect that the main purpose of such links is to
influence search results. To avoid any form of penalty, I would make
sure that:

1) The majority of links pointing to your site are not reciprocated
 
2) A good portion of sites that you link to do not link back

3) Reciprocal links use a variety of words and phrases in the anchor
text and any description that follows. Try and provide a different
link text for every link swap you make. And try and get the other site
to do likewise

4) Try to place links in natural places, amongst relevant content. Try
not to have a "links page"

5) Don't mention the words "reciprocal" or "link swap" or anything
like them on your site

The percentages are anyone's guess. Only the Google engineers know
what they are. Trust your instinct on what looks right. Take a look at
all the links to your site, and the words they use, and ask yourself
if the list looks organic or are some elements orchestrated.


Reciprocal links -  multiple websites
-------------------------------------
If you have more than one site focusing on the same or similar topics,
then you can increase the number of reciprocated links, by scattering
them.

Last week someone offered me a link swap. My site in question is PR7,
and theirs is PR4. A link swap wouldn't make much difference to my
site's PR, but it could help my other site that has PR5. More
importantly, Google is only seeing A linking to B, and B linking to C.
Although our deal is for reciprocal links, it is far less obvious.

If I was to do this a lot, having indirect reciprocal linking, I would
make sure that each of my sites:

1) Used a different server
2) Had different WHOIS data
3) Didn't share any grahics or content with the other sites
4) Had a different internal structure to the other sites

It sounds a little paranoid, but many Google observers believe that
Google can and does look at such factors. And if they don't now, they
might next year, or in five years time. If you are in it for the long
haul, consider getting it right from the start.

I'd also keep well clear of linking each of my sites to each my other
sites. A few links here and there are okay, but avoid having links on
every page "to our other great sites".

If you only have one website at present, consider starting more in the
future. Hosting and paying domain name fees for a handful of extra
sites can be quite cheap relative to other forms of advertising.
Design can cost a lot, but that's often a pride thing. Get the
visitors first, make it look good second.

The pattern that worked best for me is:

A) Have a flagship site. Make it as big and wonderful as you can

B) When the flagship site is profitable, and possibly taking up less
of your time, create a new site. It needs to be on a similar topic,
contain some unique information, and be good enough to be listed in
Open Directory

C) Repeat. There is a limit to how many sites you can run. Try to
limit the number that require continual work


Paid Links
----------
One site tried to make a commercial enterpise out of selling high PR
links, and had a major falling out with Google:
http://www.searchenginewatch.com/sereport/article.php/2165111

If the deal is made behind closed doors, and the link is one way, and
on topic, and using a unique piece of link text... Google will never
know.

Yahoo (these days) is in the business of selling links. Yahoo has a
huge PageRank. Google say that getting a link at Yahoo is a good move.
Yahoo charges commercial sites $299 a year, and they tend accept any
halfway-decent site. No-one has suffered from buying a link from
Yahoo.

I think it is a great idea to pursue, the only problem is determining
the price. In terms of factoring the price, off the top of my head:

If a link from a PR4 site is worth $1, then

PR5 - $20
PR6 - $150
PR7 - $750
PR8 - $2000
(other people will have wildly different opinions...)

Try and make the arrangement one of monthly payments. That prompts you
to check that the link is still there each month, and covers you if
their site suddenly dies.


Reminder
--------
It is important to realise that the Google's ability to provide
relevant search results depends on organic linking - websites linking
to web pages because they like the content, and believe it to be
useful to their visitors. Any attempt to use a link strategy that
undermines this process is increasing the chances of Google one day
penalizing your site for doing so.


Best wishes,
robertskelton-ga

Absolutely excellent answer, greater clarity than anthing else i have read.

Thanks

For commercial keywords, having those keywords in link text is no
longer beneficial if Google notices the same link text over and over
again - indicating that it is not occuring organically. Google says:

"Avoid tricks intended to improve search engine rankings.... Would I
do this if search engines didn't exist?"
://www.google.com/webmasters/guidelines.html

-------

"My opinion is that if you are prepared to invest in your business both
in terms of the quality of the information contained in your site and
spending money to promote your site, purchasing links should not be
penalsised"

Google describes its famous PageRank system like this:

PageRank relies on the uniquely democratic nature of the web by using
its vast link structure as an indicator of an individual page's value.
In essence, Google interprets a link from page A to page B as a vote,
by page A, for page B. But, Google looks at more than the sheer volume
of votes, or links a page receives; it also analyzes the page that
casts the vote. Votes cast by pages that are themselves "important"
weigh more heavily and help to make other pages "important."
://www.google.com/technology/index.html

So, I take it that by what you are saying, this would also be okay in politics:

If a candidate is prepared to invest in his campaign, both in terms of
the quality of the policies and spending money to advertise the
campaign, buying votes should not be penalised"

Thanks for the comment Rob i had not considered it in that light. In
your opinion therefore is there any benefit in pursuing a link
exchange strategy with similiar sites to my own?