Question on reciprocal linking.

[dasheriprock]

I have a super niched site that does well and all my links come from emails I've sent to other site owners, directories, articles, etc. Now I'm venturing into a niche where there will be opportunities to gain links quickly if I want to. I've seen programs out there like SEO Elite that will find relevant sites out there where you can exchange links with them....

I guess the question is, if the site is relevant to my site concept, offers some value to my visitors, etc is it a good idea to do a link exchange with them? I guess I'm worried somewhat about having a page that is just filled with people I've done link exchanges with. Thoughts?

[glengara]

*I guess I'm worried somewhat about having a page that is just filled with people I've done link exchanges with.*

And possibly not unjustified based on what MC recently wrote about recips....

[scrubs]

Hi dasheriprock,

You can see MC (Matt Cutts) views on here (http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/indexing-timeline/)

I would suggest concentrating on inbound links not reciprocal. Much safer sticking to relevant topics and not spammy links pages

[atlanta404]

I agree with the other posts - if you ask Google "what is a quality link", they might say quality links are mostly NOT reciprocated.

Are you in the Yahoo & DMOZ directories?

[dasheriprock]

I'm waiting to get in the Dmoz directory. Who knows if I'll ever get in there though.

As far as yahoo, that's another issue I'm a little confused on. I am ranking well in MSN, google, but not yahoo. Plus, I noticed that all the top 10 listings for my primary keyword are in the Yahoo Directory. I was all set to pay the $299 and get myself in, especially when I heard Brad Fallon say that 1 good PR 7 could put you at the top of your category (I'm in a super-niche category). But, then after reading the forums, it seems as if the Yahoo D may not be worth it.

Your thoughts?

[Chris Boggs]

Ok everyone...let's look at exactly what Matt says in that post:
...This time, I’m seeing links to mortgages sites, credit card sites, and exercise equipment. I think this is covered by the same guidance as above; if you were getting crawled more before and you’re trading a bunch of reciprocal links, don’t be surprised if the new crawler has different crawl priorities and doesn’t crawl as much.
and
Some folks that were doing a lot of reciprocal links might see less crawling.

Looks like they are looking for non-relevant recips as well as a "lot of reciprocal links." I would venture to make an educated guess that anything over 10% would be considered "a lot." Of course it could be an exact number limit to trip the filter too, but I doubt it.

I still use reciprocals when I can, especially if the content on each page is complimentary (relevant) and will help the visitor to each site find more pertinent information.

(added) I also feel that it is important to work the links into content pages instead of using an easily flagable "resources" or "cool links" page...

[dasheriprock]

That's what I'm thinking as well. I would never do a recip. with someone who I didn't believe had good content and is a site I wouldn't visit myself. I am all for exchanging links with competitors and letting them have a crack at the business if the customer hasn't bought from me for some reason.

[scrubs]

dasheriprock, if you have a US based website then I would recommend the Yahoo! directory as a quality IBL. The UK & Ireland Yahoo! directory is free to submit to btw.

It may be a bit harsh to completely disregard reciprocal links if like you say the content matches as it will no doubt serve a purpose to the visitor. I personally look for 1 way relevant IBL's.

[St0n3y]

Good reciprocal links can be a way to attract natural one-way links. Nothing wrong with recips so long as those are not your ONLY basis for attracting links.

[AnthonyCea]

Just stay away from reciprocal link directories and pages as some mention here, don't join automated reciprocal link networks, they are going to be targeted as they are used to drive traffic to spam pages!

A few natural reciprocals when needed like Chris mentioned are not going to hurt, but non relevant reciprocals to directories and automated link networks can hurt you!

[Wilksy]

Nothing wrong with reciprocal links at all, don't believe the hype. Just stay ONTOPIC and nothing will go astray. Be very strict with what you link to (and who links to you).

[AnthonyCea]

Wilksy would you say that about reciprocal link directories and automated reciprocal link networks :confused:

Please elaborate on your statement for the readers so they are not confused.

[Wilksy]

AnthonyCea please tell me how a "reciprocal link directories or automated reciprocal link networks" stay ontopic with regard to reciprocals?

C'mon, do you really think I am endorsing spam?

If you have a decent site you can swap reciprocals till the cows come home, just don't link to irrelevant 'networks' and be very careful who links to you (if your going to reciprocate). Nothing spammy at all.

Also in some niches a links page is a really good resource.

[Marcia]

Wilksy would you say that about reciprocal link directories and automated reciprocal link networks Anthony, if the OP had said that (which he did not) then we'd all see where that's what was said (which we do not).

Where are you getting that from?

[AnthonyCea]

Nothing wrong with reciprocal links at all, don't believe the hype.

The above is his quote Marcia!

I just want him to clarify the statement and his position lest people think reciprocal link directories are fine, many are confused out here now as you know, to make a broad statement is not advisable in my view at the moment!

[Marcia]

Nothing wrong with reciprocal links at all, don't believe the hype.
The above is his quote Marcia!Exactly! That's the entirety of his quote, and it says nothing whatsoever about recip schemes or directories. If anyone reads more into it than what was actually, then their imagination is getting the best of them.

When someone makes a statement about something that *is* they are not under any obligation to qualify it by explaining what it isn't.

ie if someone says that when the sun is shining it's daytime, that's all they need to say. They don't have to also say that it doesn't apply to when the moon is out, and that when the moon is out it's night-time, not day-time.

IMHO it's perfectly fine for someone to say exactly what they mean. If anyone misinterprets, then they've got a problem with their own comprehension or they're possibly engaging in wishful thinking or in the case of Google, it's often an exercise in self-justification.

[AnthonyCea]

Yes Marcia, at the same time this is a forum, members have the right to question other members and to ask them to explain further!

If you remember I asked you to explain your position further the other day too and you did exactly that!

I'm glad you are always on the job by the way! :o