PDA

View Full Version : Proof that reciprocal links still work?


wiltonbiz
07-06-2007, 10:00 AM
For at least a year, I have accepted the conventional wisdom that recips are dead and virtually useless. My understanding is that Google essentially pays no attention to recip links. Sure, you can have a few, to round out your SEO portfolio, but they are no longer a ticket up the SERPs.

Now I'm not so sure.

I run a website in a very competitive niche (top key phrase is in 2006's Top Ten Generic Search Terms, according to Hitwise). I started it nearly a year ago, and with a lot of sweat and hardwork, and all white-hat SEO, I have managed to position it quite well in the SERPs, although not yet on page 1 of Google for the main term. Still, some days I get 2,000 - 3,000 unique visitors, and once or twice, when I"ve gotten a great link from a big site, I've had about 8,000 visitors. (So much for the sandbox, BTW).

About 2 months ago, I saw a small site come out of nowhere, and start doing really well in the SERPs. It got to the middle of page 2 for the top key phrase, and has excellent rankings in secondary keywords. The site is brand new -- launched around December 06 or January 07.

How are they doing it, I asked myself. I first assumed paid links, but could find no evidence of it. I needn't have looked so hard. They have done it, frankly, with a ton of relevant, but reciprocal links, from small to medium size sites.

They have broken their "resources" section into 17 different pages, all nicely labelled with relevant categories. In each category, they have anywhere from 10 to 40 links. Let's say average 25, then they probably have a total, very roughly, of about 400-500 outboun links. And, while I haven't counted every single backlink to their site, I have counted enough in a random sample to see that most of the people they link to are the same sort of marketers -- they are giving this site a reciprocal link back.

And that's about it folks. A very nicely built site, from an SEO perspective -- lots of clever internal linking and great anchor text, but in reality, pretty light on content. And certainly no "great" content, no "original" content.

So you'd think they'd be struggling like every other newbie site that still thinks reciprocal linking is a cool idea. But you'd be wrong. They're doing great. They've had a page rank of 5 for at least 2 months. (That's PR 5 after about 4 months online). And remember, the key phrase they are chasing is one of Hitwise's top ten generic terms on the internet.

I thought Google was supposed to be on to this kind of crap a long time ago. But they don't appear to be. (BTW- more proof there is no sandbox). Google appears to be rewarding this site very nicely for a huge recip linking project. I'd love to hear what people think of this.

WB

gabs
07-06-2007, 10:40 AM
Sounds like the site is being looks as a hub..

Hubs are very different to authority sites..

Always remeber that you control what you link to... If you link to great resources and greats resources link to you then thats all good isn't it ?

wiltonbiz
07-06-2007, 11:00 AM
I don't know -- that sounds too easy to me. I think of a trusted hub as one that has been around for a while, with thousands of links. We're talking a six month old site with about 400-500 recips. Doesn't sound like much of a hub to me, but maybe you're right. If it's that easy to rank with a bunch of recips. I'm building the wrong kind of sites!

gabs
07-06-2007, 11:21 AM
hmmm.. Sounds a interesting site to look at..

Due to the time period maybe freshness of content and linkage could be a major factor..

Without the url its hard to say of course... Maybe its go just one super powerfull linky ..

SkyLite
07-07-2007, 12:42 AM
(BTW- more proof there is no sandbox)
WB

If there is a sandbox, It's likely one or two ranking factors. And I can tell you from the hard data - No particular factor is make or break. -

If there is a rule, there are 10's of thousands breaking the rule and still doing well.

You have to look at 1000's of sites and look for trends. Not yes or no examples.

Jazajay
07-19-2007, 11:09 PM
I posted my thoughts of this on another post JazaJays egotistical thoughts (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showpost.php?p=112527&postcount=3) So i wont reiterate it all over again but yeah recip links are still good in my opinion personally i think they are weighted less than they where.

You have to think maybe google does play a very good game makes you look one way while they go the other. "we value recip links less" so every one says o crap got to purge therefore google gets what it wants without doing much.

Personally i think they are valued less but still hold some weight. Heres something to think about:

Why if you search for porn, not that i do or my wife would rip me a new one, all you get(most of the time so i've heard) is link farms some pages have 300+links and are only 1 page that is not a directory yet they are 1-2-3-4-5 out of millions of results and they just pass you on from link farm to link farm.

Dont get me wrong i dont personally beleave link farms are the furture now that would be madness but it does make me think as to why they aren't devalued i mean porn and it's close terms are surly one of the most searched terms on the web. If i'm wrong i appologise.