Reciprocal Links Are Evil!

[DBernstein]

Ok if reciprocal links are bad and we should be trying to only get links to us how do we do that without buying them. Unless we create the most relevant site with the most bounty of beautiful content it aint going to happen. So do we all buy? Or do we develop the trading "one way" links network? Still sounds evil. We will never win when everyone buys links on these expensive networks. Once again the little guy can't win.

Any Ideas?

[AussieWebmaster]

Have the links page in your site be from another domain and give links from it in return for links to your domain.
Create a little content relevant to the topic/theme of the site on the links page and have a few outbound links to major sites in the niche that do not recip...

[rustybrick]

Reciprocal links are fine as long as they are natural links. I link to many resources from my blog. The same resources link back to me as a resource. But they are on topic. I didn't give those resources links because they gave me a link, the contrary. I gave them links because they are useful to my reader.

Get the idea.

Be natural.

[seobook]

the problems with reciprocal links is not that they all suck. some are probably a great deal.

the real problems with reciprocal links are:
-othes may have intent of creating burnable websites and they may be paying someone $1 an hour to link exchange with anyone...if you do not have a burnable domain and you trade with them then you can eat their penalty too.
-if sites require very little in terms of quality to trade links with you then someone else can pay someone $1 an hour to go through your link trades and trade with all your partners.

blind reciprocal links do not build value and are exceptionally risky

[Dave Hawley]

Ok if reciprocal links are bad..

Why do you say that?

I have been swapping links with similar sites for years. In addition to helping PR they also bring targetted traffic.

[Nick W]

Most of the savvy seo's i know stopped chasing recips well over a year ago...

>>Once again the little guy can't win

Why not? - be inventive - be extaordinary - be contraversial - be outstanding and link out generously and all good things will follow. Really they will...

Nick

[seobook]

Originally Posted by Dave Hawley

Why do you say that?

I have been swapping links with similar sites for years. In addition to helping PR they also bring targetted traffic.

I think it is no big secret that most websites that are actively seeking massive link swaps are also crap websites.

not all swaps are bad, but most link trades are set up to benifit one party much more than the other.

[Nacho]

Build them a cool little tool they can use on their website, then make sure it says Powered by Anchor Text. An example that is overflooded in the www are mortgage calculators. Think of something smart and I'll bet you can easily get a good 100 new links to your site.

Buena suerte amigo!

[Nacho]

MODERATOR NOTE: I move this thread to the Link Building forum. It makes no sense to have it under "Other Google Issues". Thanks for understanding.

[Dave Hawley]

Swap links only with sites that will benefit your site visitors and are not link farms. Never link for PR only. Don't be too proud to drop an email to a site saying you have linked to their site and request they link back to you. The smart ones will link back as both sites are relevant. If they don't link back...no skin of your nose.

[DBernstein]

Ok I know there is ways to build natural links and I think we should all do that, but what about the major companies who buy massive amounts of links when the small guy cant? I know the juniper commerce section cost $6000 a month! Only major players can afford that. So the little guy is at a disadvantage. I personally wouldn’t want to buy any links even if I had the money to do so. It is just wrong. It is wrong because those links serve no purpose other then link popularity. No one clicks on a random link on the side of a nav that has nothing to do with the site they are on.

I have built high PR sites with tons of relevant content and always find myself losing to someone with 3000 links. When I research the links they are crap bought links. So getting as many natural links as you can, will help but you will still lose.

[seobook]

Originally Posted by DBernstein

Ok I know there is ways to build natural links and I think we should all do that, but what about the major companies who buy massive amounts of links when the small guy cant? I know the juniper commerce section cost $6000 a month! Only major players can afford that. So the little guy is at a disadvantage.

Google has been flipping my ranking around a bit, but I keep oscillating between #8 & #12 for "seo" and I only spend a few hundred dollars a month on link renting. I am a little guy without much money. you do not need lots of money if you make friends and business partnerships.

Originally Posted by DBernstein

I personally wouldn’t want to buy any links even if I had the money to do so. It is just wrong. It is wrong because those links serve no purpose other then link popularity. No one clicks on a random link on the side of a nav that has nothing to do with the site they are on.

why not buy relevant ads from related sites then?

Originally Posted by DBernstein

I have built high PR sites with tons of relevant content and always find myself losing to someone with 3000 links. When I research the links they are crap bought links. So getting as many natural links as you can, will help but you will still lose.

sounds to me that you either need to come off some cash or need to work hard building more good friendships and business relationships that will be reflected in your linkage data.

why is it that many people feel it is wrong to place ads on the web?

[DBernstein]

I do agree with buying relevant links on similar sites. What I don’t like is the anchor text auto selected links like the ones on the jupiter network (don't mean to pick on our friends, just using the obvious example). When you hit refresh and it randomly chooses links to make money.

I can afford to buy some nice relevant links (although I would rather spend my time and money building better content and have more info instead) but I wont beat out the people on these networks.

Seobook, do you feel these commerce links are just? Do you think they have value to visitors of this site?

[seobook]

Originally Posted by DBernstein

I do agree with buying relevant links on similar sites. What I don’t like is the anchor text auto selected links like the ones on the jupiter network (don't mean to pick on our friends, just using the obvious example). When you hit refresh and it randomly chooses links to make money.

part of that randomly chosing links it to try to mix it up to make it look more natural. when you buy links its best if you can spread them out over many sites and use various different link text.

Originally Posted by DBernstein

I can afford to buy some nice relevant links (although I would rather spend my time and money building better content and have more info instead) but I wont beat out the people on these networks.

it is a balancing act. if you have great content and could use more links then get more links. work on doing both in tandom.

Originally Posted by DBernstein

Seobook, do you feel these commerce links are just?

my opinion of those links does not much matter. its more important what search algorithms think of those links. I personally recommend spending at a large variety of networks and getting many onetime fee links before spending a bunch all at one spot.

Originally Posted by DBernstein

Do you think they have value to visitors of this site?

not usually, but many link ads that are bought & sold have no intent of being relevant for human site visitors. some search algorithms are not amazingly sophisticated and are somewhat easy to cheaply manipulate.

whether or not others are paying for the links does not determine whether or not they are worth buying though. links, like any other market, will have some areas that are underpriced and some that are overpriced...and there is no universal yes or no answer as to whether a particular link rental position provides adequate value to all sites across all fields.

[DBernstein]

Thanks for the input Seobook.

Back to the original point of this post. What is your opinion of getting another domain to use as your reciprocal links location?

Does anyone feel Google will better value real links more then bought link?

The new msn seems to not put so much weight on links. Most of my sites are ranking extremely well in their results. I love Google but having the best content and best represented site is just not enough to them.

[seobook]

Originally Posted by DBernstein

What is your opinion of getting another domain to use as your reciprocal links location?

that is probably not all that hard for search engines to detect.
http://www.cre8asiteforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=15982

Originally Posted by DBernstein

Does anyone feel Google will better value real links more then bought link?

depends on how well they can distinguish the difference between real and bought links.

Originally Posted by DBernstein

The new msn seems to not put so much weight on links. Most of my sites are ranking extremely well in their results. I love Google but having the best content and best represented site is just not enough to them.

MSN Search Beta is really easy to manipulate w links right now.

[DBernstein]

How is MSN Search Beta is really easy to manipulate w links right now?

One of my sites is ranked #1 in MSN for a term and lost in the 100s for the term in google.

There is no duplicate content but there are no real links for the site. either. MSN seems to love the site theme and focus. I do notice MSN seems to put more wieght on inurl keyword use, but even that is not really present on my site.

[seobook]

Originally Posted by DBernstein

How is MSN Search Beta is really easy to manipulate w links right now?

one of my friends has a site that outranks a site for the other sites own name based on a few keyword rich links. in yahoo the site ranks below the official manufacturer and in google it is a bit lower than that.

I also have spoke with some link brokers and a good # of SEOs about the new MSN Search, although likely it will change over time.

[Dave Hawley]

Has anyone any proof that paid links (like juniper) help in anyway at all with the Google SERP's.

Please, no pages ranking number 1 for a search term, that has paid links to it, as sole proof.

[seobook]

Originally Posted by Dave Hawley

Please, no pages ranking number 1 for a search term, that has paid links to it, as sole proof.

that sounds confusing to me? not sure what the question is...