[font=verdana]A pointless waste of time. Google doesn’t have some mythical “natural link profile” that you need to try to fit. A huge number of websites out there don’t have any “nofollow” links, because the site owner has never tried to splatter spam across the internet, so adding links in just because they are nofollow and you want to build them up to look “natural” is doing you no good at all.
You can’t manipulate Google by playing a numbers game like this. Only Google knows what the rules of the game are, and those rules are changing all the time. You can’t beat them.[/font]
No. Given that <2% of all backlinks on the web are nofollow, your profile looks VERY unnatural if 50% of your backlinks are nofollowed!!!
If you wanna change your link building strategy then first try to remove your all previous spammy or bad backlinks by the help of Google disavow then start your new techniques according to Google’s new algorithm
Why would I want to change what I have been doing for years that is still working just fine. I have no bad links and was never stupid enough to go after them!
There are NO new techniques. The techniques are the same as they have always been and have always worked. What has changed is Google has just got better as detecting the crap that they have been saying do not do for years. Obviously you were doing the crap that they warned about not doing!
I would disagree with that. I think the “rules” have always been the same; what is changing all the time is Google’s ability to detect or enforce those rules is getting better.
I guess that’s a discussion of semantics. In practical terms, what would help you one year might have no effect the next year and then actively damage you the year after. I would count that as “changing the rules”. Yes, the end goal has always been the same, Google hasn’t changed what it is trying to achieve, but we have to recognise that even some strategies that Google advocated back in the early days have changed (although that hasn’t happened for a while) … let alone the things that they never officially suggested but that research showed would work.
Yes, exactly. Make your links follow or nofollow, depending on which is correct for that particular link in that particular situation, not based on some artificially-set percentage.
[/FONT]
i dont really understand how googles work. some times i feel how its work is like mistery! panda? penguin ? its iritating me, so now i will focus on content.
Wow, lot of opinions here. This is what works for ME.
-Websites that provide value to the visitor.
-Content should be clear of what’s going on right away - giving info, selling, etc.
-Unique content (goes without saying, but for the sake of thoroughness)
-Don’t care about “do-follow, no-follow, or up-follow” as it makes no diff. and…
-Backlinks: yes, relevant quality backlinks. Goog cooks the rankings (all their content shows up - g+, youtube, ads above the fold, etc).
In my opinion - 80% they control - the other 20% is artificial intelligence that is wild for which they really have no control over. << more than obvious when you search for stuff.
You should have read my entire response… it is clear that I said:
But if you opt to pass your PR juice to the site you are linking, then feel free to use nothing, I mean if it’s dofollow, leave the link as is without putting dofollow.
So you get it now? Sometimes do not react without reading the whole discussion. Perhaps I am wrong putting rel=“dofollow”, but somehow it’s good for representation… “substance over form”…
SEO strategy is becoming simpler every day because search engines become better at spotting blackhat every day. I am completely convinced that whatever “clever” trick you can still use today to bump your ranking artificially, will soon be killed.
What search engine designers/engineers are striving for, is developing a series of algorithms that are as good at judging a site on its helpful content as a human. Google, as the market leader with huge investment potential, hire the best in the world to do this and improve their product on a day by day basis.
Following from this, is the conclusion that the best long term strategy is to forget to try and outsmart the search engine, and just build websites that are truly useful for the user. An added (very big) bonus of this strategy, is that your click:sale ratio will be far higher than that of a site that is artificially lifted to top positions, but is effectively un unhelpful, spammy site.
I’ve been using this strategy for over a year and found that both Google and Bing rank it quite well, and that the visit:call as well as the call:sale ratios are extremely good.
