This article has a sequel: Top Perpetual Links Part II: “Burning” Topics.
Practical optimizers for several years already know one simple truth - the mass purchase of reference mass (the so-called "linkbombing") does not give any more guaranteed results in natural issuance. It was a little more concerned with Yandex (since the beginning of the MatrixNet era), a little less than Google, although the Penguin algorithm introduced at the end of April 2012 put everything in its place, and now Google has a link the mass as such is not an absolute blessing: it can both help your site and significantly harm.
Let's look at what the links are at this time (summer 2012) and what is their true role in promoting websites.A small educational program for an unprepared audience. You can skip this paragraph if you are a search engine marketing expert. Reference ranking played a pivotal role in the search results in the zero years of this century. The principles of ranking large data arrays are actually many. At the time, the creators of Google, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, relied on the principle of reference ranking. Natives of the university environment (Brin studied at the University of Maryland, Paige - in Michigan and Stanford), they borrowed the principle of assessing the significance of documents adopted in the university environment - the more authors refer to one or another document, the higher its authority. If you transfer it to the Internet, then the principle of link ranking is described very simply: the more links to your site from other sites, the higher the degree of trust in your resource from the search engines. As a result of using the principle of reference ranking, Google’s issue turned out to be better, more relevant to user queries than the output of other search engines (let's not forget that at the time Google started, there were already market leaders, and it seemed that they couldn’t be "moved" - AltaVista, etc.). Along with Google, the first Russian search engines, Rambler, and a little later, Yandex, built their algorithms on the principles of link ranking.
The role of links is constantly changing. The obvious advantage of using the principle of reference ranking - the quality and relevance of the issue, turned the reverse side for search engines - ease of manipulation and, as a result, pressure on all kinds of "optimizers" and "improvers" of sites (in fact, air vendors, whose modest skills were perceived by an uninformed public magic and magic). The fight against "unnatural" links has always been conducted, since the very moment of the appearance of search engines using the principle of reference ranking. The algorithms of such systems have constantly been modified and evolved, and the main reason for these innovations has always been the need to level the weight of "unnatural" links.
Let's summarize everything that we know about the role of links by the summer of 2012:
- not all links are taken into account by search engines;
- and those that are taken into account, can not only help your site, but also significantly damage;
- Search engines are financially interested, in order to predict the issue was extremely difficult, so none of the ranking factors (including reference) will never prevail over the others.
Does this mean that you need to abandon the building of the correct link building policy?
There are two points of view on this question, let's look at both in detail.
Point of view of search engines: Any link building, in essence, is an attempt to manipulate search results, we will resist this, improving our algorithms so that links obtained in an unnatural way are not included in the ranking of sites.
Good and balanced position. But there is only one “but”: there is no clear demarcation line separating the “natural” links from the “unnatural” ones. To this question we will return a little lower.
The point of view of site owners and optimizers: since the principle of link rankings is to some extent present in the algorithms of search engines, we are forced to think about the policy of building the external link mass, regardless of whether Yandex, Google and others like it or not.
The position of the SEO community may seem somewhat pompous - well, what a thing it would be for the search engines, what the webmasters, promoters and other optimizers think. But in fact, search engines are in a stalemate position, and, therefore, in a deliberately weaker one. Well, in fact, they can make sites that, when link building, adhere to elementary rules of hygiene (it is clear that those who do not adhere to them can be dealt with toughly)? Exclude them from the issue? Pessimize? Do not tell me - this is a large part of the highest quality Internet resources on the network. Having let these sites under sanctions, search engines will lose significantly more than the lost profits of Yandex.Direct - they will lose the loyalty of a multi-million audience, which, for all its conservatism, will begin to “change” in large quantities to other search engines that are not satisfied with the quality of the issue.
Links - to be! But how? Our position is only "eternal"!
You need to understand that links are the essence of the Internet, which, in turn, is hypertext. Internet without them is impossible. Slightly above, we touched upon the topic of elementary hygiene, which insures site owners against possible sanctions by search engines. Let's talk about them in more detail.
- Do not buy links en masse to large budgets - never under any circumstances. The number of reference mass does not play a serious role, the role is played only by their quality. So, cheap rented links from the TOS is a road to nowhere (TOS is a term that has become widely used even by yandexoids, literally from Lower Saxon, literally means "site-radish" - ok, I admit, a bad joke, TOS - and this term is really there is - it's just a "govnosayt" - more concise, is not it?). True, there is one "but" that is in force today: do not buy in bulk links from the GE if you do not know how to do this and you do not have much experience in this field.
- And it’s better not to rent links at all! This is a needle addict with all the consequences. We repeatedly observed a situation when a client came to us, sitting tightly on Sapa, Console or Hands (types of “heroin” among optimizers and website owners) with a reference budget of tens or even hundreds of thousands of rubles a month. Drug spending was comparable to the profit from the entire project. No, well, can you imagine? In short: the traffic path will be less, but you get off the needle (health is more important!).
- Get links from quality relevant resources, sorry for platitudes. I use the verb "get", but do not buy. Do it by any means - begging for alms, for barter (better for a bag of potatoes, and not for a bash line exchange bash), bribe webmasters or pay for the placement to site owners. You can even take hostage a member of the family of the owner of a good site. No, however, it will be too much.
Well, in general, you understand, you need to get the links, regardless of how the search engines relate to this. Another thing that you need to remember is that the link is different. And it is better if it will be "eternal", that is, without a monthly subscription fee.
Now, how do we get the "eternal" links we.
- It's really simple. We create content. Desirable interesting. We have full-time copywriters, editors, proofreaders. We, like it or not, are Russia's largest agency generating texts on an industrial scale. I will not speak about the quality of our content, it is measured by backlinks. The number of backlinks to the sites of our clients is large, and significantly exceeds the average temperature in the hospital.
- The second point I voiced ... again the content. You do not understand the content is really more important than it seems to you. Good content will provide you with the most important in terms of search links - links, recommendations from living people. This is especially important for the media. People refer to texts that they find useful / interesting / necessary for someone else.
- The third point: the exchange, placing the "eternal" links. We do not recommend using them unless you have the proper qualifications. What is needed for this? You must be able to create again interesting articles. Some that will happily host sites, those that will be read by people, those that are potentially able to give additional referrals, besides our purely personal affairs.
There must be a final point. Above, we wrote that no demarcation line exists: here the link is “natural”, but here it is not. Yes, there are obvious signs of unnatural links. But there are no signs of natural links. And therefore - put a link to this article, if you liked it, click likes, retweet.
And by the way, you can send me a friend here: //www.facebook.com/denissaveljev