Google setting a poor precident on what consititutes a quality IBL

[Wilksy]

I do some work with a particular SEO company over here in Australia. Recently it came to the attention of the CEO that one of his compeditors has been using free stat counters for backlinks with great success. They have been at the top of the serps for over 2 years and hat's off to them (not the way I'd build up a corporate SEO site, but hey whatever floats your boat - they have had great success with it).

Google know about the site and really don't seem to care. I can't see them being programmed out by the algo at anytime soon, nor can I see any evidence that they are trying.

I am now wondering what sort of precident Google are setting on this one and whether they are going to (re)address the counter issue. Because now I have at least two companies interested in duplicating such activities.

In the back of my mind I am suprised Google have taken no action. Yesterday I get an email from the CEO of one of Australia's larger SEO companies telling me he know's why this company is ranking.

Subject line: Why are xxxxxxxxxx.com.au at the top of SERPs?
Subject: answer: free counters offered at http://www.xxxxxxxxxxx.com/
which ALL link back to XX
Note, the image of counter has link,
but EVERY image also has a keyword phrase link below it
very clever...

when are we going to do this?
</end email>

So I respond, "Why paint a big red bullseye on your ass?"

He responds: "if anything, hisdomain.com.au's backlinks kick ass compared to XX....
BUT BUT BUT, XX have been at the TOP of the SERPS for almost 2
years now!!!!"

Interesting I thought to myself.

So what's your take? are Goog setting a dangerous precident on this one?

[jimbeetle]

If the CEO of this Australian SEO company just realized and is surprised that you can gain backlinks by providing something useful such as stats service, well, I think he or she is in the wrong business.

Moreover, what action would you like Google to take?

[Wilksy]

Geez I dunno Jim,

Perhaps discount off topic links from counter sites with hidden anchors and make it fair for all. But you seem to think these are useful products (for seo?) and the links should stand. Perhaps I'm missing something here?

Re: counters for ibl's. Not all CEO's are out there looking for 'useful' services to provide people for their own benefit. Some have clients and don't have time to get into forums or bother searching shortcuts (poor buggers, c what they miss).

Personally I think they are just crap links, off topic, hidden and a deceptive use of the fabled Google Guidelines, but that is my opinion (as a self confessed spammer). If I do whitehat, I do cleaner than clean. The rest doesn't matter. But something so visible surely does, no??

- Ben

[jimbeetle]

Arrgh. Hit submit instead of preview.

But you seem to think these are useful products (for seo?)

Well, yeah. It's been an SEO tactic for years: Build a tool and have people link to it. Basic.

Perhaps discount off topic links from counter sites with hidden anchors and make it fair for all.

Now that's what we don't know. There are an awful lot of links that Google has been discounting. Mayhap this is already in the equation for sites like this? We just don't know.

I'm a bit confused with your use of "hidden anchors." I didn't notice it in your first post and just can't figure out what you mean by it.

[Wilksy]

Sent you a pm Jim.

These links were all once hidden, but someone has been real busy. Can't say I have been delving deeper, I'm sure most are still hidden.

- Ben

[jimbeetle]

Thanks for the sticky.

Now I've got it, it's hidden text links. Yeah, that's cheesy, but in this case I think it might actually be accidental. If you go to the counter site and generate code for a counter, all of the text is spec'd as black, no matter the background color of the counter. It just so happens that the site you cited uses a black background. I tracked back a few of the other examples and they all look okay.

There are a couple of other "features" that make this counter's implementation kind of interesting. Not quite sure how effective it would be in the long run, but somebody's put a bit of thought into it.

[Wilksy]

I've had a PM or two from the site owner and he's actually waiting for reprocussions, but I don't think there will be any. I have still adviced others to avoid the situation themselves.

I know he wouldn't be suprised if he get's turfed. But the interesting thing for me is that now Google have seen it for sure (trust me they have) whether this set's a precident for how scummy your backlinks can get.

I only knew of one other SEO that had discovered the mess months ago. His opinion on it all was exactly the same as mine.

Also the hidden element was no accident. Most links have since become visible. I am still a little unsure of the value a 'search engine optimisation counter' has for users of a webpage, but again I may be missing something, perhaps ppl use them??

Interesting Google.

- Ben

[AussieWebmaster]

The background conflicts occur every now and again and are something that should not be penalised.

[Wilksy]

I dunno AussieWebmaster, firing links at client sites from a free stat counter while dealing with some of Australia's larger corporate brands just doesn't sit right with me at all.

I guess time will tell.

;-D

[AussieWebmaster]

I dunno AussieWebmaster, firing links at client sites from a free stat counter while dealing with some of Australia's larger corporate brands just doesn't sit right with me at all.

I guess time will tell.

;-D

If in coming links could hurt you a lot of dubious competitors would be wiping you out that way... in bound links count or don't count but unless you are in the same C block it does not lead to penalties.

[Wilksy]

LMAO, wow someone's really getting elaborate then - sorry mate but this is just way to elaborate for that. The owner of the domain has admitted it was his work to me via PM.

If Google can't tell that it's not the work of the owners of the domain then Matt Cutts needs to find a lot more savvy Spam Engineers.

Quite inspiring on the spam front!

Spam on I guess.

(message to Cutts, game on mate - you set the rules and I promise I will follow them) Starting right now.

So I will set up a domain, get some quality inbounds that cannot be denied, get it ranking then switch to compeditor sabotage mode, stay below the radars that be and within a range for building links in that niche and rank like a superstar.

(runs off to mask IP, set up proxies, get a decent script or two and start thinking like a 'dirty compeditor' <-- hat tip to JA for that lovely term)