One Way Links - They Count No less, AND No More!
by Dirk Johnson
- LinkStrategy.com
It's always something new in world of "linking
theories" on the more famous of the linking discussion boards.
The latest is the new argument that "one-way links", that
is, links that point to your site, but you don't reciprocate, count
*more* than reciropcated links.
The people who are doing the most to promote the
concept that "incoming-only links count more" tend to
be one of three types of people:
- Site owners who earn a lot of one-way links from
legitimate content citations back to their websites. The most vocal
among them post to a lot of discussion boards. Their basic attitude
is "I have mine, good luck getting yours. Let's hope Google
changes to reward *me* even more!". Many of them who post are
quite self-righteous in their positions toward this issue. Content
citations are a great way to get links, especially for "advice"
sites. But it is a very slow process, and it's really not a viable
way to get links for a lot of commercial sites.
- The second set of proponents are people who want
to sell such one way links, either the ad brokers or publishers.
They have a vested interest to talk down reciprocal linking, even
if they have no proof that reciprocated links are less valuable.
There is virtually no proof at this point. Theirs is an entirely
financially-motivated discussion, since reciprocal links are far
less expensive.
- The third set are the SEO-types who are not really
organized enough or have the data management skills to manage multi-client
reciprocal link exchange programs. Doing this work is really a lot
more difficult than it first appears. They don't like having to
do it, and they are tired of seeing their client's competitors beat
them by doing it. Frustration is what drives them.
There is a whole camp of SEO "gurus" who
blast reciprocal linking loudly and often, for those reasons. They
"demand" that Google see things they way they see them.
This is where the "impending doom to reciprocal linking"
articles come from. They talk as if Google is now going to take
advice from the very people who most want to manipulate the results
(namely...them!). In my humble opinion, these people seem to have
lost all sense of their place in the world, especially the ones
who are given a podium at the "big-time" search engine
trade shows. Its's the famous tail-wagging-the-dog syndrome.
Many of these SEOs are actively buying link placements
(text ads, essentially), in order to establish link popularity for
their clients. It's easier for them to do that, but in the end,
it is far more expensive for their clients. Nor is it stable. Once
the client decides to stop paying, the links come down. With directory-to-directory
reciprocal link exchange programs, the links are far more stable.
I see this kind of speculation all over the web.
As of yet, none of it has resulted in any algorithm changes, and
there are a lot of valid reasons why it won't. For one, Google is
well aware of the emerging practice of buying "one-way links".
To punish legitimate reciprocal links would immediately favor this
practice, which would, in turn, cause an even greater stampede toward
it. I seriously doubt that Google wants to foster that scenario.
Second, Google has been extremely successful. To
make a major change, in the form of punishing or negating reciprocal
links, would be a foundation-level change in their algorithm. Actually,
Google has always had the opportunity to do this, and not only did
they not do it, it appears that they went the opposite direction
entirely with the famous "Florida" update of November
2003. In that scenario, I watched closely as the sites with the
most extensive and traditional reciprocal link programs were well-rewarded,
while sites using the highly-touted, limited-in-scope, high-PR based
link programs got sent to the back listings.
I read a lot of this SEO guru stuff related to linking,
and as someone who does this work all day, every day, and has done
it for years, most all of it is notoriously misguided advice that
does not hold water against the extensive, real-life link analysis
work that I do on a regular basis.
Traditional, legitimate, well-managed directory-to-directory
reciprocal link exchange programs have worked well for years, and
they continue to work well. And it is affordable. But it's just
one way of many to earn links.
Granted, situations and algorithms do change, and
this might, too, but not because people in the SEO industry wish
for it. Google has recently rewarded reciprocal linking, not punished
it. That is provable. Speculation to the contrary is not.
Would
you like more detailed information about our services? Please send
an email to djohnson@roiwebsites.com
with your site address and contact information, and we can begin
the process of building a firm quote for our services.
Copyright 2004 Dirk Johnson www.linkstrategy.com
The next page on the tour is:
Pricing
- Our competitive advantage
Find
out about reciprocal linking, the right way....Please
tour our site for a complete review of the benefits,
our unique process, our competitive advantage, industry specific programs and
custom services..
| 
