SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    143
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Exclamation Pretty nasty slap to high quality links and importance for SERP

    I remember seeing somewhere here a post about the value of backlinks from social networks. It had different opinions, but most of the people agreed that a big portion of these backlinks cannot be regarded as high quality due to:

    - irrelevancy of pages
    - low SEO quality of pages

    I would like to refer to one example which has been disputed on SEO Chat forum and WarriorForum. This example shows how one site, in pretty difficult niche "stock trading" with the help of low quality (in my opinion) irrelevant backlinks from MySpace, MSN social network and other social networks was staying for a month position #1 in Google.com for "stock trading" and now is position #2 for the same phrase.

    The site is there over 2 months against any claims saying "it'll be sandboxed soon" or "this is not for long".

    The site is stocktradingtips.com with 952 inlinks to the entire site according to http://siteexplorer.search.yahoo.com - if you investigate these backlinks you will see typical social network backlinks which are considered by many as low quality backlinks and which are surelly irrelevant to the topic of the site.

    Statement: site with low quality irrelevant oneway backlinks from social networks stays very high for a keyword with tough competition - "stock trading" - for a nice amount of time (over 2 months)

    Personal Conclusion: this does not seem to fit into the Google's picture of relevancy and quality of backlinks are the ultimate importance factors for high SERPs - seems that number + different IPs + anchor text is enough.

    Question: Why? The site survived too long and passed the sandbox, this cannot be a temporarily glitch in algo. But this is against all rules.
    Backlinks inside blog posts + FREE content = Free Traffic System

  2. #2
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy hooperman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    4,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Your analysis seems to be completely discounting the influence of links that aren't from the social bookmarking crowd.

    Also, the alleged 'sandbox' only affects relatively new sites. This site is old.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    143
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by hooperman View Post
    Your analysis seems to be completely discounting the influence of links that aren't from the social bookmarking crowd.
    To be frank, I am not ready to ultimate analysis about this case, because there are too many factors to consider and it's tough to mention them in one post.

    The only thing I can say at the moment is that the vast majority of backlinks is absolutely irrelevant (in my personal opinion) and still they work. SERP in Google for competitive keyword is the best proof.

    Another issue is that this site survived for long on the top (#2 is very close to the top, so let's call it "top" for a while) which is a proof that Google took a serious decision about the SERP of this site; not by mistake. This is not some temporarily issue (by the way, many SEO Chat members thought the would vanish from SERPs shortly - and they took their words back now).

    One more thing - which is a pure hypothetical suggestion of mine and I cannot prove it but this seems to be logical - Google seems to care about the trust of the site. You saw it yourself: the backlinks are the best example of irrelevancy, but just because these are from MySpace and MSN space - it was enough. Perhaps, Google has some trust factor for sites with good reputation, long age of life and SEO value. And backlinks from these sites can do wonders, even if they are nothing but a shameless manipulation.


    Quote Originally Posted by hooperman View Post
    Also, the alleged 'sandbox' only affects relatively new sites. This site is old.
    I was not good at explaining the point. Some think that sandbox is also very close to giving Google some time to unpuzzle cases like this. I agree that this is not the correct interpretation of sandbox, but even for this erroneous interpretation the site is at the top for a too long time to be a tiny glitch in the algo.

    Conclusion: all this makes me feel that - number of one way backlinks + proper anchor + some authority/trust of the pages with backlinks is the ideal formula for successful SERPs. Relevancy and too many links from the same site (dozens from MSN space + dozens from MySpace) is not a priority.
    Backlinks inside blog posts + FREE content = Free Traffic System

  4. #4
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy bigalreturns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The Wirral, England
    Posts
    1,294
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The fact that the vast majority of backlinks are irrelevant proves nothing. Say I have a stock trading site, with 10,000 backlinks. 9,000 of these (the vast majority) are totally irrelevant. However, 1000 of these are relevant, and from well ranked sites. Now take another site related to stock trading. This one has 500 backlinks, of which only 5 are irrelevant. Here only 1% are irrelevant, as compared with 90% for the first site. However, site 1 still has 1000 quality backlinks, compared with 495 quality backlinks for site 2. Which do you think will rank better?
    This just shows that the ratio relevant:irrelevant is meaningless - the absolute number is what counts. Furthemore, there is no way of knowing the complete set of links that Google knows about, so no way of knowing the absolute numbers for any site.

    Most social media links are nofollowed, so are meaningless in terms of ranking. While this doesn't hold true for MySpace/MSNSpace type sites, these links are still very low value. Yes, a link from the root domain myspace.com may be reasonably high powered, but that does not mean every page on MySpace can propel a high link value your way. Not only are they likely to be irrelevant, they are low PR, and typically have large numbers of other outgoing links.
    I personally don't subscribe to the "trust" thing for ranking, but regardless of whether you do or don't, do you really think a user's MySpace is going to be a high trust page? I personally struggle to think of a page I would give lower trust to!

    I realise you're just trying to find explanations for results, but this is a tricky business, and more or less impossible apart from under strictly controlled test conditions. There are so many factors affecting the ranking of your site, of which you are in control of a small proportion. You are aware of the exact nature of even fewer, so to try and make inferences from the ranking of a single site, and the poor information you have regarding its ranking factors is always going to be a futile exercise.
    "The proper function of man is to live - not to exist."
    Get a Free TomTom


  5. #5
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    143
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigalreturns View Post
    I realise you're just trying to find explanations for results, but this is a tricky business, and more or less impossible apart from under strictly controlled test conditions. There are so many factors affecting the ranking of your site, of which you are in control of a small proportion. You are aware of the exact nature of even fewer, so to try and make inferences from the ranking of a single site, and the poor information you have regarding its ranking factors is always going to be a futile exercise.
    Agree, that is why did a post here - to see what others are thinking about this. It is always better to have a scope of opinions to choose from.
    Backlinks inside blog posts + FREE content = Free Traffic System

  6. #6
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy DaveWoods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Derbyshire - UK
    Posts
    2,651
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Also, the number of links is totally irrelevant to SERP's. What you're talking about will relates more to PageRank but as we know, this only has a small bearing on rankings.

    The quality of these links and the anchor text used for these links is much more important. The URL alone should be a good indicator as it's likely that a good proportion of the backlinks are using the URL as it's anchor text which will significantly help the site to rank better than it's competition that doesn't use the anchor text for which you are searching.

    For example, 10 backlinks which use the keyphrase you're searching for with good on page optimization will always outrank any site which doesn't follow these rules, so quantity shouldn't be the criteria you use as it's much more complicated than just counting the number of backlinks

  7. #7
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    143
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by csswiz View Post
    The quality of these links and the anchor text used for these links is much more important.
    When you refer to the quality of backlinks, what factors do you think to be important for it?
    Backlinks inside blog posts + FREE content = Free Traffic System

  8. #8
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy hooperman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    4,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The obvious ones are anchor text, PR of the linking page, what authority/trust the linking page/domain is deemed to have, how related the linking page is. The age of the link probably factors in there somewhere too.

  9. #9
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,770
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    The original poster may have spoken too soon. I can't find stocktradingtips.com in the top 100 search results of Google as of this writing for the search phrase given.

    I did a couple searches on Yahoo then figured I'd try them on Google, then I thought about this thread (I've got insomnia). This is stuff that I search for every now and then. I noticed that Google's search results are getting more and more like Yahoo's. Google is improving.

    As for the original poster's experience ranking high on a very competitive search phrase using only low-quality incoming links, right now I have to take him at his word because I can't find his site anywhere in the top 100. But if what he says is true, then I would chalk it up to one of the many peculiarities and oddities that is Google.

  10. #10
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    143
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by cheesedude View Post
    As for the original poster's experience ranking high on a very competitive search phrase using only low-quality incoming links, right now I have to take him at his word because I can't find his site anywhere in the top 100. But if what he says is true, then I would chalk it up to one of the many peculiarities and oddities that is Google.
    Most probably you think that it was MY site - not correct. Thought I would not be against extra traffic for that keyword

    BUT, you are absolutely right when you say that from some USA IPs the site has gone out of 1st, 2nd and close to them pages of Google.com - from some IPs it is still there. For example try anonymouse.org as proxy - the site is still there. By the way, the same discussion for SEO Chat forum members: some of them see the site, others not.

    However, if the site was just kicked from USA IPs in Google.com searches, then I think this is the beginning of it being kicked off from the rest of the IPs with time.

    Ok, let's see what happens. Maybe it was too early to say something. Though over 2 months is more than enough to get sandbox. Let's see how long it survives before gets out completely.
    Backlinks inside blog posts + FREE content = Free Traffic System

  11. #11
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,770
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by besttools View Post
    BUT, you are absolutely right when you say that from some USA IPs the site has gone out of 1st, 2nd and close to them pages of Google.com - from some IPs it is still there. For example try anonymouse.org as proxy - the site is still there. By the way, the same discussion for SEO Chat forum members: some of them see the site, others not.
    You are correct. Using a non American http proxy (Germany, I think the one you recommended is from) stocktradingtips.com is the #1 spot for the search phrase "stock trading" (no quotes).

    If someone was able to do something like that consistently, well, it would be quite valuable, I'm sure.

  12. #12
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    143
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    To be frank I am suprised that the site survided over 2 month at the top of Google for that keyword. That is too long.

    Yes, it looks like Google "deciphered" the site, maybe even because of the attention plugged to this case from SEOChat forum, Warrior Forum and this forum.

    Still, for those who are looking for temporarily success - this is a solution. Those who think about long term matters must be more careful.
    Backlinks inside blog posts + FREE content = Free Traffic System


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •