It’s been the case for so long that to even bring it up in a post seems trivial.
Yet, despite everything it seems that new and intermediate marketers never quite stop falling for this SEO trap.
“Hundreds Of High PR Links For $29″
“Get Thousands Of ONE WAY Links To YOUR Website”
Sound familiar? That thinking is the trap.
People get so worked up doing everything they can to get as MANY links as possible to their sites as possible, confident that if they can only get enough links, they’ll be guaranteed rankings.
Despite how widespread that notion is, it’s simply not true. Great SEOs have told us for a long time that it’s the QUALITY of links that counts, not the quantity.
“A small number of the most high quality most targeted, authoritative and relevant links will do more for your rankings than 1000 crappy, irrelevant links.“
I can think of at least 3 ways this thinking is not only unhelpful, but alot of times downright dangerous for your sites and your rankings.
1. It’s a waste of time. Why build 1000 links when you can get the same results building an awesome 10? Even if you’re using an automatic submitter for the 1000 and emailing the 10 people manually it’ll probably STILL take you less time. Why do things the hard way? Haven’t we got enough work to do?
2. It’s a recipe for come and go search rankings. If Google can see your links growing disproportionately to your traffic, you’ll look unnatural and may be penalized. So why risk penalty for a technique that’s wasting your time anyway?
3. “Link Only” Links. All these links, whether they’re from social bookmarking sites, directories, “hubs”, network profile sites, or plain old link directories on some random blog… they’re all “link only” links. They provide a link and it might boost your search rankings after time, but you’re not going to see a visitor from it. For pretty near the same effort you can get links in ways that can bring traffic AND a link… and a better link at that…
A content trade, a guest post, a sponsored link, there’s a big list of ways to get “traffic AND link” links that might be worth putting into your marketing arsenal. I’m not saying those other kinds of links are worthless, all have their place, they all help, but their NUMBER is not to be obsessed over.
Finally, to seal the deal, we have to talk about that all important factor of relationships.
If you’re only focusing on that mass form of link building… where are your relationships? In the same amount of time you spent submitting to 1000 social bookmarking sites, you could have started relationships with 3 or 4 highly authoritative websites in your market that could provide links and traffic to your sites FOR LIFE. Not to mention partnerships, joint ventures, revenue swaps, and so many more opportunities for revenue it’ll make your head spin!
Bottom line, don’t get caught up on the numbers with your link building. Build quality links, build the RIGHT links and you’ll save time and money on your journey towards bigger online profits.
Post to Facebook
Share on Twitter
Digg This Article
Save on del.icio.us
Hi,
Yes, I agree with your article. The idea of quickly having thousands of backlinks to your website is un-natural. It’ll be obvious to Google that you’re gaming the system. It isn’t worth the risk. It would be better to pay someone a few dollars to research say, 30 high quality linking sites, on a monthly basis. Then, you take the time to manually submit the link info to those sites. That’s better quality, for sure.
Hey Andrew, I agree with you about getting links that are based on some
kind of relationship, the links I get as a bonus to commenting on an
interesting post, not as a reason to comment!
Relating to that subject I’ve got to say that although I usually like the stuff Josh Spaulding publishes I am not interested in the deeplinking offer at all..
Fran
From things I’ve read the type of keyword can influence the type of backlinks you look for. If it’s a low competition keyword a few low end links might be enough to achieve your goals.
As you mention, the effectiveness gets lost in these mass linking methods as more people pile in.
I’m a newbie to internet marketing, however, my experience of having too many links, and especially in the wrong place seems to have reduced my google ranking. With only around 5 well placed links I got to number 4 in the top 10 google ranks. I have very poor key words in my site along with a heap of other wrong doing.
In-spite of this, just typing in paranormal mind, it came up trumps for getting into top ten, and it stayed there for months. After adding unhelpful links in many other sites I got knocked of the google radar. It has recovered a little with some random tweaking. With a bit of committed learning from here on this site, I’ll lose my blindfold.
Allan
Yes I got those sales pitches and I ignored them because:
A. I do not feel I can afford the service
B. Maybe more importantly I never believed the advertisements.
You make me feel like I might actually be learning something.
Thanks for the info, good article.
I agree, link building should be about quality and not quantity.
i never fall for those link farms out there. they are garbage.
completely agree with you. Relevant links mean relevant traffics as well, and we can get better conversion rate by doing so
It also depends on what niche you are in. If you are in a niche like foot fungus you aren’t going to find too many authority sites in that niche and the few that are there definitely aren’t going to link out to an adsense/affiliate site.
Excellent article, Andrew. Agree totally. Quality links are a much better investment of time, than a bunch of free-for-all links.
You’ve just clarified a lot of things I’ve been considering over the past few weeks Andrew. I just LOVE your phrase “link only links” – it seems to sum up the link building industry of software submissions and link packets and all the other total idiocy that reaches it’s summit with most people equating SEO with “link building”.
Ugh!
I would even go a little further than you have done and say that “link building” is in itself totally worthless!
Let me illustrate that point like this. If make a post at a forum or even make a comment in one of my favorite blogs I see people visiting my blog soon after. That is not a “link only link”, because it brings visitors as well. The same is true for article marketing.
My general view is to “link” for traffic and ignore link only links.
A couple of things before I shut up…
I love the irony of people making 1000 SOCIAL bookmarks when they have no relationships with the communities they are bookmarking.
Finally thanks for your comment about Google seeing a mismatch between your links and your traffic – that’s a real eye opener.
Keep ‘em coming Andrew
Alex
Hi Andrew,
There’s quite a big business offering sites that allow backlinks (Angela’s Packets, Joe Finn, etc). It is not a trivial matter to set up those links – register, confirm, add the link – are you saying this activity is largely a waste of time?
Hey Andrew,
Fairly new to link-building and SEO and the sort. Josh Spaulding has just released his Deep Linker Pro that you’ve provided a testimonial for. Josh puts out some quality work with all of his reports, so I am sure he’s put out a top product here.
With your article hitting home the point about quality links are better than a large quantity of links, where does Deep Linker Pro fit into the picture? Is it that DLP creates a large quantity of web directory links that are considered quality, and thats why you endorse the product?
Kieran
I totally agree with you that a smaller number of more powerful links is the way to go. Some years ago I managed to get a content site listed in DMOZ and the Yahoo directory and the rankings (and traffic) literally took off. Due to the link juice, and the small niche I was in, I bascially appeared for virtually any keyword phrase you typed in. Infact, I would do use Google for research when wrigint articles and kept on finding my own site! It’s defintely worth creating quality content and then getting high quality links IMO.
Well said, Andrew. It is so time consuming to build link after link in the quest for numbers, only to see your SERP position hold steady or uptick slightly. I’ve received HUGE bumps (10-20 positions or more) from a handful of high PR, relevant anchored links – for far less time invested.
Best,
Scott
OK, you are confusing me! If you are so against auto Link builders why do give such an enthusiastic,glowing testimonial to Josh Spaulding’s Deep Linker Pro?
Thanks for this great eye opening post, Andrew. This post had change my mind from getting many low quality links to few high quality links to my site.
I too am very curious about what DaleM is asking: (quote) If you are so against auto Link builders why do give such an enthusiastic,glowing testimonial to Josh Spaulding’s Deep Linker Pro? (unquote)
Tell me, please…did I make a mistake in purchasing Josh’s software?
@DaleM
you r right man,…. it’s like negating his own self. But what to do Andrew has to earn affiliate commission too.
Hey Kids,
Glad this point came up, so allow me to clarify
What I was really protesting in this post was people’s
“obsession” with the numbers of links they have and their
lack of obsession with link building methods that can
be the most vital to their success.
I specifically said:
“I’m not saying those other kinds of links are worthless, all have their place, they all help, but their NUMBER is not to be obsessed over.”
Really, you need both kinds of links. Links like this from directory
submissions, particularly when they can be automated, do have value.
They can help establishing domain authority, increase flow of pagerank,
and establish credibility, as well as, help you to rank more easily for
super long tail keywords.
They just need to be focused on in order of their importance
which I argue is NOT as high, as links like those from article
marketing, content trades, and link partnerships.
Hope this clarifies.
Andrew
Glad you cleared that up. So do you feel investing in Deep Linker Pro is worth it?
I do William. It’s an extremely low one off investment for what it does and definitely worth it’s weight many times over.
What a relief to read something I’ve started to suspect for some time. Thank you for some very sound advice.
Backlinks have always been a mystery to me, mainly because I couldn’t understand how the smart folks at Google and other search engines could be fooled by hundreds of total junk links. So I guess you’re confirming what I always suspected, junk links are just that, junk. Good information on a very confusing subject.
great posting, you’re right so many people get this part wrong!
thanks Andrew, i really appreciate your commitment!
Eric
Well said. I’ve been trying to figure out this backlink stuff for months. You’ve made it very clear. Thanks for the great insights and for posting this just when I needed it!
Andrew, about a week after making this post you promoted a deep-link directory submission software, which at the time I did not need. However, I’ve found myself in a situation in which it would be EXTREMELY helpful, but for the life of me I cannot find that email. Any chance you could remind me/us what that piece of software was and provide a link?
Much appreciated.