Is this tactic ethical link building?

[viralinker]

I just realized that this forum is the more appropriate one for this message that was posted in the Google forum... sorry!

I welcome comments on whether a linking strategy I developed crosses the line, or if it is even effective.

For the last few months, I have been concentrating on getting inbound links from bloggers who write relevant content to what I am selling (financial advice). The good news... I have been pretty successful. I now have about 300-400 bloggers linking to me. What's more, because of the CMS platforms common among bloggers, having a link on their page template means that my link carries over to every page they ever wrote. When the spiders visit the link partners pages, I seem to get credit for dozens (maybe hundreds) of links from one web master because my link is on every single page.

So, from those 300-400 links, my link pop (according to Yahoo's database: Google's link pop database, as we know, takes months) has soared into the tens of thousands. Further, every time a blogger makes a new post, another link is added. Querying link pop on all SE's yields multiple links from different pages within the same domain.

On its face, this seems good. According to the link pop databases, I now have greater link pop than the biggest names in financial services. Ignoring the fact that it will take many more months to compete for top ranking on some very competitive financial terms, I have the following concerns:

1) Am I adding links too fast? Will the SE's assume this is spam?
2) Does it do more harm than good because the vast majority of pages will never be visited nor linked themselves?
3) Would this be considered link farming? I mean, the pages have legitimate user-generated content, and those pages are not created expressly for the purpose of carrying links. They are blog posts, after all.
4) Considering that the bloggers (for the most part) write about content that is relevant to my business, does this strategy give me (or anybody) an edge in the search algorithms?

[phaithful]

1) Depends... is this something that has occured with your competitors? Does it look natural or do you stick out like a sore thumb for this particular vertical?
2) Probably not, I'd be more concerned if a majority of these sites were considered "bad neighborhoods".
4) Yes the links are more relavent. It would hold more value than links from blogs that didn't write about your industry.
3) By the definition of link farming, I'd say no. To search engines, I wouldn't worry... ethically... it really depends on how you went about getting those links... but I'm optimistic and would say you're just good at promoting your site. Good for you :)

[viralinker]

I don't believe that I am linked to bad neighborhoods. All of them have user generated content, which is more or less relevant to my topics. I am not linked to those blogs that are "blogging" about viagra and cialis. However, as is the nature of the beast, some link partners are well-trafficked, others not so much. Because the link is on every page, deep pages within a web site are not themselves well-linked (whereas the home page is usually decently-linked).

Is there any chance that an abundance of zero importance pages (which are zero because they are just deep dives, and not new sites or bogus sites) would penalize my rankings?

[bobmutch]

viralinker:

First keep in mind that the search engineers are on these forums often. If you think you may be doing something that is spammy you may not want to paste you domain till you fix what ever spam you may be doing. People can PM you and ask for your domain.

The Yahoo datacenter I accessed shows that you have 74,000 inbound links wheb I add -site:domain.com
linkdomain:domain.com -site:domain.com

Also Yahoo is seeing the inbounds as similar entries after entry 348.

Considering that your domain is just a little over a year old and that you got most of your links in the "last few months" I would say over all it is not a good thing. I would suggest you may want to consider just getting a home page link from each site or putting all the links in a nofollow tag and look for the click though traffic.

Link pop that comes from the same domains has been largely devalued quite awhile ago and domain pop became more important. Some SEO experts are of the opinion that to some degree domain pop is now being devalued and Trustlinks are becoming more important.

Even for domains that have age and lots of organic links I don't think sitewides are a good thing. My site is 1.5yrs old and shows about 50k of inbounds and there are only the odd relevant link rental but I still won't point sitewides at it. I think I have around 140k inbound links to my site that use the nofollow.

So for your questions:

>>>1) Am I adding links too fast? Will the SE's assume this is spam?

Yes and yes. Sitewide bought links are spammy if they are not in a nofollow even if they are relevant.

>>>2) Does it do more harm than good because the vast majority of pages will never be visited nor linked themselves?

I think that having numerous sitewides on a site like yours will raise a flag and that they will do more harm than good.

>>>3) Would this be considered link farming? I mean, the pages have legitimate user-generated content, and those pages are not created expressly for the purpose of carrying links. They are blog posts, after all.

I wouldn't consider it a link farm but I would consider it spammy.

define:link farm
http://www.google.com/search?q=defin:link+farm

Best two definitions:
www.redfernservices.com/glossary_of_terms.asp (http://www.redfernservices.com/glossary_of_terms.asp)
prowebster.com/L-Q.htm (http://www.prowebster.com/L-Q.htm)

>>>4) Considering that the bloggers (for the most part) write about content that is relevant to my business, does this strategy give me (or anybody) an edge in the search algorithms?

That is going to give you relevant click though and if your get a link off their home page only and it is not in a spammy signature it will help. Relevant links are always a very good thing. But if it is just another link among hotels, lawyers and bingo links all in the footer with no text then all you have is another spammy link.

Over all one of the best ways to build quality links is to put your time and money into content such as original highly informative articles, quality resources and lists, and perhaps some relevant free web based programs that will keep people coming back. They will over time bring you hordes of natural links which is what the search engines are looking for.

You may want to consider putting up a blog and naming it Key Word Blog and after blogging for 3 or 4 months go and work Robin Good's good blog directory list.
www.masternewmedia.org/rss/top55/ (http://www.masternewmedia.org/rss/top55/)


There are lots of good ways to build links with out going out and buying sitewides that are in spammy signatures.

Hope this helps a bit!

[viralinker]

Thanks, Bob... however, the success of the link campaign comes from the fact that the targets were blogs that utilize a blog CMS System. For example, on any blogger or wordpress page, it is standard practice to have your links module, but that module is on every page. These CMS webmasters don't utilize a separate page for useful links. They are always in the right or left column. So, no spamming was intended, nor were the links paid-for.

Does this change your opinion?

[bobmutch]

>>>the success of the link campaign comes from the fact that the targets were blogs that utilize a blog CMS System.

I understood that your links were sitewide. It doesn't really matter what program was used to place the links.

>>>So, no spamming was intended, nor were the links paid-for.

If the links were not paid for that doesn't change things a whole lot in the long run.

If the signature of the links is not spammy but is a list of relevant sites it is certainly not as bad as having them mixed in between bingo and hotels.

In this case it is going to come down to you not only having non-spammy links but your links have to look non-spammy.

It is my opinion that getting sitewides from 20 or 30 blogs all at once is going to look spammy to the search engines. The other issue is you are not going to get credit for all those links. The search engines will give you credit for a few of them from each site and then the rest will not transfer any ranking weight to speak of.

So you could get almost the same result by just having the link on the home page and you will not have links that could appear to be spammy.

The number of links is not an end all but just a means to the end. The end results that you what is ranking.

I have often had to deal with this same issue. You are offered a link and you want what ever click though the side wide will give you but you don't want the spammy look of sitewides, while you also would like to get some ranking weight.

What I have done is look at which one will benefit my site the most. The traffic the sitewide will bring or the traffic that higher ranking that the ranking weight of one link on the home page will bring and at the same time balance out the negative effect the sidewide could or might in the future bring.

I have always choice either the sidewide in a nofollow or one link on the home page unless the sitewide was less that 100 pages.