MediaWhiz Blog: Archive

It’s impossible to exhaust all the creative methods of getting new backlinks. A WMW post, Link development by buying competitors, highlights a lesser-used (but powerful) link building method:

My competitors in my business are in 90% of the cases unprofessionell and I just had the idea of increasing our links by buying their websites.

What would be the best way to get their links directing to us? Should we redirect their domain or should we put a bunch of our links on their website?
Any other ideas?

I like this method for several reasons:

• If the site you’re buying has decent, relevant backlinks, than this will be a good Hilltop-type link to your main site
• You can surround the link  to your main site with links to other authoritative sites, thus putting your main site in a good neighborhood
• Since you control the entire site, you can put in tons of intra-content deep links (sorta like the Presell pages from WeBuildPages)

Of course when buying and selling assets (and this includes Web sites), I have one golden rule: Buy Cheap, Sell High. If the price is right, go for it! If not, go back to writing high quality content (or comment spamming). 

Aaron Wall writes (that is, wrote, and continually rewrites) the most well-known search engine optimization ebook on the Web. He is also the man behind Search-Marketing.info, which, while lesser-known than SEO Book, is a great source for instructional SEO articles.

1) Yahoo!’s search algorithm: Closing in on Google, or 18 months behind?

I think they are closing, but when they started they were far more than 18 months behind, and as they draw closer they reach more toward a point of diminishing returns. I recently interviewed NFFC and he stated:

“This is what I think, SEO is all about emotions, all about human interaction. People, search engineers even, try and force it into a numbers box. Numbers, math and formulas are for people not smart enough to think in concepts.”

and that if he worked at a search engine

“I would look to give good things a boost and stop focusing on finding bad things to penalise.”

In the past Google was able to give people more reason to give back user data (ie: toolbar and PageRank), Yahoo! is trying to catch up with their My Web idea, but even though they allow users to block sites and share them I still feel none of the competing search services have a brand that can compete with Google, and none of them make users feel like they own and help improve the results.

Look how Google launches other products: Gmail, Orkut, using other brand names. Google wants their name to be synonymous with search. Yahoo! wants to be synonymous with everything, and that thins the brand. Owning content networks means having internal customers, and that creates a biased search service which some people will question the relevancy of.

Google has also bought Urchin and may be creating a payment system to help create the micropayment business model or get more end to end consumer behavior data. As far as collecting user data I think Google has the competition beat, but there is only so much you can do with the data before the focus on more data creates algorithms which resist innovation and change.

I think most of search distribution is down to positioning and who can lock in more users with their other services. The search service which makes you feel like you own the service will be the one that wins in distribution. As far as quality goes I think NFFC was right on that, whoever focuses more on signs of quality than reasons to penalize will win. Adding more human interaction to the algorithms would help a ton as well.

2) NickW: Highly entertaining SEO personality or rebel without a cause?

Based on regularly linking at his site and posting comments to it I obviously like it. My opinion does not matter that much though in the grand scheme of things. If you look at the more official type links, he has got blogrolled on sites like Search Engine Watch, Yahoo! Search Blog, Ask Jeeves Blog, has been Slashdotted a few times, and has had press mentions from sites like Guardian, Slate, etc etc etc.

My site is not on any of those blogrolls, has had little mention in any traditional type of press, and has had limited reach outside of the search community, so I would say in that regard he is doing a much better job than I, especially when you consider that he gets away with far more cursing than I do

Even when he calls people out, like ClickZ recently, they still feel the need to comment on his site, so that is fairly impressive. In less than a year his site has probably moved into the top 10 search related sites in terms of quality inbound linkage data, and with modern search algorithms it is all about linkage data.

3) SEOBook: Reached its peak, or just getting started?

Will steal a line from Larry Page at Google’s recent quarterly conference call. It is still in the first inning.

4) Do you think the guy that posted here (and in subsequent comments on that thread) is really GoogleGuy as we know him (aka Matt Cutts)?

You don’t know a person for sure based on a few heated forum posts. I am not sure if that was GoogleGuy or Matt Cutts. Rumour has it that Matt loves tomatoes though.

5) If you ever fall off the Sears Tower, just go real limp, because maybe you’ll look like a dummy and people will try to catch you because, hey, free dummy!

Never been in the Sears Tower. Do not plan on going. I am a HUGE FAN of the dummies http://www.crashtestdummies.com/ though. Luckily I was able to link your question to that great band, or there would have been no link based Q&As

This thread at WMW caught my interest. The question: do rotating links help link popularity? Crush replies with what also happens to be my initial reaction.

Crush: works for now but I think SE’s are working towards killing rotating links. Like I say for now fine but may have less effect.

I’m not sure about this one though. LBB readers, tell me what you know!

I like martinibuster’s blog a lot, my only complaint being I wish he posted more often. Maybe he read my mind as he made a killer post yesterday.

Taking the Brain Cells Out for a little exercise
Let’s whip out those two brain cells and rub them together: What do you imagine the search engine engineers would think about a directory that is marketed exclusively to webmasters? Aren’t directories supposed to be useful to web surfers? Would the search engineers think that these directories were a scheme for helping SEO Webmasters manipulate their ranks? If so, what action do you think they would take?

Sometimes it’s hard to step back a bit and look at search algorithms with a long term perspective; martinibuster seems to have a talent for this. Read more: Directories with a Kick Me Sign on Their Backs

We post a lot on our blog about how to best aquire valuable incoming links, with nary a peep about the power of outbound links. Our unequivocal opinion is that good outbound links are a good thing, both for users and for search engines:

For Users

• Helpfulness: Users will leave sooner or later. If you help them as they leave, they are more likely to return.
• Perceived Authority: Not sure if I’ve ever used the word “authority” in a non-SE context… but if a site links to other HQ sites, in my mind, that makes it more trustworthy to users.

For Search Engines

• Hilltop Hub Points: If you link to topical authorities your site may get “hub points” from the Hilltop algo (or similar algo’s)
• Good neighborhood: As martinibuster has said, your neighborhood is important to modern SEs. Outbound links may be as important in this as inbounds are.

Bottom line: good outbound links = good for your site.

Todd Malicoat aka Stuntdubl works as V.P. of Sales and Marketing for We Build Pages. He also maintains a widely-read weblog on internet marketing, self-titled Stuntdubl Internet Marketing Consulting.

1) Google Sandbox: myth or reality?

Sheesh…start me off with a trick question. I was thinkin’ maybe I’d get to tell you my life history about “falling into SEO by default” after being a web designer/developer like everyone else. I think the sandbox is a name given to a variety of different ailments, and provides a good excuse for those not ranking. There is so much talk about sandbox, filters, and penalties that it has really become overwhelming. I think Google has learned their lesson about being too open with SEO’s. I don’t blame them a bit for ambiguous guidelines and subtle disinformation tactics. SEO’s make their living manipulating their algorithm, which isn’t in the best interest of their users. There is something that was implemented in late 2003/ early 2004 that was much more time based. Using a great line from “Things to Do When You’re Dead in Denver”…”Give it a name”…call it a filter, call it a penalty, call it the sandbox…the simple fact is if you are a good SEO you will diagnose the problems and get the site up the rankings.

You really have to play the “best practices” to beat the sandbox (and other filters for that matter). I’m often pointing people to your guide to beating the sandbox on WMW [supporters only]. The age type filtering has really made SEO much more complex, and I’m sure personalization implementation will only continue to increase the complexity of learning to rank well on Google.

2) Link building: love doing it or hate doing it?

Link building is a necessary evil. I still love PARTS of link building. It’s exciting when you know you got a very valuable link for next to nothing. I think the low barrier to entry in SEO is what has made it so attractive to people offering the services. That barrier is rising, and link building is getting tougher. Tools are getting better, but it really comes back to personal relationships with other webmasters. I think link building has really become the red headed step child of SEO that most companies don’t want to do anything with except ship off to the neighbors. It’s difficult to put a revenue model around it that is beneficial to both the provider and the consumer. The models that DO work are abused by everyone and ultimately cut off at the base by the big G-monster. It’s great to see the results of link building and that’s what makes it fun. It can be quite disappointing when you put in a ton of time though and don’t see highly tangible results.

Even more than link building now, I enjoy tryin’ to find older sites to purchase more bulk advertising and presell pages from. It’s a little trickier than getting just a plain link, but it’s more worthwhile as well.

3) TrustRank: implemented now, or next year?

I think there are definitely elements of Trustrank in play now which we will only see increase. We all know now that leaving an unattended ballot box is going to result in ballot stuffing. Humans are a better determinate of quality content than artificial intelligence (at this point anyhow), so combining as much carbon based intelligence into the search algorithms as possible would be a priority for the SE’s I think. It would make logical sense that the data Yahoo and Google are mining from personalization will eventually be rolled into the criteria for rankings. The add/block feature on MyWeb 2.0 is about the best spam-reporting feature out there, because Yahoo doesn’t have to pay anyone to use it. It would be silly if they DIDN”T use that data. Of course it can be manipulated by the uber savvy blackhats, but it’s still a step in a good direction for them.

I think Trustrank will start to affect the SEO/SEM community more and more. It will just change the game like so many things in the past have. There will always be best practices for marketing a website and that’s what we will continue to do. Rolling with the changes is part of what makes SEO services valuable. I did an overly dramatic article on Trustrank and personalization that details why I think it will spell the end for a lot of the crappy SEO’s we’ve seen start charging for BS services in the last few years.

4) Will blogs still be “in” next spring?

Ugh. I sometimes cringe at the thought of myself being a “blogger”. Bloggers as a whole are really quite an annoying bunch of blowhards that have become full of themselves because someone actually listened to what they had to say. I think they will be around next spring, and will probably evolve in some way. Chances are they still will be the in thing because I think as a society we like hearing the inside scoop about a company. It’s the whole Cluetrain thing…having an open dialogue with customers is the only way to conduct business effectively these days. Blogs provide a nice form for communication. I blog for a couple reasons…firstly to give away information to people that I think would be valuable when there is no way I can really take them on as a client myself. I want to be helpful to those who are interested in learning for themselves the same way folks at WMW and other forums have helped me to learn so much. The second reason I blog is to have a nice timestamp for when things happen and reference points to go back and use. The last reason would be to communicate ideas and methodology to existing clients. I think all these are valuable and valid reasons beyond just yapping about rehashed news because someone might listen.

It’s pretty easy to skim 50 or 60 blogs in a day if they all only have a couple of posts. The good information will rise to the top of the stack and the way it is presented to users is just kind of a formality I think. Blogs will be probably by “in” on MTV soon which I suppose would make it “out” in our early-adopter type circles. Blogs with information rich content and good value for a reader’s time will be something I’ll be happy to learn from for a long time to come.

5) Sometimes I lie in bed and surf the Web with my laptop sitting on my chest. Do you think this could give me cancer?

Much better your chest than your lap. Gotta watch out for your neck and back….more likely to jack that up lookin’ at a laptop all day and night. Since you’re an internet marketing geek like me I suppose you see the sun about the same as I do so I’m sure it all balances out.

A question for our expert readers: What’s the skinny on .edu links?

My own opinion is that they probably are valued as more important than a “normal” .com, .org or .net link. It may be only a “weak” indicator of quality, but current algo’s seem to be using almost any quality indicator, however weak. That said, I am not sure if the boost is anything spectacular, however it may help a site gain authority in the eyes of a SE (or help it get out of the sandbox).

The question is asked in a WMW thread, Links from student edu pages:

willybfriendly: .edu links are nice, but don’t “rank” differently than any other link.

…

alphacooler: We DO KNOW that .edu links are weighted very heavily with the engines.

What’s the verdict?

I have a treat in store for all three of you regular LBB readers. It’s a new series called the Hyperlink Hot Seat. I have lined up over a gross of SEO experts to answer five quick questions for us (the questions will be different for each Hot Seater, although some may overlap). I’ll post a new edition every friday, or, failing that, whenever I feel like it. Without further adieu, I give you…

Barry Schwartz on the Hyperlink Hot Seat

Barry Schwartz is the President of RustyBrick, Inc., a Web services firm specializing in customized online technology that helps companies decrease costs and increase sales. He also maintains a weblog, SERoundtable, which is both widely read and highly recommended.

1) Directories: helpful link building tool, or in Google’s firing range?

They are possibly the easiest links one can get, aside from paying you guys for them. But recent news from DaveN, SEW Moderator, and someone who should be listened to, says that Google is actually devaluing the links from directories.  I have more information on this at http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/002169.html.  So yes, it is within Googleâs firing range.  Will Google devalue links from well respected directories?  I don’t think so.

2) Autolink: proof that Google is now evil, or blown way out of proportion?

"Do no evil", oh boy is that catch phrase killing the company.  I wonder if they wish they never used that phrase.  From the people I know at Google, they are all very loyal to Google.  They are loyal to Googleâs mission; "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful."  They will do almost anything to make that happen, staying within law.  If that means surfing the forums to spot spammers and then track them down, that is what they will do.  If that means not givin a spammer a reason to why his or her site was banned, then they would do it.  Deep inside, I feel those employees loyal to Google have a strong dislike towards anything that manipulates the results.  Of course, that dislike is felt amongst the SEO community.  I guess you are seeing my point.

Autolink, that is a side issue.  It was a creative idea that blew up.  Happens to all companies that are popular.  Microsoft, Apple and many others had similar issues.  Does one action make a company evil?

3) Folksonomy: useful system, or annoying Web fad?

I donât feel folksonomy, tagging, will go far in search.  You can see it being abused already with Yahoo!âs My Web 2.0 – heck I have even tried to abuse it for fun.  Instead of explaining the issues with it here, Danny Sullivan blogged on it at  http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/050630-101701. Maybe its the next keyword META tag, so maybe I would consider it a Web fad.

4) Is PageRank completely, forever, totally, "6-feet-under" dead?

Mostly, but I don’t think Google would ever completely remove PageRank from its algorithm.  But there is absolutely no way PageRank is as important as it was two years ago.  PageRank is too much a part of Google’s branding for them to kill it, at this point. Plus, in my opinion, I think Google has too much pride to remove it.  That can be a bad thing, but I respect them for it.

5) The Linux logo is a penguin. I think penguins are cute. Do you like penguins?

I am more of a FreeBSD fan than Linux.  So I will have to go with, I think devils are cute. Actually, devils that ear apples.

Presell pages are a link building method that have gradually gained a following. Tto my knowledge, the most visible firm that offers them now is WeBuildPages. A thread at WebmasterWorld, Presell Pages – your experience to date, has some interesting tidbits:

jdancing: I have found pre-sell pages or “content pages” often rank better then the site that is buying the page. Buying a page devoted to your site on a related, well established site is a great way get your website found, especially if you are stuck in the sandbox.

This “fluke” of high ranking presell pages could potentially be a huge advantage for firms in need of reputation management. When a site or service becomes “big enough”, positive and negative comments about that site or service can usually be found in the SERPs when searching for its name. If a positive presell page grabs the #2 spot, rather than a negative review of the service or blog entry of a disgruntled customer, this could have a very positive impact on the conversion rate of potential customers who do brand research before buying.

Pros of Presell Pages (as I see it)

• They provide links from keyword rich pages (and can include deeplinks)
• They provide links in the editorial block, rather than an ad block
• They potentially rank high in the SERPs, thus giving searchers a positive off-site “presell” of your products (and can also push down negative press)

Cons of Presell Pages (as I see it)

• If presell pages are not clearly marked as advertising, this could negatively impact the trust that the publisher conveys to its readers
• They seem to be a bit expensive (of course, it’s all relative–do you sell CD’s or real estate?)

More discussion on presell pages available at Threadwatch and Stuntbubl Internet Marketing Consulting.

Fresh on the heels of our post about how fun link building can be, Stuntdubl IM’d me a video of a very talented link building consultant. I wish I could laugh.

Update: Barry has posted Link Development Support Group at SERoundtable. It’s comforting to know we’re not alone…