Should I Avoid Link Exchange / Link Trading Hubs?

SEO Question: I have been considering joining a link exchange network to boost my Google PageRank. Is it a good idea?

SEO Answer: You have to know your goals before you can set a plan of attack.

Option #1:
Are your sites automated rubbish and junk content that can't get any legitimate linkage data? Are you just looking to spam MSN and Yahoo! for a few quick bucks of profit per site?

If so then it may make sense to push hard on the link exchange front. Outsource it though if you can. Once you get a system down that is profitable you can replicate it so long as you are paying someone from another country dirt cheap wages. If you are doing this to scale you won't have enough time to do it all yourself, at least not if you value your time, which eventually you will if you are doing this and it proves effective.

If you are doing spammy link exchanges yourself for months and months and months and are seeing no results it might be time to think about switching gears. Some people are good at this option. Others are good at option #2.

Option #2:
Do you spend hundreds of hours creating what you consider to be a useful original resource? Are your main problems that your site is new and you are still learning the web? Do you want your site to do well longterm?

If you fit more in this camp then I think it is probably going to be a waste of time to join reciprocal link spam networks.

Polarization:
Much is lost in polarization and pigeonholing groups of people. But in this case, I think it is an important distinction where you really only need to classify your sites as belonging to one group or the other.

My SEO mentor said he is partial to quality sites but spam can make great money too. Where people mess up is when they piss around in the middle.

Sure it is ok to have garbage sites. Sure it is ok to have good ones. But never the twine shall cross. With each site either spam hard or create good stuff. Don't make a site that has a foot in each pond.

The Illusion of Value:
When I first got on the web I thought it was oh so important to have a Yahoo! listed domain. Why? People taught me that so they could exploit me selling me shitty subscription based services that allowed me to look through a list of domains that already had all the good stuff pulled out.

Does it really help you if your online mortgage site is listed in the wiccan category of the Yahoo! Directory? Probably not much.

With these link exchange networks most people are doing the same thing. Hunting for some percieved magical value that is easy to automate, replicate, and easy for search engines to detect. In most cases it does not add much value for the time you waste looking through them.

More recently I have bought old domains and plan to develop some of them, but I did not get them via the crappy subscription software that was sold to me a few years back.

I had to get certain tips from a couple friends and a cool programmer to create my own custom tools for finding them. I would share them, but here I don't

  • I promised my friends I would not

  • if everyone accessed them the market would be hypersaturated and I wouldn't be doing any favors to anyone, not even the people using them

Reciprocal linking may still be a useful idea, and you should link out to some quality sites even if they don't link back, but typically most sites in link exchange networks are shit (option #1 above).

Autosurf Traffic Exchange Programs:
Posting this is going to make me sound rather ignorant, but I have no shame...

When I first got on the web I also tried autosurf programs a bit. I was dirt poor and knew little about the web or marketing, but it didn't take me long to realize I was wasting my time.

The only people that autosurf traffic exchange programs help are

  1. those who run automated software that spoofs them

  2. those who sell scammy fraudulent $5 submit your site to search engine programs (often people in group run automated software that spoofs the network)
  3. those who run the traffic exchange network (and thus get to sell, test, and refine automated impressions to targeted newbie webmasters)

I liken most link exchange networks to that analogy. A scam that promotes the network above all others.

The whole link exchange idea pushes the low end of the market, as Brett Tabke noted years before I entered the SEO market.

Search algorithms, the volume of legitimate content, and automated site generation have grown / evolved for over a half a decade (half of the WWW's lifetime) since Brett's article was wrote. That probably means there is quite a bit less value in the spammy link exchange networks.

Promoting Scams:
If there is market demand for an idea someone will sell it even if it is a scam. Search Google for [search engine submission].

If you look at Google's webmaster guidelines they will tell you about how to submit your site, but Google does not go out of their way to make sure that information is available on relevant search queries. They will gladly take some of your money selling ads for that query where likely over half of the ads probably promote some sort of scam or fraud.

Capitalism, Social Networks and Value:
To some extent social networks (and the web is nothing but a big social network) aim to push the same financial reward systems that define capitalism.

Those at the top of the charts get a dispropotionate amount of exposure and can build more efficiency into their process because they get lower aggregated distribution costs or higher return for similar effort.

To put that into perspective, if I wrote this exact same post 2 years ago it probably would get no links or comments. Now some automated systems scrape my content and I am guaranteed those links. Some people read this site daily and I am guaranteed some exposure.

Some people will get more than they deserve while others get the shaft. I have really experienced a good bit of both extremes in the past 2 years.

Guestimating Value:
The stock market is hard for most people to win at because insiders have more value and can control their stock float (the number of shares publicly available).

The three things that helps level the playing field a bit are

  • there is always some market equlibrium for demand that gives consensus baseline for value (although that may be way off...see the US stock market for the last 6 years).

  • there is a lot of money involved and eventually the markets have to work toward correcting themselves
  • there is a ton of publicly available information about companies

With link exchanges and other internet marketing exchange programs there is no baseline. Sure saying 1 for 1 is a fair trade is a baseline, but it is an arbitrary one since you can't possibly quickly research the past and guestimate the future of the potential link partners.

If you are putting in that much effort to learn and evaluate sites then you probably don't need to be in the framework of a site which aims to promote easy-to-get low quality spammy link exchanges.

Misfocused Efforts:
The biggest loss for most new webmasters when they hunt for hidden gold is not the potential that their site may end up getting banned. The biggest loss is the misfocused effort.

Right now I probably own around a dozen Yahoo! listed sites. Many of them were accepted free. Instead of looking for a way to sneak into the directory I simply created sites that they liked enough to list.

Obviously the Yahoo! Directory does not have the same value as it did when I first started out, but I think it is a good example for this post.

If you like a topic enough and put in enough effort eventually competing sites will link at you. I now have links from webmaster who took time out of their day to email me about what an ignorant fool I was a few years ago.

If You Don't Build Links You are Not a Real SEO

I am not certain why, but I have been getting lots of requests from claimed SEO companies that want to outsource 100% of the link building associated with SEO.

My typical response is:

If you don't do link building you are not a real SEO.

That may sound brutal, but it is true. Here is why:

There are the rare sites that have already spent millions of dollars building their brands to where all they need done is descriptive unique page title and making sure their content management system works. Then there are sites like SearchEngineWatch that are just the authority sites in their field, self reinforcing market positions and a decade of writing quality content about a topic the author loves. But most sites do not fall into those categories. If you feel a site needs more links to compete, why - other than laziness - would you want to outsource 100% of the link building project?

If a site is in non competitive fields sure a few directory listings and the like may be all that is needed. But if that is all that is needed I don't think it is hard to develop processes to do that sort of stuff.

If your an individual person who runs one website I guess it may make sense to outsource that to a person who provides affordable services, but if you are an SEO company with recurring work and new clients coming through all the time it doesn't make sense to outsource it.

Sure some people make certain services cheap and are really good at what they do, but if the price gets too cheap and the process is fairly automated the link quality is going to be low.

As far as link builders I would recommend, I would have no problem paying Eric Ward for the connections he has and his solid site announcement history. I also know and trust Debra Mataler well enough to know she would do a good job building links.

As Stuntdubl said, you want to balance the link equation. Get a variety of link types. A good link builder will do that for you. But it is hard to build an SEO business model that

  • is profitable

  • gives clients individualized attention
  • provides end to end solutions

If you guarantee success with your service you are better off doing affiliate marketing than selling SEO services. You get a larger percent of the action that way and have no clients!

Demand for SEO lags what is most effective and many people think they just need more PageRank. And many of the most profitable business models are going to revolve around selling pieces of the pie instead of selling the whole process. Many of the SEO firms that have been contacting me wanted to outsource 100% of their link building to link brokers.

Some links are about social relationships. Those are key in hyper competitive fields. How can you compete in hyper competitive fields if you are not learning the market or pushing social relationships? How can you even know what budget to allocate for link building if you don't do it? If people should buy link services off a link builder then what value does a clueless SEO firm add by taking a cut charging a premium for their own ignorance?

I am friends with a few link brokers, and know pieces of their partner networks, business models, and link types. Some of the content sites in the networks are so good that they provide enough direct value to pay for themselves even if they had no effect on SEO. Of course it would be hard to say that about all link buys. Sure some of the links probably do count well and others probably don't count at all.

Assuming all the links from link brokers counted in all search algorithms (that would be being hyper optimistic) there would still be a few fundamental flaws with only building links from brokers:

  • A link profile consisting of only one link type is not a real natural profile.

  • If nearly all your links come from a few networks or are brokered through a few people then the odds are pretty good that a competitor is going to come in contact with the person who is selling you links.
  • Most people selling links will also sell links to competing sites.
  • If you get to the top of the search results there is little effort needed to duplicate your actions if all your links are rented.

I am not trying to hate on any individual type of link. I just think that you should mix what you use. If possible do all of the following

  • articles (these make great direct sales)

  • press releases (when I was a total no name a well known Yahoo! search engineer saw one of my press releases and reviewed my ebook for me based on a press release)
  • directories (most are one time fee)
  • viral marketing opportunities, free tools, & ideas (these are hard to do but also hard to replicate, and are the cheapest link opportunities if you land a good one)
  • affiliate marketing (you set your payout percent, affiliates only get paid if they convert, and it still builds your brand even if the links do not count for SEO)
  • buy links where others are not looking (use Yahoo!'s advanced search page or the concept in this tool. Instead of only entering add URL search for ezine ad, associations, history, and other ideas which may provide greater value than the typical add URL search)
  • if you can afford it do off the web marketing that drives online activity
  • if you can afford it maybe it makes sense to buy an old site or the rights to publish content on old sites

A couple years ago effective SEO was using the same anchor text everywhere and just getting thousands of low quality links to point at you. That is not the case anymore. A strong link building program

  • Should be able to help guarantee usage data and targeted traffic that converts (since people tend to click on legitimate links and trust what is perceived as an unpaid recommendation).

  • Should provide secondary links that were not requested. If a site like SearchEngineWatch writes an article about your site you can guarantee that others will syndicate how interesting your site is.
  • Is hard to replicate.
  • Mixes your link profile.

Your link profile is about who knows you and who trusts you. If you outsource that outside of your client and outside of your business I think you owe it to your clients to at least know enough about the following:

  • how to evaluate how competitive a market is

  • the value add of different linking strategies
  • the risk vs reward profiles of different linking strategies
  • why it is important to mix link types

Updated SEO Tools: Feedback Needed!

Reminder: New Free Tools:
About two weeks ago I added a bunch of SEO tools to my free SEO tool list. I just made all of the new public tools open source, so if you like any of them you can do whatever you want with them.

Cool Keyword Research Tool: Needs Feedback:
I would love feedback on the SEO Book keyword research tool. Give it a try and see if you think it is useful or what features you would like added to it.

The tool does not try to do everything within itself, but provides relevant links for digging through keyword data from lots of other tools, and makes it easy to cross reference Overture results and Google Suggest results, as well as many other keyword tools.

At the bottom it also provides links to well known web directories, news sites, shopping sites, tagging sites, encyclopedias, blog search engines, and blog trend graphs. Those links are intended to help you find information that others found useful, and maybe also help you come up with linkbait ideas.

I think occasionally if it gets queried too heavily it breaks, and sometimes intermittently Overture will not provide data, but whenever I re-query it the tool usually works fairly quickly.

Link Harvester Updated:
Some people recently notified me that the xls sheet output in Link Harvester was putting array where the individual links were supposed to be. I just got that fixed too.

Backlink Analyzer Update to Come:
The last update to Backlink Analyzer (like 2 months ago) broke some of the key features. I did not realize this until recently. I just spoke with the lead developer, and although a new version was intended to be out in December I am hoping to have it out by the end of this month.

Matt Cutts on Linkbaiting

Matt talks about controversy, market timing, niche selection and information quality...everything you need to know about linkbaiting (well that and maybe read a few NickW posts).

Spelling Errors: Advanced SEO Techniques

With certain sites in certain industries it can cut into your credibility to have lots of misspellings.

Although I hate to admit it, one of the biggest things holding back my credibility is spelling errors. Some people just can't take a misspelling fool seriously. Others empathise with my skills and type misspelled queries into their engine of choice.

Matt Cutts recently said that using correct spelling is good for SEO. This couldn't be any further from the truth for most boring hollow shallow lead generation / affiliate marketing / contextual ad websites (aka: 99% of the web).

Misspellings probably occur in somewhere around 10% of search queries. Across the board misspelled terms are probably less than 10% as competitive as the correct spelled counterparts. Sure some people will opt to use the search engine spell correction tools, but many do not.

While some misspellings cost me links and credibility, others earned me thousands of dollars.

Truth be told, I was financially screwed when I made those thousands of dollars off of one particular spelling error that comes to mind. Had I not been a bad speller I may have been bankrupt (and I would have neve typed this post).

Not all your sites have to be associated with your name, and I am not ashamed to profit from being a naturally craptastic speller. Is your good spelling holding back your earning potential?

How do Librarians Assess Website Quality?

Via Gary the second issue of Google's Newsletter for Librarians was released.

In A Librarian's Guide to Finding Web Sites You Can Trust Karen G. Schneider, the Director of Librarians' Internet Index, wrote about what she looks at in deciding weather or not a resource is trustworthy.

The main criteria are:

  1. Availability (reliable hosting and free information)

  2. Credibility
  3. Authorship
  4. Link Rot
  5. Legality

With this site I have not got much love from the librarian community. Likely largely because of the following:

  • bad spelling

  • going way off topic
  • sometimes expressing opinion that may be taken as fact
  • focusing on a topic that is generally hated (SEO) contained within a link rich loved topic (search)
  • selling a marketing ebook at a fairly high price point
  • having no credentials (in part because there really are none in this industry - though I should make an about page!)

You don't have to have the love from librarians to succeed on the WWW, but if you are in a field where competing channels do it is going to be an uphill battle unless you focus on a niche or get lots of link love and attention love from people within your industry.

It is really worth looking at how librarians review websites, because if you fit their guidelines it should also be easy to get many other links. If Google is sending out a message to 20,000 librarians then maybe they will use that information, and maybe Google likes many of the same things that the librarians do.

One curious question remains: how can Google not use a page title on their newsletter for librarians?

Keyword Research Tip: Set Up an AdWords Account for Competitors

Google is getting much better at extracting potential keyword information when you set up an account.

Lets say your site competed with SeoBook.com (and you are thus evil). You could set up a new ad campaign and act like it is for SeoBook.com (by entering www.SeoBook.com as your ad URL).

Google will then give you keyword groups based on the content of SEO Book.

  • seo

  • search engine
  • search engine optimization
  • search engine submit
  • Miscellaneous keywords

Each of the categories has a list of keywords in it where you can add all or some of them to your keyword list.

  • seo

    • seo book
    • seo rank
    • seo optimization
    • seo rankings
    • seo placement
    • seo ranking
    • seo
    • seo tips
    • how to seo
    • multilingual seo
    • seo elite
    • seo writing
    • seo software
    • seo consultants
    • seo service
  • search engine
    • seo search engine
    • submission search engines
    • search engines
    • rank search engines
    • search engine registration
    • search engine ranking
    • thai search engines
    • submission to search engines
    • rank in the search engines
    • add url to search engines
    • foreign search engines
    • search engines australia
    • writing for search engines
    • search engine rankings
    • stomping the search engines
    • search engine url submission
    • submit to search engines
    • dutch search engine
    • search engine marketing
  • search engine optimization
    • search engine optimization seo
    • search engine optimization tips
    • search engine optimization
    • search engine optimization seo services
    • search engine optimization ebook
    • search engine optimization and placement
    • search engines optimization
    • search engine optimization information
    • search engine optimization submission
    • multilingual search engine optimization
    • search engine optimization company
    • search engine optimization forum
    • search engine optimization forums
    • calgary search engine optimization
    • search engine optimization analysis
    • search engine optimization advice
    • search engine optimization software
    • search engine optimization thailand
    • vancouver search engine optimization
    • search engine optimization cost
    • search engine optimization tools
    • houston search engine optimization
  • search engine submit
    • search engines submissions
    • search engine submissions
    • search engine submission
    • search engine submission software
    • search engine submission guide
    • canada search engine submission
    • canadian search engine submission
    • search engine submit
  • Miscellaneous keywords
    • url cloaking

Google gives slightly different word sets for similar sites. For Linkhounds Google AdWords gave the following terms under the SEO category:

  • seo tools
  • effective seo
  • seo placement
  • seo optimization
  • seo url
  • seo tips
  • seo
  • seo advantage
  • seo rankings
  • seo business
  • seo tool
  • seo software
  • arizona seo
  • foreign seo
  • seo copywriting
  • seo analysis
  • seo company
  • seo ebook
  • seo report
  • seo strategies
  • uk seo
  • multilingual seo
  • seo consultants
  • seo service
  • seo courses
  • seo links
  • seo australia
  • how to seo
  • seo chat
  • seo london
  • utah seo
  • consultant seo
  • seo houston
  • seo consultation
  • seo help
  • seo school
  • seo training

Google's AdWords keyword suggestion tool may make niche discovery easier by allowing you to see how Google views a variety of small niched sites or sites in other locations where slightly different language or dialects are used (think UK English versus US English).

As a content publisher, if you monetize via AdSense, the keywords Google suggest are great to target since you know they are pointing advertisers as them. The words seen by the widest number of advertisers are likely to be priced near or above their fair value.

Gerard Salton and Early Search Engine Algorithms

Tom Evslin posted about his experiences working with Gerard Salton in the early 1960's.

Everybody assumed that the best results would be obtained by algorithms which made an attempt at understanding English syntax. (which is very hard to do). WRONG! Turns out that syntax was a waste of time; all that matters is semantics - the actual words used in the query and the documents - not how they relate to each other in a sentence. Sometimes it was (and still is) useful to search for phrases as if they were words. But you get that just by observing word order or how close words are to each other - not trying to parse sentences.

Modern search engines may use quite a large amount of user tracking and heavily emphasize linkage data, but if you want to see the roots of search I highly recommend reading Salton's A Theory of Indexing.

Privacy, User Data, Trust and Marketing

I wish I could add more to Danny's excellent coverage of the government's bogus overarching power grab for data from search engines, but I can't, so I just want to parrot it. :)

The US government requested not personally identifiable search data from AOL, Google, MSN and Yahoo! in an effort to evaluate how often children might find porn on the web. Everyone but Google handed it over. The US government is now suing Google.

The stock market punished Google heavily on this and other news, with the stock dropping from about $470 to $399 a share last week. While Google may have wanted to keep the data for trade secret related reasons they also win a ton of user trust by being the only company which said no to the request.

Compare their position to MicroSoft. Only after Google made this request an issue by denying it did news come out that other search companies, like MSN, gave over data last summer.

How did MSN's recent post make them look?

A prime opportunity was missed last summer. Back then there was a chance to come out at a time when Google was being pounded over privacy concerns and stand up to the government instead of folding like a cheap lawn chair and working out some technical response that we would only learn about months later when the heat was on and they had to say something. Shameful, really.

As a person who likes search this lawsuit makes me wish I was a bit smarter so I could work at Google.

As a marketer I think Google being the only one doing what they are doing is a great thing for them.

  • This heavily undermines the Google can't be trusted with data meme.

  • By being the content in the news they raise their brand exposure. If you ARE the content that people are talking about advertising is not needed to gain market share.
  • By standing up against the government they gain user trust. It is going to be hard for a competitor to build an ad demand network of Google's scale while also trying to build that much trust at the same time.

I think this incident enhances Google's implied value, as it will surely increase their market share.

The Dartmouth - The New Spamford Daily

Ho hum...anyone looking for poker links? It looks like The Dartmouth can still fit a few more below the fold.

Pages