Jump to content
RealEcon

Opinions On Why Backlinks Have Such Uneven Effects On Rankings Now

Recommended Posts

Working on an SEO product/service right now and getting closer to launch. Im now wondering what peoples opinions are regarding whats up with backlinks?

I mean so many people getting such mixed results regarding backinks and rankings, why is this?

Is it do to: link platform type, link velocity, spun content, dupe content, links coming from unrelated niches, nofollow, dofollow, homepages, PR, age???

Whats the foundational reason so many people have had such problems with backlinking/rankings, that many have scaled back or even given up on SEO?

Would like to get some ideas from people that have been through the trenches in 2012, and have really analyzed backlink/ranking results well.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't start dropping commercial keyword anchor text right away. Its too easy to get flagged as spam. You need to build trust first. Start with non commercials and you wont Google dance so much. Watch your anchor text percantage. Slow and steady wins the race. Backlink your backlinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working on an SEO product/service right now and getting closer to launch. Im now wondering what peoples opinions are regarding whats up with backlinks?

I mean so many people getting such mixed results regarding backinks and rankings, why is this?

Is it do to: link platform type, link velocity, spun content, dupe content, links coming from unrelated niches, nofollow, dofollow, homepages, PR, age???

Whats the foundational reason so many people have had such problems with backlinking/rankings, that many have scaled back or even given up on SEO?

Would like to get some ideas from people that have been through the trenches in 2012, and have really analyzed backlink/ranking results well.

Thanks.

All of the above. There is no one answer why different people suck at getting sites ranked. There are lots of ways to go wrong and different people get different factors or combination of factors wrong.

If I had to pick two factors that doom the most newbies it would be a lack of or faulty keyword research so they end up going after keywords that are too tough for their skill set and not taking the time to learn all the necessary skills themselves before farming out the work to others.

This leads them to waste time, energy and money on niches they are not going to be able to make money on and unable to accurately judge the workers they pay to do their seo work for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys. Yeah, I dont know.

Im still testing and putting things together, but It seems like there are some really big things that we all have been missing. I mean why do some sites rank great with no backlinks (even with brand new domains). Why do blog nets work so great for some people. But other people are using high quality article directories like Ezinearticles to rank? I even see some sites ranking with link directory links.

Has Google just made things so random that everyones ranking situation is going to be unique from each other from now on? Or is there something else going on (that a few people know about, and are not openly sharing)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally speaking I have found more of my new sites do far better than pre-penguin, but my approach is completely different. For example, I love high PR links (and always will), but I have sites ranking for ridiculous terms with nothing more than links from a variety of platforms with no PR. I mean go figure. That stuff isn't supposed to happen.

Then I have a site just a few weeks ago that tanked for absolutely no reason. Same approach, far less competition, and it bombed. Leaving that aside, I have had outstanding results with brand new domains, and what I'm doing different is tiers, highly varied anchors, and a lot less direct links to the moneysite. And I'm skipping my love-fest with high PR, at least for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working on an SEO product/service right now and getting closer to launch. Im now wondering what peoples opinions are regarding whats up with backlinks?

I mean so many people getting such mixed results regarding backinks and rankings, why is this?

Is it do to: link platform type, link velocity, spun content, dupe content, links coming from unrelated niches, nofollow, dofollow, homepages, PR, age???

Whats the foundational reason so many people have had such problems with backlinking/rankings, that many have scaled back or even given up on SEO?

Would like to get some ideas from people that have been through the trenches in 2012, and have really analyzed backlink/ranking results well.

Thanks.

Stop focusing solely on links. While backlinks are still the king of rankings - they aren't the end-all-be all factors anymore. Link quality also plays a much bigger role (quality can be interpreted many ways). And obviously on-page factors that worked 2-3 years ago are site suicide now. Although it's still FAR from perfect, Google's algorithm is much better at taking a snapshot of your entire site (qualify of backlinks, website, social, non-linked citations/mentions, etc) and ranking your site accordingly.

It's a lot harder nowadays to trick Google into thinking your site is quality just through pure backlinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If u do onpage right, backlinks matters by far the most and social now helps rank a site

If u put risky links like blog posts tier one and google catches u, it makes your site impossible to rank well

Seo in 2013 has more onpage pitfalls, but link building is no harder than 2010 if u avoid spam targets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not tried synnd, as seems rip off, but we've had good luck with cheap fiverr packs like pinterest pins, digg votes, stumbles, re tweets where I have seen rankings go up in next 2 to 3 days after ordering

Sure only works for clean backlink sites and not penalized sites with aln links

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, will check it out. The only reason that i tried out synnd is because they claim each of the account is aged and made from different ips. This is supposely a lot higher quality than the ones from the fiverr vendors.

I've not tried synnd, as seems rip off, but we've had good luck with cheap fiverr packs like pinterest pins, digg votes, stumbles, re tweets where I have seen rankings go up in next 2 to 3 days after ordering

Sure only works for clean backlink sites and not penalized sites with aln links

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop focusing solely on links. While backlinks are still the king of rankings - they aren't the end-all-be all factors anymore. Link quality also plays a much bigger role (quality can be interpreted many ways). And obviously on-page factors that worked 2-3 years ago are site suicide now. Although it's still FAR from perfect, Google's algorithm is much better at taking a snapshot of your entire site (qualify of backlinks, website, social, non-linked citations/mentions, etc) and ranking your site accordingly.

It's a lot harder nowadays to trick Google into thinking your site is quality just through pure backlinks.

If u do onpage right, backlinks matters by far the most and social now helps rank a site

If u put risky links like blog posts tier one and google catches u, it makes your site impossible to rank well

Seo in 2013 has more onpage pitfalls, but link building is no harder than 2010 if u avoid spam targets

You guys are really getting at what I want to know.

I think the key thing to focus on is "Onpage".

Does it not seem like if you get certain onpage things correct, that you almost rank on your own without backlinks?

I wonder what would cause this kind of behavior?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the things mentioned by you matter. But what I have observed over a period of time, If you maintain your link velocity ( dont ask me whats that :) ) and keep on building links with good PR site it gonaa help you a lot....Though there's nothing which can replace original content but I see people with lots of duplicate content getting ranked...good in SERP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the things mentioned by you matter. But what I have observed over a period of time, If you maintain your link velocity ( dont ask me whats that :) ) and keep on building links with good PR site it gonaa help you a lot....Though there's nothing which can replace original content but I see people with lots of duplicate content getting ranked...good in SERP

Im glad you mentioned that it seems like there is a lot of duplicate content ranking in the serps. So we are back to "Onpage" issues.

Why is duplicate content ranking in the serps?

I have actually seen scraped wikipedia pages on a new domain, with no backlinks, ranking in the serps. I dont believe this is a random ranking issue with the algo. Just like I dont think its random that Matt Cutts came out and said Press Release links wont help with rankings.

All of these strange things are tied together. And when examined together show a pattern. And it always leads back to Onpage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A simple change we did that made a huge difference within a week was switching out from a normal HTML/PHP website to Wordpress. Which was easier for me to play with the onsite SEO. So I redid a lot of the pages, changed the SEO per what I have read is optimum, set the SEO for images we use, and we started ranking higher for keywords I was going for. After that happened we have been getting more new client calls for our real life business. I think only spamming everything is not the right way to go about SEO. You have to have real stuff out there.

I do try to write some type of blog post once a week with some pictures, to let clients know that we are still in business. I really just try to talk about whatever I am seeing for the week with a random project and slowly but surely we have been ranking for a lot of keywords I didn't even know we were. It never felt like there was a get ranked high very quickly type of way to do things, but I figured if I just kept doing what I was doing eventually it would look pretty normal. Which it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A simple change we did that made a huge difference within a week was switching out from a normal HTML/PHP website to Wordpress. Which was easier for me to play with the onsite SEO. So I redid a lot of the pages, changed the SEO per what I have read is optimum, set the SEO for images we use, and we started ranking higher for keywords I was going for. After that happened we have been getting more new client calls for our real life business. I think only spamming everything is not the right way to go about SEO. You have to have real stuff out there.

I do try to write some type of blog post once a week with some pictures, to let clients know that we are still in business. I really just try to talk about whatever I am seeing for the week with a random project and slowly but surely we have been ranking for a lot of keywords I didn't even know we were. It never felt like there was a get ranked high very quickly type of way to do things, but I figured if I just kept doing what I was doing eventually it would look pretty normal. Which it does.

 

Yeah, you are right man. Something about the way you can set up a CMS like WP,  allows the spiders to understand sites better with the current algo. 

 

Also in regards to WP, if you have a penguinized site that has well written content, and is fairly well siloed, with optimized meta info, you can actually move the site to a new clean domain and it will start ranking quite well after a couple days.

 

Another example of rankings happening without backlinks. 

 

Once we all understand what is going on here, SEO is going to get a lot easier and a lot more effective for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read most of your comments here and on other threads. 

 

When "starting new with SEO" there are tons to consider, but this is what I'm seeing as correlations:

 

1. Doing old-school medium quality links (articles, web 2.0s, bookmarks, wikis) with large diversity
2. Using a underpromoted network 

3. With a brand that is 2-3 y/o site, with tons of pages (Ecom site) and large base on FB, some on twitter and YT vids

 

 With the above I was able togo from not in the top 100-250 for a keyword to #1 in about 98-99 days. Basically, 3 months.

 

 Now, with that said it had a lot going for it and the onpage was tweaked, but I didn't have the on-site nearly as tight: no homepage internal link, alt text could be better. 
 
 But, I did edit the title, re-write the description, add content and h tags, etc. 

 

 (Noted: They also had a PPC campaign. Not saying it helps with SEO, but if you want a page crawled fast, nothing better than setting up a small 1-2 day campaign for Google to crawl the page because they have to establish QS and onpage relevance is important.)
 
 (Another Note: The on-site metrics for Bounce rate, time on site, pages viewed, had increased doing that time frame as well with good Conversaion Rate Optimization/Design changes)

 With newer sites that grow e-com and grow both with Social and SEO, a little PPC, and CRO, etc I'll get back to on it because I've launched a site and am optimizing it without all the pros the other site had. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be honest, I do sometimes wonder if there's just one giant machine at Google HQ that decides where sites go in the ranking by tossing a massive coin. However, there are definitely patterns and I think when you get things that fall outside that pattern they're just exceptions to the rule. It's hard to trick the algorithm when you don't know exactly what is in there. What seems clear is that good content plus good backlinking plus good onpage SEO gives you the best chance of ranking high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you guys are right about good content being important. I would say if people really took a long hard look at content, they wouldnt have to think so much about "backlinks". 

 

In my opinion I dont think many fully understand what Google is doing with content in combination with G+ authorship. Its pretty huge, when you look at the big picture.

 

If you found the right content and G+ authorship combination, backlinks would be the last thing you would have to think about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working on an SEO product/service right now and getting closer to launch. Im now wondering what peoples opinions are regarding whats up with backlinks?

I mean so many people getting such mixed results regarding backinks and rankings, why is this?

Is it do to: link platform type, link velocity, spun content, dupe content, links coming from unrelated niches, nofollow, dofollow, homepages, PR, age???

Whats the foundational reason so many people have had such problems with backlinking/rankings, that many have scaled back or even given up on SEO?

Would like to get some ideas from people that have been through the trenches in 2012, and have really analyzed backlink/ranking results well.

Thanks.

 

SEO should just be part of the traffic model, especially now. You never know when the dial is going to be turned so building lists and tapping into other traffic sources is a must. Also, using the link building strategies you mentioned above can have mixed results with each new website. Having SEVERAL websites in your biggest money making niches can really help. Sometimes it just doesn't make sense and one will rank really well and the other just won't rank (or hold its rankings) using the exact same link building strategies. Continually building new websites for the same niches (and even keywords) really helps with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×