Your source for quality links resources, here we would like to provide you articles regarding quality links, so keep visiting for new articles. We try to provide you best articles for quality links.
I have to admit I almost gag every time I read a forum discussion that starts out with a variation on the following: I have a (insert topic here) Web site with a couple hundred quality links. The site is (insert number of months) months old but it still seems to be sandboxed. My competitors all have (insert some number here) backlinks and their pages are (spammy/unprofessional/incomplete/duplicate content/icky). But they rank higher than me. Why is that?Yeah, that's a tough one. I've seen people blithely reply, "Keep building links. You'll get there."
Sorry. That dog won't hunt. Most recently, someone wrote a similar post to a mailing list. The "keep building links" replies morphed into "buy my link services" replies. When I looked at the site's backlink structure, I found over 700 URLs.
There is something seriously wrong if a site with 700 inbound links cannot get even a semi-decent ranking on Yahoo! or Google. This was not a real estate or travel site. It was a site for a very obscure, one-off topic. There is some competitive content out there, but just about anyone with a smidgen of knowledge about how to design a page should have been able to leverage that linkage into something useful. I look at Web sites every day that do more with fewer than 100 links than this particular site had accomplished.
So, what's the difference between site A's 700+ links and site B's less than 100 links? I can see hands shooting up across the map. We all know the answer. All together now, let's chant the holey mantra of "Quality Links! Quality Links!" If someone hasn't come up with a linking service called Quality Links Express, they soon will.
To borrow a line from Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, "Hitler wants to conquer the world. I say, 'let him'. Me, I want the (holy) grail itself". Admittedly, I'm quoting a bad guy who dies an unpleasant death. But my point is, there's a sucker born every minute.
I mean, if people want to spend money on links, I say, 'let them'. Me, I want the High Quality Links.
In my opinion, there are three and only three types of high quality links. Everything else is just fluff (useful fluff in some cases, but not high quality). The expression "high quality" implies that most links won't have similar quality. But people don't look at the meaning of the words in the cool expressions they pick up and repeat. They just like the way things sound and start speaking about "quality links". Except "quality links" is a meaningless phrase, whereas High Quality Links means something special.
You can divide all High Quality Links into three categories: Yahoo! Class, CNN Class, and Business Class.
Yahoo! Class Links: Yahoo! still operates a directory, I hear. Most of the links are commercial links, which means they are paid links, but supposedly they still help. Why is that? Probably because Yahoo! has been known to take people's money and not list them anyway. They warn you explicitly, "Paying us an outrageous fee does not guarantee you will be listed" (my wording -- they may actually say something else on their site -- see Yahoo! for full details). So, Yahoo! may be showing lots of bought links, but they are editorially selected bought links. That's called editorial control.
DMOZ operates a directory, too. DMOZ listings are currently free, may always be free, but the most common complaint about DMOZ is that it's so hard to get in and once you do get in you have virtually no control over how your listing looks. Hey, that sounds like editorial control.
SmartPages. SmartPages. You heard me. SmartPages. The service is designed for brick-and-mortar businesses with Web sites. It's not a Web directory and therefore it provides some filtration. It's selective. That sounds like a form of editorial control. In fact, MSN recently announced they were going to drive their local search with SmartPages.
So, what's the common factor to Yahoo! Class Links? Editorial control. (Your mileage may vary.)
CNN Class Links: CNN, ABC News, MSNBC, Fox News, the BBC, and many other news organizations all cross-promote their sister companies, but they also sell advertising. Nonetheless, many news organizations embed unfiltered links in their body copy.
What's the common factor to CNN Class Links? Editorial control. (Your mileage may vary.)
I don't care what universe you're from; when you're hunting links, that's gotta hurt. So let me make this as painfully obvious as possible. The third class of links, Business Class, hurts even more.
Business Class Links: Many of these links are bought and paid for, you just don't pay for them directly (or solely). Think of any professional organization. Think of your local chamber of commerce. Think of the government Web site that lists all the vetted contractors. Yes, your tax dollars are busy at work paying for links to business Web sites.
Of course, these sites won't link to just anyone. They'll only link to bona fide members or professionally certified or accredited organizations' Web sites. That sort of excludes most of the online retail store Web sites, doesn't it? The people trying the hardest to make money off the Internet (and there are a fair few who make in excess of $100,000 US per year) don't waste their time going for quality links. They know they won't get them.
Well, that's not entirely accurate. The directory sites often have categories for online stores, Internet resellers, etc. There is no reason not to get those kinds of links. But the next time you're out link-hunting, be absolutely sure you're about to shoot a deer and not poor Harry Beaton. That is, if you want a Yahoo! Class Link, you will only get it from a directory that is about as selective as Yahoo!. It doesn't matter if they take your money. What matters is if they exercise editorial control.
So, finally, what have we learned that helps us identify truly High Quality Links? They all have editorial control.
How much value do you personally place by a directory that accepts links from anyone?
How much value do you personally place in all those self-promotional articles you find at the various submit-it-yourself article distribution services?
The point is, if you don't trust the source of your links for your own surfing, that's a pretty good indication of what kind of quality you're getting with your backlinks. High Quality Links are not easy to get. They may indeed cost you money, but they aren't priced on the basis of PR. They are priced on the basis of a business model that doesn't take search engine placement into consideration.
Bottom line: If what you're doing really works, you'll never ask for help in a forum. Not ever. If what you're doing doesn't work, you can save yourself time and humiliation by realizing that continuing to do more of the same isn't going to change anything.
This is not an argument against link building. We all need to capture inbound links. Just have sense enough to realize that if you have 700+ links after a year and still aren't beating out the competition in the search results, getting another 700+ worthless links won't solve your problem. You can have your "quality links". I don't want 'em.
So, there you have it. And be glad that Rand only wants me to blog. I don't have time to write an article-length discussion on "link quality".