1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

matt cutts - "for the next few years we will continue to use back links to access a site"

Discussion in 'White Hat SEO' started by jamie3000, Jul 11, 2014.

  1. jamie3000

    jamie3000 Senior Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2014
    Messages:
    1,079
    Likes Received:
    472
    Occupation:
    Finance coder looking for semi-retirement
    Location:
    uk
    Youtube video is titled "Will backlinks lose their importance in ranking?" 01:55

    I know this is probably old news (video is a couple of months old) but does Matt Cutts suggesting they will stop using back links to assess a sites reputation in the future surprise anyone else?

    SEO really does seem to be more and more content orientated! Using social signals, chrome metrics and content analysis doesn't seem quite enough to me still....
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  2. alexa_s

    alexa_s Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    85
    Things are working fine as they are now, I can't remember the last time I was looking for something in google and didn't manage to find it. They will never fully discard this algorithm for something else, probably social will play more of a role and that's it. Apart from social, back links are probably the hardest factor to manipulate, I'd much prefer it if quality content was the only requirement for ranking, I can then spend my working hours happily producing valuable content and not having to deal with building links.
     
  3. 2spoons

    2spoons Regular Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    386
    Likes Received:
    168
    Occupation:
    Internet Marketer and Coach
    Location:
    UK
    Home Page:
    Links will always be fundamental to Google's algo. Notice how he even says links will become "a little less important". He's certainly not saying that links will be ignored completely.
     
  4. Slim.

    Slim. Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    93
    Occupation:
    Affiliate Manager
    Location:
    England
    This is just my opinion but it appears that Google is constantly pushing affiliates further and further from the SERPs. I understand the logic of providing hyper-relevant searches but in certain niches (gambling as the perfect example) affiliates are just no where to be seen. Its all about PPC now. Thats not to say that there is no room for affiliates anymore, but its a game of adapt or sink.
     
  5. snoopdogg1

    snoopdogg1 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    39
    Occupation:
    Rapper and Pimp
    Location:
    London, UK
    I found the video "[FONT=arial, sans-serif]Are pages from social media sites ranked differently?" [/FONT][FONT=arial, sans-serif]Surprising[/FONT][FONT=arial, sans-serif], he says nothing about google+ and I just can't see it. [/FONT]
     
  6. jamie3000

    jamie3000 Senior Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2014
    Messages:
    1,079
    Likes Received:
    472
    Occupation:
    Finance coder looking for semi-retirement
    Location:
    uk
    I agree Google+ must carry more weight than they let on
     
  7. BacklinksAce

    BacklinksAce Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    UK
    Home Page:
    The internet is links. Until that changes, Google will have to use link data in some shape or form.
     
  8. Oukast

    Oukast Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2012
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    683
    Location:
    Under the palm tree
    Doesn't surprise me the slightest, because backlinks are one of the worst ways to measure "popularity". What I mean by this, is that the system is way too easy to game. Not that I'm complaining, but that's true.

    Then again I don't really see stuff like author rank or G+ stuff replacing them either, as they're just the same damn thing with just a different name.
     
  9. Techxan

    Techxan Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    3,585
    Occupation:
    Local SEOist
    Location:
    TEXAS (you have to yell, its the law.)
    If you look at the history of backlinks, you will see that Google has been moving away from then for years because of spamming.

    As soon as they can ditch back-links they will, they have already devalued almost all of them, and turned many toxic.Now they are fighting sites who give the links as well.

    Look at the history of google. ANYTIME some metric becomes so influenced by spam that it affects ranking, google does something about it. The list is endless, starting with the keyword tag decades ago.

    Backlinks are easily manipulated, and they work. It is a just matter of time (and finding usable metrics) before their influence wanes.

    Google started harping on quality three years before the backlink slaughter started (devaluing entire classes of links), and they are harping on it now. When backlinks finally get devalued across the board, something is going to have to ake their place.

    With hummingbird, search took on synonyms (because of speech searches).

    Google has at least one 128 bit quantum computer in service now that I know of.

    When they reach the point that they find another metric and the computational power to process that metric, they will toss backlinks like they did the keyword tag, because the manipulation of search results is being skewed by the use of backlinks.

    In its entire history, google has always stopped these spammed metrics from influencing as soon as they could.

    They always will.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  10. peetrike

    peetrike Power Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    585
    Likes Received:
    217
    Location:
    Estonia
    Cutts told some time ago that they already have in-house algorithm for other metrics besides backinks but it`s far far away being perfect to use. I hardly doubt that it will come out in near future. Unless Google owns 100% of internet traffic, all browsers, hardware used to surf and so on is hard to come out better solution for backlinks. Even if they devalue backlinks and come out with other metrics it can always be fooled.

    Cheers
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  11. ttmschine

    ttmschine Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2013
    Messages:
    290
    Likes Received:
    114
    I don't see how they can ever use content effectively to rank websites.

    In order for you or I to rank say 100 books on some subject, like quantum physics, we'd need to be experts in quantum physics, if then we rank another 100 books on medieval agriculture we'd need to be an expert in that too.

    How can a machine that doesn't even understand the individual words ever do that?

    Plus it would need to be an expert in everything - millions of subjects, niches, sub-niches, etc, etc, etc.

    So if they moved to content only they could only do it by counting words and the like, and then they'd just shift link manipulation to some new form of manipulation.

    I think links will be around forever, they'll just keep adjusting the dials and assessing individual links differently.
     
  12. Techxan

    Techxan Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    3,585
    Occupation:
    Local SEOist
    Location:
    TEXAS (you have to yell, its the law.)
    With algorithms.
    Agian, exactly what they have done in the past.

    on't you get it, they want spammers chasing their own tails trying to game the system, then they jerk the rug out from under them. It keeps the spammers busy so they don't try to bulid real quality websites.

    Consider:

    The keyword tag- In the early days you could get all the traffic in the world by placing "naked women" in your keyword tags. The keyword tag is ignored today.

    The description - used to be weighted so that the words were given more weight as long as they supported the title and page LSI. The description is ignored for ranking today.

    also consider:
    link farms
    article directories
    press release sites
    infographic links
    comment links
    guest posting

    Each of these components of SEO are still around, and worth a shadow of what they were worth (or are toxic) before they were spammed to death.

    Google has been tearing down the value of links for a decade, what makes you think they will not continue to do so?

    Why do you think Schema (micro codes of all types for that matter like open graph) suddenly is so important? Google has been pushing SCHEMA for a few years now as a way to get a handle on contents of a website.

    They are hunting for a metric that will GUT backlinks, and when they get it, everybody burns.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2014
  13. peetrike

    peetrike Power Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    585
    Likes Received:
    217
    Location:
    Estonia
    Google can`t even make search results better based by content. They can`t give value for spelling and similar grammatical factors cause regular blog owner even makes spelling mistakes. They can`t rank you higher when you have 2 grammatical errors but the next site has 4-5. But they can value if you have one longass article or is it divided into paragraphs (which is easier to read for visitors), time on site, bounce rate back to search results and similar. These metrics can always be gamed. Although they don`t have access to all sites unless everyone is using GA or GWMT (yeah i know there`s Google Chrome, cookies, tablets and other they own).

    Cheers
     
  14. ttmschine

    ttmschine Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2013
    Messages:
    290
    Likes Received:
    114
    Lazy answer which suggests you don't really understand what an algorithm is.

    We could both write an article on a particular niche of quantum physics, they could both contain all of the necessary words, even the same "buzz" words, but if one is right and the other is wrong then the only way you could properly rank them is by knowing which is which.

    An algorithm is a formula, you can't invent an algorithm to determine facts or knowledge.

    The only way you can rank something in order of importance is by knowing what it is that you're reading and whether it is factually correct.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  15. Techxan

    Techxan Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    3,585
    Occupation:
    Local SEOist
    Location:
    TEXAS (you have to yell, its the law.)
    Hence the phrase "When they reach the point that they find another metric and the computational power to process that metric"
     
  16. Techxan

    Techxan Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    3,585
    Occupation:
    Local SEOist
    Location:
    TEXAS (you have to yell, its the law.)
    I said algorithms. An algorithm is simply a set of instructions to follow to enable a function. By manipulating input to an algorithm, the algorithm can be use to make predictions, or probable outcomes based on the input.

    A series of algos, can do a pretty good job of predicting outcomes based on the input of whatever metrics the algo is fed. Random algos can also take random input (from other algos) to fine tune the probable outcome.

    So yes I know what a algorithm is and does.

    You are using misdirection with this phrase:

    Google doesn't not try to assign importance, it tries to find relevance.

    Hummingbird was the big deal that it was for a lot of reasons, the primary one is that (the algo) has been refined enough to look for relationships between words within the cultural context of the society and language, instead of merely relevance.

    This means that the algo can take input like

    "When does book 6 come out?" and figure out that this phrase is related to "A Song of Ice and Fire", which many fans have been waiting to come out. No where in that search querry is the name of the books nor the author used.

    Hummingbird is what implemented this abiity to ferret out these "relationships" between words that are not relevant to each other in language to be discovered and used.

    Now add into your thinking this ability to find out relationships between words based on language and societal custom combined with the use of quantum computing.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  17. blackwarriormonster

    blackwarriormonster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2014
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    4
    I agree with your opinion, if google use content effectively to rank sites, they must be experts in everything. I think content+back links will be the rules forever.
     
  18. bluereyzz

    bluereyzz Newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2013
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    1
    I wonder, how Google ranks without content...
    I dont think, content would fade... Still fact s technologies and algorithms in Google says xx...
     
  19. Lalalaenhund

    Lalalaenhund Power Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2010
    Messages:
    738
    Likes Received:
    418
    Location:
    errywhere
    A human-like AI is the only thing that could realistically replace backlinks that I can think of, and that's probably at least 10 years away.

    And besides, when/if g finally manages to make an objective search engine that rewards quality content, I'd have no problem with that, I'd just make quality content. SEO will never die.
     
  20. wickid

    wickid Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    52
    Home Page:
    I listened to a vlog post a while back where someone had asked Cutts if Google ever internally took backlinks out of the picture in a test. Cutts said they did test that but the results that they got were horrible. While I think eventually social signals will be the main ranking factor in the algorithm as people are actually liking and sharing content with others, I think it is still quite a while away before backlinks are either totally ignored, or dropped to a minimal factor in the algorithm.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1