Nice share.. I read this when it came out... but something that is not clear about what they say is their definition of 'quality'.
They talk about using niche specific 'quality' directories to get links, but as one commenter pointed out, how do you determine if its a good quality directory vs no good. If they offer paid submission, does that count as a paid link which the repeat again in that article as a no no?
As others pointed out, the forum route gives you lots of nofollow links, and to play by Googles rules/word, those are useless (most of you know by now I don't agree with that, but lets take what Google says for what it says analysing this peice of info
).
If you took their recommendations to heart. You would basically end up with a bunch of links that are low in value overall and wouldn't get you anywhere in rankings. They seem to suggest that people will link to you if you are good, but the fact is, people linking to sites accounts for a very very low % of the total number of linkers out there. They know this. It's a statistical fact. Their article even said that any impact some creative content that gets linked to a lot (ie linkbait) won't last for long, so don't count on it. If you wish on a star though, some how, with a pinch of ferry dust, you will get others linking to you. C'mon. Do you do this? I don't! If I find something I will pass it in an IM to a friend, doesn't mean I will put a link up on one of my sites for it. Sure I have posted a few links to sites here, but certainly masked them so there is zero impact.
I am sure you have heard of the term 'linkerati'. Basically it identifies fellow webmasters/site owners who hold the big guns in links offering value from sites that have become authorities. For years this linkerati has been talked about, and even Matt Cutts himself talked about the future of link building being in their hands, and they like it that way. It's the geeks who detest any kind of commerical element that will link to something they like. This doesn't do anything for anybody attempting to run a business, get affiliate sales, or sell any type of product service they offer. It's a fraternity of nerds, and the cool kids with money aren't welcome. Revenge of the Nerds V - We Own The Internet.
Some basics that make up a quality link, by their standards would suggest something like this:
- Absolutely no paid advertising options anywhere on the site, and if there is, the site is using javascript and/or nofollow and clearly identifying it as paid.
- Site must be within the same genre as your site. How do you figure that out? Just search for your keywords and those sites that come up, are it.
- Site offers quality content that is not generated. Or at least has a % that is human edited (ie. news sites syndicate all kinds of stories they never wrote).
- There is an indication that an editor moderates commentary/content
- They do not have a bunch of spammy links coming to them
These are about all I can think of as clear cut quality signals when it comes to getting links from a certain site. Can you think of others?
*UPDATE* - I created this new thread in order to explore the question of Link Velocity further. In it I detail exactly what I would do in starting a link campaign. It relates to this, but I thought the topic deserved it's own thread, and I was asked to talk about it more.
Here it is:
Link Velocity - What Works Best!!? THIS!!
Share Your Experiences!
