One-Way Linking

One-way linking is a good way to build your link popularity. One-way linking is more difficult to obtain vs reciprocal linking. The benefit of this method is that you do not have to be concerned about linking back to the other website.

Submitting free content to other websites provides a link back to your website, as well as promoting your website through the submission content. Writing articles or white papers also helps build your authority as an expert in your field. Most importantly, you are helping others to learn more about your topic.

Methods for one-way linking:

Write original articles
Create a monthly newsletter
Business directories
Topical directories
Join online business associations
Press releases
White papers
E-books

Submit articles, white papers, press releases, etc. to other websites that accept free content. Make sure you include a bio or information about your website with your submission, including a hypertext link back to your website. Archive your free content on your own website to build your website. Your visitors will appreciate the free information you provide.


Feel free to post other methods you use for one-way linking in this thread.

Daria,

Don't forget about making free, unique tools. Those generic tons of one way free links.

Absolutely, if you have a free tool to offer this is another great way to build one-way links.

Banners and text links work for getting traffic and have the benefit of being oneway links.

another technique is to create a useful directory which people will want to link to

another good technique is to create a parody site (like black hat seo)

a more controversial technique (which is sometimes highly effective but can backfire) is to tell someone they are out to lunch. often times people will feel the need to protect their ego and link into a site against them. others may pick up and syndicate the idea as well.

http://mucklermedia.blogspot.com/

is a good recent example of this

tell someone they are out to lunch

I don't believe you, you must be wrong, and I dare you to link to me ;)

Actually, I'd never thought of that before (it's counter to my personality, generally) but it makes a lot of sense. I'm just not sure I'd use it as a tactic, though no doubt there are a few trolls out there this would work wonders for LOL

Another way to accomplish one way linking is information feeds like news, quotes, pictures of the day (linked) and so forth. In essence the feed either contains or IS the link.

Ian

or just buy the dang things :D

seriously though, our free tools generate better than average links.

Actually, I'd never thought of that before (it's counter to my personality, generally) but it makes a lot of sense. I'm just not sure I'd use it as a tactic, though no doubt there are a few trolls out there this would work wonders for LOL

There are some social policies and people I vehemently despise and would happily use any technique necissary to express my opinion about :)

My main goal in learning SEO is to try to use it to help change social policy for the better. After enough learning I hope to eventually be good at it.

I can certainly sympathise with that! And of course the irony of having said obnoxious types contributing to their own downfall by linking to it is a nice touch, too ;)

Cheers,

Ian

another technique is to create a useful directory which people will want to link to

another good technique is to create a parody site (like black hat seo)

http://mucklermedia.blogspot.com/

is a good recent example of this
I'm sure I should know who this site is parodying (is that a word?), but I don't. Can someone bring me up to speed? :o

I'm up to my 40th monthly newsletter so I can vouch for the effectiveness of that approach in getting links <shameless plug="see the signature for the last one">.

However I was not posting for that reason. No-one had mentioned blogs as far as I could see. I have started a blog since I found that topics come up that are worthy of a little comment much more frequently than once a month. This creates many more opportunities for linking out and that encourages others to link in.

... and while it comes to mind, did anyone mention being active in fora (I've got to use my education in a dead language occasionally!) :)

I'm sure I should know who this site is parodying (is that a word?), but I don't. Can someone bring me up to speed? :o

http://weblogs.jupitermedia.com/meckler/

Alan Meckler, the guy who is the CEO of JupiterMedia (putting on that conference everyone is at right now)

There are some social policies and people I vehemently despise and would happily use any technique necissary to express my opinion about :)

My main goal in learning SEO is to try to use it to help change social policy for the better. After enough learning I hope to eventually be good at it.

And make a living too I would hope...

Good content doesn't do much to build links. Great content is better. However, remarkable content is ultimately what it is all about. A link is a remark, a citation, but mostly an exclaimation - a coded "Hey wow! Lookit that?!"

Good isn't the issue. ;)

In the SEO industry, the last thing I saw that really completely fit the bill was Marketleap's Link Pop and Saturation checking tools. Some of the PageRank checkers for those without the toolbar are also pretty cool of course, and rapidly gaining those IBLs.

Writing articles and White Papers only works if they are remarkable articles. There are topics that just won't be remarkable. A classic example was given by Peter Da Vanzo of SearchEngineBlog a while back in a discussion at another forum, where he pointed out that writing yet another article on Meta Tags is pointless, no matter how good. It has been done to death. It could be the greatest article ever written, and it still wouldn't raise attention, never mind exclaimations.

Of course, the number of links you actually need often doesn't require extreme originality. Often a dozen or so good links from republished articles, or linking to a particular resource is enough for your needs - at least until someone else comes along with something remarkable and leaves you to choke on the dust.

fun book about making remarkable ideas which i would like to remark about / link to (just as an example :) ) Purple Cow (http://www.sethgodin.com/purple/)

Good content doesn't do much to build links. Great content is better. However, remarkable content is ultimately what it is all about. A link is a remark, a citation, but mostly an exclaimation - a coded "Hey wow! Lookit that?!"
...

Ammon, you left out a link to your first blog posting on the The Real Meaning of Links (http://blog.cre8asite.net/index.php?id=P65). See that, great content just got a link. :)

Hey Barry, good to see you here (and especially when you provide links to my stuff :cool: ). Thanks muchly.

Nice blog post, Black_Knight. Please be sure to share the link to your new link article here when it is ready.

It does seem like old home week around here

Another way to accomplish one way linking is information feeds like news, quotes, pictures of the day (linked) and so forth. In essence the feed either contains or IS the link.

Ian

Ian, could you explain how this works? I mean, if I have a live news plugin on my site, how is that putting a link to my site?

Hope this question doesn't sound dense :confused:

Ian, could you explain how this works? I mean, if I have a live news plugin on my site, how is that putting a link to my site?

Hope this question doesn't sound dense :confused:

He means simply setup an RSS feed which allows other sites to carry headlines of your news area or content. The headlines on their sites would be links to your own sites actual content, thus providing you a link and the other webmaster free content for his site.

Ian, could you explain how this works? I mean, if I have a live news plugin on my site, how is that putting a link to my site?

Hope this question doesn't sound dense :confused:

Actually the news link etc. are links from other sites to yours... you want to get your URL out there in publicity ways and as such they are not reciprocated links but one way links that help build PR and SERP position

Submitting free content to other websites provides a link back to your website, as well as promoting your website through the submission content.


I wonder if there are people that remember webseed.com. They did that and Google dropped them like a bad habit.

From my experience, this is not a problem when it comes to submitting original articles, press releases, etc. Of course, you want to manually submit your original content, don't use an automated program. I would also limit the amount of sites you submit to. Find a list of ten to twenty quality sites you want to submit your original content to and track the link building results. The links take time to be indexed and show up in the search engine results.

Great opening post Daria. But doing all that writing can seem daunting for some people. Here's a shortcut that I use with clients - it covers the basic writing that needs to be done.

First, I'll go through the news section of their site (if there is one), then I'll play the role of a journalist and interview key people within the company. Then I'll search Google news for stories specific to their industry.

After that I've got enough ideas and background material to write a basic info pack for each client:

1. Write a newsworthy news release of around 300 words.
2. Write a feature article on the client, 1,500 words written in the 3rd person.
3. Write a 'how-to' article, 600 - 800 words that solves a common problem for an important customer group for my client.

Then I'll use http://www.prweb.com to distribute the news release, usually paying $80 because of the guaranteed inclusion in Yahoo News - but you can do it for free. I'll then submit the feature article and 'how-to" article to as many publications as I can find.

To find target publications say for photography, I'll do the search [ photography "submit an article" ] on Google.

The success of such an approach depends on the quality of the writing - if you can't do it yourself, get a freelance journalist to do it for you. The effort can build attractive one-way links very quickly.

Hope this is of interest,

Ken

Lots of people may know this already but for those who havent tried.......

we find that we usually get better results by incentivising link requests. Where our clients are not enthusiastic about linking back to joe blogg's site they are usually more 'ok' about giving product/service discounts, coupons etc in exchange for a link and this tends to work very well in B2C scenarios, and may work just as well for B2B links, dependant on the 'incentive' of course.

Lots of people may know this already but for those who havent tried.......

we find that we usually get better results by incentivising link requests. Where our clients are not enthusiastic about linking back to joe blogg's site they are usually more 'ok' about giving product/service discounts, coupons etc in exchange for a link and this tends to work very well in B2C scenarios, and may work just as well for B2B links, dependant on the 'incentive' of course.
So you are buying the link or setting them up as affiliates...
but an interesting way to go about it.

You should just deliver great content on your site - with time and patience others will find you, like what they see, and link to you.

webwizard411

You should just deliver great content on your site - with time and patience others will find you, like what they see, and link to you.

webwizard411

Give me some of what your smoking.

The fact is that unless you come up with something totally new and so unique that it takes everyone else 6-12 months before they copy you, you have about as much chance at natural (non reciprocated) links as a snowball in hell.

Any site that does not fall into the above category will pick up a few links naturally, however not enough to help your rankings much.

Tell that to Beal, Whalen, Sullivan, Battelle, French, Thurow, Thies and a whole slew of others. That is just in this one sector. They write good content and are getting linked to every day of the week my friend. Oft times it is nothing really earth shattering or new, but it is quality and it gets copied hot off the press -- and does not take 6 months to do it either.

Of course, I might be smoking the same stuff he is too. What do I know, eh?

Tell that to Beal, Whalen, Sullivan, Battelle, French, Thurow, Thies and a whole slew of others. That is just in this one sector. They write good content and are getting linked to every day of the week my friend. Oft times it is nothing really earth shattering or new, but it is quality and it gets copied hot off the press -- and does not take 6 months to do it either.

Of course, I might be smoking the same stuff he is too. What do I know, eh?

[snip removed by by nuclei - unneeded harshness]

Dan, and Danny, yes, I agree. They deserve it too. But they still aint winning any races for link building.

And the fact is, it is not the content getting linked. It is because it is from people everyone knows. Or that speak at SES. It's the people getting linked.

Salesmanship did that, not content.

You will get one-way link by buying the text link advertising. I thought this way many website do like this especially on seo company. The top seo company bought text link from high pagerank website.

Nuttakorn
Asiawebplus.com

I agree, buying links definately works. Just make sure of who you buy from is secure and confidential, and not easy to spot.

It might be more correct to say: It is easier to trade "one-way links" if you have a lot of quality content.

Oft times it is nothing really earth shattering or new, but it is quality and it gets copied hot off the press -- and does not take 6 months to do it either.
I prefer "topic distillation" to "regurgitation," of course. :p There isn't a whole lot that's earth shattering or new in SEO, but here is always a demand for common sense, and for different perspectives. Anyone can knock it all they want, for any writer, but the proof is in the results.

I agree with nuclei that just putting content on your site isn't going to magically draw a lot of links in a hurry. Sending it out into the world works a lot faster. Link building is not the largest benefit of providing content, though. A good article generates a long term flow of quality traffic. Case in point, the old sales site for my book gets at least a hundred visits every day, almost a year after we took it out of the search engines and stopped promoting the URL.

I make very little effort to "manufacture" links for my own sites. I am, quite frankly, too busy to worry about how many links show up. I'd rather see good links in the right context. I've made more requests for links to be removed in the past year, than for links to be added.

The prescription of "put good content on your site, and the links will come" is a bit simplistic. I think it was Stephen Covey who said, "first diagnose, then prescribe." Here's a better prescription: make sure your site offers visitors a compelling value proposition. If "lots of content" is part of that, fine, but content isn't the only way to add value on the web.

I prefer "topic distillation" to "regurgitation," of course. :p

(exhaling) "syndication" is another way of putting it.

I agree that it is something that is not going to happen overnight. I wasn't objecting to that point at all. It does take time and a little self-promotion goes a long way too. Content is not the end-all solution, but it is one that will provide for long-term benefits.

But you never know when the next "pet rock website" is going to make someone an over-night success either.

Let's stay on topic, no personal comments please. Let's focus on the many methods used for one-way link building, as well as the positives and negatives you've experienced so others may learn from this.

Huh? I thought the topic was on the development of one-way links. That should include such things as content that is worth linking to, syndication of articles, etc.

Part of the process of developing these non-reciprocated links will take time. Is it a positive or a negative? Depends on your viewpoint I guess. If you think your time is valuable and don't have the time to give, then I guess it would be a negative.

The success of such an approach depends on the quality of the writing - if you can't do it yourself, get a freelance journalist to do it for you. The effort can build attractive one-way links very quickly.

Yes, absolutely. As you said, if you can't do it yourself, hire help to produce quality writing.

Huh? I thought the topic was on the development of one-way links. That should include such things as content that is worth linking to, syndication of articles, etc.

Part of the process of developing these non-reciprocated links will take time. Is it a positive or a negative? Depends on your viewpoint I guess. If you think your time is valuable and don't have the time to give, then I guess it would be a negative.

Sorry, I should clarify that Dodger. The topic is about the development of one-way link building and the many methods you can use to create them. Sharing the positives and negatives you've experienced while building one-way links may help others who are working to create their own one-way links.

The topic is about the development of one-way link building and the many methods you can use to create them. Sharing the positives and negatives you've experienced while building one-way links may help others who are working to create their own one-way links.

... as opposed to others naturally linking to your site and thusly acquiring inbound links. The terms "one-way link building" and "creating them" has different slant to it, don't you think?

... as opposed to others naturally linking to your site and thusly acquiring inbound links. The terms "one-way link building" and "creating them" has different slant to it, don't you think?

Yes, they do. Let's say create, as in, creating a game plan to build links, however you may do this, acquiring naturally, submitting original content, etc.

There isn't a whole lot that's earth shattering or new in SEO, but here is always a demand for common sense, and for different perspectives. Anyone can knock it all they want, for any writer, but the proof is in the results.

Totally agree.

Even if you have great content, worthy of attracting links, it never hurts to point out your resource to sites that link to resources. Whether that means emailing the site owner, submitting to a directory, etc.

So I don't see much distinction between "building" and "creating" here. I do think it's reasonable to distinguish between creating/building links and buying "text ads" from a link farm.

Yes, I agree. Quality of links as well as paid or free, those are distinctions to be aware of.

Yes, I agree. Quality of links as well as paid or free, those are distinctions to be aware of.

Natural linking has it's benifits in at least a contextual semi-quality that is probably long-term as well. The Internet has a way of not forgetting.

I would assume that if you are going to try to buy that type of quality, that you would want to enjoy some of those same attributes. For example, take a glance at the sidebar to the left in the block labled "internet.commerce" ... specifically (they are random) the ones dealing with hotel accomodations, home equity loans, and vacation packages. If you could assign a quality ranking to these types of links, how would you do it?

For example, take a glance at the sidebar to the left in the block labled "internet.commerce" ... specifically (they are random) the ones dealing with hotel accomodations, home equity loans, and vacation packages. If you could assign a quality ranking to these types of links, how would you do it?
If I operated a search engine, it would be my goal to ignore such links entirely.

glance at the sidebar to the left in the block labled "internet.commerce" ... specifically (they are random) the ones dealing with hotel accomodations, home equity loans, and vacation packages.

lots of sites are getting their ability to parse out pagerank to other sites blocked. it would take a bunch for google to do that to the internet.com network, but they are absolutely undermining Google's algorithm by selling exceptionally unrelated text links.

If I operated a search engine, it would be my goal to ignore such links entirely.

Then the goal of the link buyer would have to be better placement then, not inside that easy to spot block of links. If the block is for advertisement only though and exposure to the sites visitors, that is another thing altogether.

I think that goal as you put it, is attainable to some degree right now. It is not that hard to accomplish.

I prefer "topic distillation" to "regurgitation," of course. :p

As always Dan, well said. :)

lots of sites are getting their ability to parse out pagerank to other sites blocked.

By this, do you mean the entire site or just parts of the page? I cannot see the entire site having it's links knocked down in this manner.

Then the goal of the link buyer would have to be better placement then, not inside that easy to spot block of links. If the block is for advertisement only though and exposure to the sites visitors, that is another thing altogether.

I think that goal as you put it, is attainable to some degree right now. It is not that hard to accomplish.


I dont think it is so much a block of links, as that is how traffic trading and recip linking has been done since the beginning. I think it is more a matter of relevancy.

When buying links make sure that your links are going on pages/sites that are relevant to your own. 6 months ago I would not be saying this, but times are changing, and those of us that keep abreast of things will adapt as needed.

By this, do you mean the entire site or just parts of the page? I cannot see the entire site having it's links knocked down in this manner.

from a robots point of view, it is far easier to say domain.com cant pass PR anymore than it would be to say this area of domain.com/page.html cant pass PR any more. Remember, the search engines are not there to allow you to make a living. They are there to provide what they feel is the most relevancy to their surfers.

That still does not answer my question.

whole sites

http://www.blockedpr.com

He meant the entire site.

ok, seobook pasted one of the 5 url's I was going to pm you with already while I was typing this :p

I would have prefered he pasted one of the others tho instead of my competitors :p

If I operated a search engine, it would be my goal to ignore such links entirely.

Indeed, Google in particular has suggested it may do exactly this, either ignore or not count as much links that it sees on every page in a similar style. It makes sense to do this. There are many reasons why a site might repeat the same links, for instance with navigational reasons. It's absurd, however, to think the site should have to jump through some type of hoops and avoid this because Google might not like it. If it makes sense for human users, Google and other search engines should come up with a system to deal with them.

FYI, the "internet.commerce" ad units someone mentioned are ads sold by Jupitermedia, publisher of this site. I have nothing to do with them -- I oversee the editorial side. I can tell you they've existed like that for literally years, linking to various products and well before the more recently explosion of off-topic links you sometimes see sold by sites.

My advice to anyone buying links has long been that you'd better buy the link only because you think the traffic from that particular link will be worth the money, not because you think any search engine gain will come from it. Maybe it will -- but maybe not, and there's no doubt we'll continue to see more tweaking of how exactly links are counted. That makes the idea of buying links and expecting a particular outcome to be harder.

As for the main topic of this thread, ideas on getting "one way" links, I can say I give links like this all the time, and for free. It's not rocket science. Someone sends me information that I think is going to be of interest to my readers. I happily give a link, because if my readers win, I win.

Similarly, I get people linking to SEW all the time without making any request, because they've seen some new, unusual content, found some general advice they like or for some other reason. The content does help win.

There are still a vast number of sites out there, I would argue, that actually don't live in the PR-obsessed world that many of us live in all the time. They do indeed seem to link for reasons other than being paid. Distributing good content to these sites may help get you links -- or even simple requests may still work.

Having said all this, there's no doubt that many people are much more aware of the value in links. It's far more common these days that you may encounter requests to link back or to be paid in exchange for a link. Doesn't mean that free links are dead, though.

I completely agree with Danny. It is getting harder to get one-way links that are free. Really, it also depends on your company's niche market. Some industries make it easier to get one-way links than others.

Incidentally, I've tried PRWeb.com and had very good results from a link/exposure perspective. I've seen a notable increase in one-way links as well as receiving traditional media opportunities.

the reason SearchEngineWatch can get so many one way inbound links is that it is known as the definitive resource for search engines.

major universities link to Google Yahoo Teoma AND for more information about search engines check out SearchEngineWatch.

I think the best trick is to realize that there will only be one or two type of websites like SearchEngineWatch in any industry and to focus an idea enough to become the definitive resource in your industry for whatever you are focused on.

when you say seo it is a somewhat broad field to where not that many companies come to mind. when you say keyword research one person springs to my mind - the key is to focus an idea enough to be whoever that one person is.

FYI, the "internet.commerce" ad units someone mentioned are ads sold by Jupitermedia, publisher of this site. I have nothing to do with them -- I oversee the editorial side. I can tell you they've existed like that for literally years, linking to various products and well before the more recently explosion of off-topic links you sometimes see sold by sites.

My advice to anyone buying links has long been that you'd better buy the link only because you think the traffic from that particular link will be worth the money, not because you think any search engine gain will come from it. Maybe it will -- but maybe not, and there's no doubt we'll continue to see more tweaking of how exactly links are counted. That makes the idea of buying links and expecting a particular outcome to be harder.


That was me. :D

I made that comment in regards to how easy it was to spot, not only by Google but by any SE with enough smarts to recognize it for what it is. (and I know it is part of Jupiter Danny -- it was not a reflection on you.)

I am not buying into Google blocking entire sites in passing PR though. I think that is a little insane to even think about.

Aaron's ideas are right on the money about concentrating your energy and making it more focused. It is like an upside-down pyramid in practice, with the full weight coming down on the tip. It will attract more un-solicited inbound links.

I would also like to think of unfocused content as the "Jack of all trades, and a master at none". You will get some inbound links, but they will be mixed and not concentrated in any one area ... that is if you get any at all. Nobody can be an expert in all fields in other words.

One way link building is the best thing to do. This will defenitely increase the popularity of the website. Best way to obtain one way links is to have a sepearte section / pages for the websites who provides the link to you.

One way link building is the best thing to do. This will defenitely increase the popularity of the website. Best way to obtain one way links is to have a sepearte section / pages for the websites who provides the link to you.
If somebody links to you for a certain type of content, you want to get them to that content, right? A seperate section of your website wouldn't be the greatest thing to link them to, instead of the content they originally linked you for.

webwizard411

Indeed, Google in particular has suggested it may do exactly this, either ignore or not count as much links that it sees on every page in a similar style. It makes sense to do this. There are many reasons why a site might repeat the same links, for instance with navigational reasons. It's absurd, however, to think the site should have to jump through some type of hoops and avoid this because Google might not like it. If it makes sense for human users, Google and other search engines should come up with a system to deal with them.
If search engines want to ignore ad links, as you say, they're easy to spot if they're on every page. It's possible that I'm missing your point, but I don't see why this would cause anyone to worry about how they link within their own site.

It would be relatively trivial for any search engine to tell the difference between a site's navigation links (which point to the domain they're on) and run of site "link text" ads (which all point to other domains). No hoops to jump through in that case, are there?

It would be relatively trivial for any search engine to tell the difference between a site's navigation links (which point to the domain they're on) and run of site "link text" ads (which all point to other domains). No hoops to jump through in that case, are there?

Simple, yes. But not all run of site links are ads, are they? I brought up the internet.com block of links already, but there is the block right below it too -- the Forum Roll. That block of links is static though, while I have noticed that the internet.com block rotates links in a random pattern.

You know, one of the main things people say when the internet.com links come up as to why they are not link farms and others are, is that they are relevant. IT sites on webmaster resources.

Yet here I am wondering what the heck auto insurance or flower delivery have to do with IT....

Google seems damn good at saying some people are bad when others are not. Even though there is no difference at all.

You know, one of the main things people say when the internet.com links come up as to why they are not link farms and others are, is that they are relevant. IT sites on webmaster resources.

Yet here I am wondering what the heck auto insurance or flower delivery have to do with IT....

Google seems damn good at saying some people are bad when others are not. Even though there is no difference at all.

I would tend to agree with that statement. Some of those links are fairly off topic. I think Google blocks most of the links using mathematical filters. I think there are a few thing that makes the internet.com links seem more legit:

1.) they are randomized (not the same on every page)
2.) internet.com has tons of various websites and tons of pages. right now just posting about it is adding more pages to the network.
3.) there is likely a greater ratio of legit links to illegitimate links on the Internet.com network as apposed to many link sellers
4.) tons and tons and tons of links are poured into the internet.com network from various spots across the web.

Seems to be working too. I took one at random (hotels) and did a link: check on them.....there was SearchEngineWatch and ClickZ Networks (about 8 of them) showing up in the top 50.

1.) they are randomized (not the same on every page)
2.) internet.com has tons of various websites and tons of pages. right now just posting about it is adding more pages to the network.
3.) there is likely a greater ratio of legit links to illegitimate links on the Internet.com network as apposed to many link sellers
4.) tons and tons and tons of links are poured into the internet.com network from various spots across the web.

I would think with the above being true, that it must be because it is known as an authority site (content, links, etc.) that it is not viewed in the same way as a smaller, lesser known site.

Simple, yes. But not all run of site links are ads, are they? I brought up the internet.com block of links already, but there is the block right below it too -- the Forum Roll.
That forum roll, quite frankly, fits right in with the type of links I'd want to ignore, if I operated a search engine. My point is, that nothing would affect *this* site's ranking, if search engines choose to ignore off-site links that fit a certain (obvious) pattern. Reducing one site's ability to boost the ranking of another site is hardly a penalty.

As you also point out, the arms race will continue for a long, long, time.

I was meaning to make this post when Daria first started the thread, but for some reason I became side tracked.

One method I have had great success with is writing testimonials. It is not a sure fire method, as some may not include the link when posting the testimonial, but some will. The key is to make sure it is a product or service you have used and feel is superior. Then write a brief 50-100 word testimonial and submit to the marketing/sales department. Before wasting your time, however, you do want to check the site uses testimonials.

Sites, like people, love having their egos stroked, but do it with sincerity.

Steve, so true. That is reputation point worthy. :)

How many people will turn down a testimony on their site?

Steve, so true. That is reputation point worthy. :)

How many people will turn down a testimony on their site?

It kinda gets out of hand with some sites though. lots of drug and printer cartridge type sites tend to think some sites are the best thing since sliced bread.

i actually have a page where people can leave testimonials in my blog and was stuck delinking one today (please note that i sleep random hours and in saying day i can mean today or anytime in the last 18 - 36 hours :) )

It kinda gets out of hand with some sites though. lots of drug and printer cartridge type sites tend to think some sites are the best thing since sliced bread.

i actually have a page where people can leave testimonials in my blog and was stuck delinking one today (please note that i sleep random hours and in saying day i can mean today or anytime in the last 18 - 36 hours :) )

Well that sounds more like a guestbook. ;)

Aaron, the testimonial thing is a highly selective method. Not appropriate for the guest book or blog type. You want to be looking for home page or testimonial page inclusion. The beauty of it is: in addition to the link pop, you will also derive genuine qualified traffic. This is not something done enmasse, but rather with selective sincerity. JMHO

Aaron, the testimonial thing is a highly selective method. Not appropriate for the guest book or blog type. You want to be looking for home page or testimonial page inclusion. The beauty of it is: in addition to the link pop, you will also derive genuine qualified traffic. This is not something done enmasse, but rather with selective sincerity. JMHO

I know. I try to leave testimonials for good stuff that I like. On my site I give those people who read my ebook an option to leave feedback. If it is good I feel happy. If it is bad then I know how to improve my ebook for the next readers. It is just a good feedback loop.

If you look at the newer good link analysis tools

linktree (awesome free topical hub finder)
prog / proogle (free google results with pagerank)
prprowler (pretty decent tool for $100, though prog does a decent amount of its work for free)
link proctor (awesome tool for $67. similar to optilink but it also spiders link partner sites to verify they are linking)

I am linked to from all of their home pages :)

Aaron,

The Linktree link is exactly the method I mentioned, and thought would be a good reminder for others. Outstanding!

I like the testimonial idea... who can resist link to a testimonial!

I like the testimonial idea... who can resist link to a testimonial!

who posted the testimonial idea first? i have a testimonial for their testimonial idea. I am wondering if they would be interested posting my testimonial on their testimonials page ;)

Aaron,

As soon as I finish my current project and go solo (which will be July 9) I would be honored to have a testimonial from you. :)

prog / proogle (free google results with pagerank)
BTW thanks for that great reference, seobook. That is one great tool. I have switched to Opera as my default browser so was upset that I cannot use the Google Toolbar and so could not easily see Google PageRanks. Now I have that and much more. :)

In regards to testamonials, are we talking one-way testamonials here or recipricol testamonial link-building? ;)

In regards to testamonials, are we talking one-way testamonials here or recipricol testamonial link-building?
Hi Dodger,
In my initial post I was referring to one way links. You write the testimonoial they link to you. It does not mandate a link back to them. The fact you have taken the time and interest to write a glowing testimonial should be sufficient.

well by talking about it here you can rest assured that it will be blocked by G in an update or 2.

well by talking about it here you can rest assured that it will be blocked by G in an update or 2.

Why?

Testamonials by their very nature are glowing votes for websites. Why would Google block or discount these? Granted...there will be some who will abuse it, but I do not see that just because it is being discussed that Google will block it. That is the same as saying Titles (often discussed), anchor text links (very much discussed), and anything else will be blocked.

Why?

Testamonials by their very nature are glowing votes for websites. Why would Google block or discount these? Granted...there will be some who will abuse it, but I do not see that just because it is being discussed that Google will block it. That is the same as saying Titles (often discussed), anchor text links (very much discussed), and anything else will be blocked.

because you guys are talking about subjugating testimonials very nature to suit your benefits. It is a well known fact that G is going out of their way to stop people who are purposely using links in ways that boost rankings creatively.

well by talking about it here you can rest assured that it will be blocked by G in an update or 2.

Not sure if the above is in jest or not. IMHO,testimonials are what the G PR theory is all bout. A vote from A to B is a link of confidence, but I can see reasoning that a return link should be included on site B.

In my humble view, the testimonial in itself is a vote of confidence and should not require a link from site B. As an example: site B is all about grapes; types, growing, harvesting, uses, etc. Their resource pages contain links to all things grape related and is always on theme. Site B is hosted by a superior company, servors never down, etc. Site B writes a deserving testimonial to the hosting company, site A. Site A then publishes the testimonial from B with a hyperlink to its contact info.

Is it self serving? Absolutely yes! Is it done for manipulation? Only the testimonial writer knows the intent. Is it good marketing? I think it is. Should Google block it? That is there choice, but the link from the hosting company sure may drive some traffic to the grape site. Don't get me wrong any PR pop would be great, but it is not the only reason to secure links.

Steve, thats actually what I meant. Reciprocated testimonials would be easy enough for G to spot and can easily be blocked, assuming G knows some people are doing it. Which they now do. There is no reason for reciprocated testimonials except to build links.

There is no reason for reciprocated testimonials except to build links.
Hi Nuclei,

It is not a truly a reciprocated testimonial, it is more verification. Any published testimonial needs to contain certain authorial content.This prevents the fabricated style used in the past, and ensures it is a legitimate testimonial. By the site containg a link back to the testimonial writer, it gives the public a means to contact the writer and to check the truth or gain further insight. You could well say the link is not needed. In many cases it may not be live, but the live link sure does make it easier to verify. Even if the link is not live it still gets the sites name infront of more eyeballs.

Perhaps down the road I will be kicking myself in the butt for making this method public. Who knows? It is a method to be used sparingly, not one to canvass the web with testimonials.

Perhaps down the road I will be kicking myself in the butt for making this method public. Who knows? It is a method to be used sparingly, not one to canvass the web with testimonials.

Thats what I meant tho. Next week there will be 10% more testimonials on the net. The week after 20%, etc. That is why I believe it will now be watched.

It is not a truly a reciprocated testimonial, it is more verification. Any published testimonial needs to contain certain authorial content.This prevents the fabricated style used in the past, and ensures it is a legitimate testimonial. By the site containg a link back to the testimonial writer, it gives the public a means to contact the writer and to check the truth or gain further insight. You could well say the link is not needed. In many cases it may not be live, but the live link sure does make it easier to verify. Even if the link is not live it still gets the sites name infront of more eyeballs.

Perhaps down the road I will be kicking myself in the butt for making this method public. Who knows? It is a method to be used sparingly, not one to canvass the web with testimonials.

A one-way link from a testimonial page to me is an effective link building strategy. As Steve mentioned, use it sparingly. And most importantly, mean what you say in the testimonial. The testimonial content should not look like you are dropping a testimonial just for a link. If you actually use the tool or read the book and it is great, then a testimonial is a natural outcome of looking at the product. It makes sense to write a testimonial because it is a good product, and the comments you make are real because you really do appreciate the product. In appreciating the product the linking then becomes a secondary part of the reason for the testimonial to be made.

I am writing them as fast I can.... I figure I may have to buy the domain testimonials.com... and then make my money by having affiliate status with all the companies I write testimonials for.

Thats what I meant tho. Next week there will be 10% more testimonials on the net. The week after 20%, etc. That is why I believe it will now be watched.

It is not like the cat just got out of the hat. People have been doing it for a long time. A testimonial is a citation of sorts just like a link is. Also most smart people do not hand out testimonials to just anything.

Each time you write a testimonial you are throwing your name on the work of others.

Get behind a couple bad products and you lose the trust of your customers, which is often the single most valueable aspect of many web based businesses.

I am writing them as fast I can.... I figure I may have to buy the domain testimonials.com... and then make my money by having affiliate status with all the companies I write testimonials for.

Hehehe. Funny one... ;)

I am writing them as fast I can.... I figure I may have to buy the domain testimonials.com... and then make my money by having affiliate status with all the companies I write testimonials for.

Even though I know you are saying that in jest, this is exactly what some idiots will be doing. And what will be its downfall.

Even though I know you are saying that in jest, this is exactly what some idiots will be doing. And what will be its downfall.

I suspect you may be right about that. It is no different than the idiots who stuffed the keyword meta-tag, or the idiots who spammed the Guestbooks, or the idiots who built FFA pages, or the idiots who are spamming the comments in blogs, or the idiots who will be spamming the wiki sandboxes, or the idiots who are brokering text links out of extinction, or the idiots who spammed the sig links at forums, and on and on.

If there is a way to trick the link popularity and skew it unfairly in ones favor, then you may be right -- they will shut it down.

Every method and/or strategy we use is subject to abuse which is more than likely why G does not particularly care for some types of SEO. As Aaron mentioned testimonial writing is not new; it just is not often discussed. Some have been doing it since products and services have been offered on the web.

With a testimomial not only your name, but also your reputation is on display. It is not something that can or should be used for any type site. As Daria stated, "most importantly, mean what you say in the testimonial. The testimonial content should not look like you are dropping a testimonial just for a link"

The intent is too praise a product or service when and only when deserved. Site owners should be able to tell the difference between a legit testimonial and one contrived only for a link back. It is their decision to link. The testimonial guantees nothing.

I suspect you may be right about that. It is no different than the idiots who stuffed the keyword meta-tag, or the idiots who spammed the Guestbooks, or the idiots who built FFA pages, or the idiots who are spamming the comments in blogs, or the idiots who will be spamming the wiki sandboxes, or the idiots who are brokering text links out of extinction, or the idiots who spammed the sig links at forums, and on and on.

If there is a way to trick the link popularity and skew it unfairly in ones favor, then you may be right -- they will shut it down.

Well, #1, I dont consider link sellers idiots as we obviously have the means, over and above normal. At least some of us. :)

Well, #1, I dont consider link sellers idiots as we obviously have the means, over and above normal. At least some of us. :)

we all kinda chose how we go about what we do. everyone making a living from marketing thinks they are providing some value on the surface (unless they are a reptile without emotion or complex though capability)

there are smart link sellers and there are dumb ones just as there are good doctors and doctors who kill people out of their ignorance. i find that people are more important than the market segment you are in.

i think his word idiot was probably geared toward the type of people who are selling completely random and completely unrelated links across multiple sites carelessly and getting sites banned or filling search indexes with junk.

one way or the other most good seos are somewhat of a link broker in that they know how many and where to buy links (what directories to list in,etc.) to get good rankings

i think his word idiot was probably geared toward the type of people who are selling completely random and completely unrelated links across multiple sites carelessly and getting sites banned or filling search indexes with junk.

That is exactly what I meant. No different than the idiots who might ruin testamonials (if it comes to that).

Forget Opera and get Mozilla Firefox, the (un)official browser of SEO. Not only are there just tons of SEO-friendly extensions, Nick Stallman recently put together a version of the Googlebar plugin that shows PageRank. Thanks to Aaron (Mr. Breaking News) for the tip-off on that, BTW.

Forget Opera and get Mozilla Firefox, the (un)official browser of SEO. Not only are there just tons of SEO-friendly extensions, Nick Stallman recently put together a version of the Googlebar plugin that shows PageRank. Thanks to Aaron (Mr. Breaking News) for the tip-off on that, BTW.

Hi Dan,

Firefox, while a damn decent browser, has its flaws as well. Such as the fact it uses the last known referer if you go to a site from commandline and no referer. Several other minor things we found while testing it as well, but not major enough to remember at this time.

That toolbar works in Netscape as well. It made a lot of Macintosh users very happy campers.

But I also use the Pluck Newsreader for IE which gives me my feeds for SEObook, SearchBlog, SE Lowdown, ResourceShelf, SE Roundtable, WPN, SE News Journal, Traffick, Site-Reference Marketing, and all the rest. So I guess I will be sticking with it for a while. ;)

The RSS Reader sidebar works fine for me with Mozilla. Not sure why I would care about the referrer, Nuclei - can you clarify that issue, though? I'm working on an article and it would be good to have my facts straight *before* it's published. :D

here was the conversation that brought me up to speed on it in the first place.

[16:21] <nuclei> and how come yer viewing it coming from gmail
[16:22] <jason> dunno
[16:23] <jason> firefox sent the wrong refer i guess
[16:24] <nuclei> heh
[16:24] <jason> i better figure that out
[16:25] <jason> if i double click a url in mirc the browser it reuses sends the refer of whatever tab was active


Basically if you have it open already and click a url from a client like mIRC or an email client that would not usually send a referer, it reuses the one from the last active site. While this is not really a major issue for most people it can slew log records and anylitical programs.

The RSS Reader sidebar works fine for me with Mozilla. Not sure why I would care about the referrer, Nuclei - can you clarify that issue, though? I'm working on an article and it would be good to have my facts straight *before* it's published. :D


There is this unresolved bug at Mozilla.org Bugzilla Bug 236194 (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=236194) that refers to it. It is much like what happened with Netscape a couple of years ago, New Windows would not send a blank refferal.

While this is not really a major issue for most people it can slew log records and anylitical programs.

There has been false referrals being made to blogs in the past. Some blogs keep a rolling referral list of Urls that their visitors came from. Mozilla Firefox could be used in the fashion you described to fill that list with unrelated links to porn sites.

The HTTP_USER_AGENT field is another thing that can be spoofed. But this can be done via an extension for Firefox (not a bug). Imagine playing around with one of your buddies heads and hitting his site with googlebot in that string. Do that steady for about two weeks and listen to his amazement at all the attention he is getting, then stop suddenly and watch his amazement as to what in the heck went wrong. (People, do not try this at Home)

Nah, hitting a website with a referer of fbi.gov/mostwant.htm and an IP of 198.81.129.100 is much funnier.

Forget Opera and get Mozilla Firefox, the (un)official browser of SEO. Not only are there just tons of SEO-friendly extensions, Nick Stallman recently put together a version of the Googlebar plugin that shows PageRank. Thanks to Aaron (Mr. Breaking News) for the tip-off on that, BTW.

I try to find the new cool stuff, but Chris Ridings actually was the person who found that first and put it on his blog (http://www.searchguild.com/blog.html)

Chris was not one of the original beta testers. He hardly found it first :)

lots of sites are getting their ability to parse out pagerank to other sites blocked. it would take a bunch for google to do that to the internet.com network, but they are absolutely undermining Google's algorithm by selling exceptionally unrelated text links.

In the link you provided a few posts back on this theory of blocking PR, one of the sites cited as having PR blocked was the forum site PHPBB.com. Google appears to be adjusting backlinks right now and PageRank (it is all good, btw) and one of the sites being reported for backlinks is PHPBB.com (I have three from them).

Of course, all of this can change overnight, eh? They may vaporize before my very eyes (crossing my fingers). Right now ... there a large proportion of the links are coming from forum sites, siglines to be exact. It is a strange twist to see some of these reappear all of a sudden. One backlink is coming from that Submarine N.U. Contest page ... and I am hard pressed to find my link on there right now (not on the cached page either). Go figure -- just when you have it figured out, they change the rules on you.

All very commonplace now but professional blogging needs added into the mix. And all very good for those of us that can write. But for smaller clients, the list is most often out of their reach: in essence, they can't write. So what is your advice for an illiterate site owner to build these one-way links? Do you think it's within an SEO's brief, who has the expertise to write, but not on behalf of their industry, to do so? My take is that it in most cases we way out of our depth.

Submit articles, white papers, press releases, etc. to other websites that accept free content.

What is a good article and directory submission tool?

You have the answer in your new thread

What is a good article and directory submission tool?

According to my experience i have noticed that the directory submission is the quickest way to have back links if you have a good description content and you are posting the submission in the correct directory you can have it quickly other than that reciprocal links are also very beneficial in quick back links.