Link Building Articles by SEO Speedwagon

October 06, 2006

Paid Directories for the Quick 6

I had a conversation today with a newer link building client. He questioned everything, which is an excellent way to make sure you are getting the most from a campaign. It was a long call, indeed, but a worthwhile reminder that even the steps that are most often taken for granted occur for a specific purpose.

One of the questions had to do with the order of events in the external linking phase.

Why does paid directory submission come before competitor linking? If these competitors are performing so well, why not go straight at their links?

Great question. Let's look at this in terms of a football game. You can go deep on the first play of the game to get on the scoreboard, but that strategy alone will not win a game. Especially for a site that does not have many external links, paid directories represent the only trustworthy quick 6. Trustworthy because they are human edited, and quick in terms of being added and crawled. Most other external links should involve correspondence prior to addition. Most likely, these will be from sites not crawled as often as the major directories, and not built to be as quickly and deeply indexed as those directories.

In the course of the game, these links will prove just as valuable, but it will take a much longer time to get that value. Get that quick 6, and then settle into the running game.

Paid Directories for the Quick 6
Posted by tom at 02:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 28, 2006

The Site Map and Simple Link Building Concepts

The site map is the most basic way you can show a list of urls to the search engines, but that does not mean that your site map has to be basic. Below is a very simple approach for applying link building concepts to your site map.

• Add Link Text. It’s not good enough to show urls to the search engines. Tell search engines about those urls by placing each page’s most important keyword phrase in the link.

• Subtract Descriptions. Do not waste time and space with descriptions. Get rid of them so robots can focus solely on links.

• Divide Site Map into a Series of Site Maps. Spiders will only crawl so many links per page. A series of sitemaps allows you to (a) include all unique pages that you want indexed, and (2) increases the likelihood that each page will be crawled. Use as many pages as necessary.

• Multiply Sitemap Links. Depending on the number of site map pages, either link to all in your footer or just the main site map page. If you choose the latter, link to all site maps at the top of all site map pages.

Easier said than done, of course, but well worth it.

The Site Map and Simple Link Building Concepts
Posted by tom at 01:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 30, 2006

Del.icio.us Leaves a Bad Taste

If this has been covered already, let me know. If so, I'll graciously provide attribution.

"Social tagging," the process of users sharing bookmarks and feedback about specific sites and pages, is near the top of the list of cornfields on which SEOs are trying to erect slick new subdivisions.

As social media sites have gained popularity, many SEOs have lamented the fact that Del.icio.us uses the robots meta tags nofollow, noindex, and noarchive as a way to avoid spam. If links don't pass popularity, then they won't be abused, so the theory goes. (Don't confuse this nofollow with link attribute nofollow.)

This has left many people wondering why a query for [site:del.icio.us] shows about a million and a half pages indexed, and why the site ranks for queries like [seo] and [popular]. Some people believe it's due to incoming linkage and Google's tendency to show URLs in results even though Google has been told not to index them.

For better or worse, the truth is much simpler. Google was never told to not index Del.icio.us pages. YOU were told that GOOGLE was told not to index pages. But Google? They never got the message, because Del.icio.us has been using user-agent delivery (yes, cloaking) to tell you one thing, and engines another.

Following is the famous meta tag from the Del.icio.us "SEO" tag page - the meta tag that makes everyone think the page won't be crawled:

But if you set your user-agent to Googlebot, here's what you see:

Where did those highlights go? Only her hairdresser knows for sure.

The robots.txt file for the site is no different. Here's the file for standard user-agents:

I left some extra whitespace in the screen shot to show that nothing follows the code lines.

User-agents Googlebot and Slurp each get additional lines in their versions of robots.txt. Following is what Google sees:

What annoys me about this process is not that Del.icio.us is trying to put one over on Google or Yahoo. (The latter would be especially odd, given that Yahoo owns Del.icio.us), but that Del.icio.us is trying to put one over on YOU. Certainly Google and Yahoo know what's going on. Millions of pages don't magically appear when valid noindex tags are in place. Del.icio.us wants to be a popular destination, wants its search engine rankings, but it doesn't want all the riff-raff that popularity brings. Old-school cloaking that a 10-year-old could detect isn't a way to achieve that.

Del.icio.us Leaves a Bad Taste
Posted by erik at 04:52 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

August 21, 2006

More Link Exchange Madness?

If I am missing something here, please call foul.

But if you're trying to get bloggers to join your ad network by offering front page blogroll links to their blogs from your outrageously popular and influential domain, should you then publicize it to the point that an algorthm might get wise to the pay-for-link placements? Wouldn't you at once be undoing what you are trying to do?

I have a hard time interpretting Jeff Burkett, head of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive's sales development team, any other way:

"Some bloggers are open to putting advertising on their site, so why not strike deals with them and help them do that," he wrote last week on his own blog, "Media Landscaping." "The revenue gets shared (in the bloggers favor of course) and we throw in one additional component...A link to their blog on the homepage of washingtonpost.com."

Unless Jeff is planing on throwing in the free condoms, he might be wise to rethink his pitch lest he sully the Washington Post link juice. From the mountainview top at Google, via Matt Cutts himself:

Google’s stance on selling links is pretty clear and we’re pretty accurate at spotting them, both algorithmically and manually. Sites that sell links can lose their trust in search engines.

Scroll all the way down to the bottom and have a gander. At least the folly is honest.

UPDATE: No rel="nofollow” as of 9pm EST this evening...

UPDATE II: Ominpresent Google is on the scene, and they are trotting out a javascript link blinding precept surprising quite a few in the forums...

More Link Exchange Madness?
Posted by john at 09:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 17, 2006

Google Says Index This!

Recently, the Wagon has noticed a new option at play over at Google Sitemaps. Next time you're in the area, click on Preferred Domain.

Google is giving you the opportunity to choose whether you would like your urls listed with or without the www (http://www.yoursite.com or http://yoursite.com). Google follows this opportunity with the following note:

Once you specify your preference here, it may take some time for changes to be reflected in our index. While Google doesn't guarantee that we'll show your URLs in the form that you prefer, we will use your choice as a suggestion to improve our indexing.

We think this is important for a few simple reasons. Google is trying to improve its index of your site, and they are allowing you to help them. Further, Google is acknowledging that the www vs. non-www indexation issue is causing duplicate pages to appear in its index. And finally, and most importantly, Google is telling us that sites can improve their indexation by clearing up the www. vs. non-www issue.

Click over there to learn how to 301 redirect non-www pages to their www equivalent, or vice versa.

Google Says Index This!
Posted by tom at 04:56 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

June 22, 2006

Anatomy of a Blog/Newsletter Archive

Archive, Archive, Archive.

The following transcript is loosely based on many client conversations. For our purpose, we will join this conversation in progress, and leave it in much the same fashion.

Consultant: Oh, so you have a newsletter. Do you archive it?

Client: No. Should we?

Consultant: Absolutely!

Client: Well, we’ll see

. . . And Scene.

The recommendation repeatedly . . . dare I say ritualistically . . . receives reluctance. Why, man, Why? If you go to the trouble of creating fresh, useful content for a targeted audience, why not show it to the search engines? How different is that from a blog? Not too many people argue that blogs do not have search engine value, including newsletter pushers not yet ready to be called bloggers. What they do not realize is that the blog structure is flexible enough for the newsletter pusher to plug in newsletter content postfactum, thus protecting his or her newsletter status.

Enter Jill Whalen. You would be hard pressed to find someone that balances search engine value and user focus better than Jill. When she makes a move, you can guarantee that both parties are justly considered. Jill Whalen has always archived her newsletter, but she did not always archive it like this.

In adopting the blog structure, Jill Whalen has made it easier for humans to peruse her archive, for search engines to index her archive, and for me to advocate such archives. Jill's linking structure is perfect. She drives traffic and correspondence to the archive by linking to the archived location from that article in the newsletter. The article will have a temporary home on the archive main page, as well as permanent homes on its own page, within the monthly and other relevant categories.

With the release of each new issue, the archive will show search engines new pages of fresh, relevant content. And Google loves new content, but Google also loves old content when there is proof of new content, so the older articles will continue to gain steam as new issues are added.

And look at those links, a completely different navigational structure than the main site. Just one link on the left. Jill Whalen is completely emphasizing conversion. And on the other side, she points out the previous issues, beneficial to human and search engine alike. Then she links (with keywords, of course) to her most important sections of the main site. As for the body, every article links to itself in the title, then all categories under which it could be found at the end of the article.

More pages, more fresh content, and more keyword-rich links equate to more relevance, more importance, and better indexability. If you will not do if for me, please do it for Jill Whalen.

Anatomy of a Blog/Newsletter Archive
Posted by tom at 01:16 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

June 15, 2006

User Vs. Search Engine Vs. Perception?

We have a client that has developed a beautiful interface. What I enjoy most about it is that it seems so different from other directory structures. You can tell that it was created absolutely with the user in mind. I won’t mention the site because this sounds way too much like a commercial already. Stay tuned because there is a story here, I promise.

We had the typical battle: molding this site into something search engines could crawl and credit properly without detracting from its user-centric interface. When this battle was reasonably conquered, we began searching for external links. The Link Building campaign has received a quite favorable response – until this morning that is.

A free, minor (but respected) directory rejected the site on the grounds that it was “full of hidden spam.” After some shock and some correspondence, we were able to clear up the misunderstanding - mouseover text spawned by JavaScript was assumed to be "stuffing" - but how common is the misunderstanding? We have received very few rejections and even fewer explanations for rejection. How many sites incorrectly categorized our client as a spammer and deleted our request/submission?

A site’s need for external acceptance has increased our dilemma to a 3-pronged battle. In addition to finding the balance between user and search engine, a site must also appease perception. So a site must be geared towards the user, easily digested by the search engines, and accepted by the user who is ignoring usage and attempting to view the site as a search engine.

As SEOs, we understand and abide by webmaster guidelines, but as link builders, we are further subject to that which might be perceived as an infraction of those guidelines. When link candidates are searching for reasons not to link in a matter of seconds, the only thing that matters is perception. If we know the stimulus of their false perception and judge it as reasonable, we must consider making a change even though we know better as best practices SEOs.

Is that what you had in mind, Mr. Page?

User Vs. Search Engine Vs. Perception?
Posted by tom at 12:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

June 06, 2006

Link Request Craziness

We get a lot of emails from others asking us to link to their site or suggesting a reciprocal link exchange. What I can’t figure out, though, is how dumb some of these folks are.

Now I don’t mean they’re dumb because they are working on adding new links to their site. That's actually pretty smart. What I’m referring to can be found in the first line of many of their emails.

Can someone please explain why some people think that all email addresses use a person’s name first followed by @ and the domain? How else would the link request emails we receive start out with some of these brilliant salutations:

Hi Site-Contact!

Dear Info,

Hello Accounting,

Just a tip to anyone out there sending out link requests to affinity sites. Don't buy a list or pay for an automated program (spam) to send out emails to potential link partners. Actually spend some time finding true affinity sites, get the person’s name that you are sending your email to, and send a personalized email!

Do you really think someone is going to read an email that starts with:

Dear Services,

Link Request Craziness
Posted by doug at 01:42 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

May 11, 2006

Who’s Winning American Idol?

Our friends at WordTracker tell us that 68,324 searches will occur today for [American Idol]. So who is winning American Idol? The answer . . . when we return from break.

OK, Fox has #1. No surprise. But look at #2. Call it David vs. Goliath. Instead of the network behemoth occupying the #2 spot (there is no reason it shouldn’t) or some other serp behemoth (Wiki and IMDB are further down the page), true American Idol William Hung is hanging right there! This makes me proud to be someone who spends way too much time analyzing Google Results.

So what forces are at play?
A. The American Dream.
B. Link Building.
C. Irony.
D. All of the Above

Yes, William Hung! She Bangs! She Bangs!

Speedwagon Out

Who’s Winning American Idol?
Posted by tom at 06:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

May 04, 2006

Silent Bob Carries a Big Stick

When Kevin Smith releases a movie, his audience knows about it. In fact, when Kevin Smith does anything, his audience knows about it.

A Kevin Smith movie will not have Titanic advertising, and it will not have Titanic returns, but there will always be Kevin Smith movies. His movies make more than enough money with limited enough advertising to afford him auteur status, a rare condition these days.

Kevin Smith's online presence is largely responsible for the life he leads, and the films he makes. He does not have to rely on offline expenditures to sell tickets. His audience hears about upcoming work from him online. Below are just some of the ways Silent Bob is growing his audience for Clerks II.

• The Main Site
• The News Site
• The Message Board
• The Blog
• The Movie Site
• The Merchandising
• MySpace
• Wiki

The Clerks II site was purchased in 2004, and the movie is not due out until this August. I doubt Kevin Smith is worried about the sandbox effect.

Silent Bob Carries a Big Stick
Posted by tom at 03:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

April 20, 2006

Link Building in Film

If we paid better attention to the great filmmakers, we would have a much better name for Link Building. Wouldn't your response rate improve dramatically if you were in the Homage (pronounce O-mäj for instant film snob status) Building business?

Great filmmakers link out whenever the opportunity presents itself. Scorsese’s best include La Motta mumbling the contender speech from On the Waterfront, and this visual link from Tommy D to the original film outlaw in 1903’s The Great Train Robbery. The image does not appear within a scene, but on its own following a scene, just like the original.

You have also seen that link in the intro to Tombstone.

Everybody links to Hitchcock. Imagine what his PageRank would be if he hadn’t been penalized for duplicate content following Van Sant’s shot-by-shot remake. De Palma has made a brilliant career of linking to Hitchcock, but his best link – and the best link to the Odessa Steps sequence – comes from The Untouchables.

Terror in the Aisles is 84 minutes of links to the best horror films, proving that a links page can be worthwhile as long as it is focused and/or narrated by Donald Pleasance.

We link for the same reasons that filmmakers link. We increase meaning of a given subject by linking it to another known source. Contrarily, we can send traffic to a lesser-known source that we feel is worthy of greater attention. Like filmmakers (and search engines), we think in terms of links. We express ourselves in terms of what has already been expressed. And audiences (human and search engine) identify us based on to whom we link, so we impact our rank based on such choices.

Choose links wisely, but do link!

Link Building in Film
Posted by tom at 02:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

March 30, 2006

Wagon's Final Date With March Madness 2006

After a humbling 2-2 last week, the Wagon has decided to pull the plug on the Texas Update to the March Madness Algorithm. To those who bet the house based on our predictions, we will soon be opening shelters throughout the country.. Already being called the George Mason Update, our most recent dance number is guaranteed to finally get it right! That being said, please gamble at your own risk.

The March Madness Algorithm now takes the number of Yahoo backlinks pointing to the Athletic Department and divides that by student enrollment.

LSU (21,100 links / 30,564 students = .687) loses to UCLA (36,400 links / 38,000 students = .958)

George Mason (201 links / 29,728 students = .007) loses to Florida (73,400 links / 49,693 students = 1.48)

... and then Florida takes the 2006 NCAA National Championship!

This will be the last March Madness post until next season, unless of course we ace the finals, in which case you can expect to see a press release, merchandising, and a low budget film starring C. Thomas Howell.

Wagon's Final Date With March Madness 2006
Posted by tom at 03:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

March 23, 2006

NCAA March Madness 2006: Sweet 16

The Wagon has not received much feedback on the March Madness Algorithm, which can only mean it is producing relevant results. The only man bold enough to place his Keds in front of the Wagon was Ray Brower, who suggested we base our predictions on links to the athletic department as opposed to the school. Thanks, Ray. We love the idea!

So if you want to win deep in the tournament, you better have some deep links (or a separate site with lots of links). Here goes nothing, and I truly mean nothing.

Tonight's projected NCAA winners based on links pointing to their athletic department:

#4 LSU (257 links) loses to #1 Duke (945 links)

#13 Bradley (109 links) loses to #1 Memphis (591 links)

#6 West Virginia (4,760 links) beats #2 Texas (948 links)

#3 Gonzaga (385 links) loses to #2 UCLA (1290 links)

NCAA March Madness 2006: Sweet 16
Posted by tom at 04:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

March 20, 2006

NCAA March Madness 2006 Proves an Untamable Shrew

The belief that link popularity conquers all just might have some kinks. We'll take our 12-4, but the Wagon was looking forward to the sweet satisfaction of 16-0 and the distinction of being the first blog added to the Vegas Black Book. In sooth, our March Madness prognostications were probably on par with the alleged savant 3 cubicles to your left.

Below are results from Friday's Round 1 games:

RIGHT - #15 DAVIDSON (1,820 links) loses to #2 OHIO STATE (8,310 links)

WRONG - #14 NORTHWESTERN STATE (452 links) loses to #3 IOWA (10,200 links)

RIGHT - #9 WISCONSIN (28,000 links) beats #8 ARIZONA (9,910 links)

RIGHT - #9 BUCKNELL (1,850 links) beats #8 ARKANSAS (1,470 links)

RIGHT - #10 NORTHERN IOWA (2,880 links) loses to #7 GEORGETOWN (3,440 links)

RIGHT - #11 SOUTHERN ILLINOIS (530 links) loses to #6 WEST VIRGINIA (5,540 links)

RIGHT - #16 MONMOUTH (649 links) loses to #1 VILLANOVA (2,340 links)

RIGHT - #16 ORAL ROBERTS (351 links) loses to #1 MEMPHIS (1,850 links)

RIGHT - #12 KENT STATE (4,060 links) loses to #5 PITTSBURGH (6,820 links)

WRONG - #11 GEORGE MASON (3,590 links) loses to #6 MICHIGAN STATE (8,480 links)

WRONG - #10 NORTH CAROLINA STATE (8,430 links) loses to #7 CALIFORNIA (15,700 links)

RIGHT - #16 ALBANY (2,220 links) loses to #1 CONNECTICUT (5,870 links)

RIGHT - #14 MURRAY STATE (1,110 links) loses to #3 NORTH CAROLINA (21,400 links)

WRONG - #13 BRADLEY (841 links) loses to #4 KANSAS (4,540 links)

RIGHT - #15 PENN (9,320 links) loses to #2 TEXAS (29,700 links)

RIGHT - #9 UAB (654 links) loses to #8 KENTUCKY (3,850 links)

We are planning to update the March Madness Algorithm prior to Thursday's games, so please share feedback and suggestions.

NCAA March Madness 2006 Proves an Untamable Shrew
Posted by tom at 10:13 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

March 17, 2006

NCAA March Madness 2006 Decided by Link Popularity

Many people assume they will outrank competition for important keyword phrases if they have the most links. Link Building involves so many other variables. This assumption is as arbitrary as today’s NCAA tourney matchups being decided by number of links.

Well the Wagon is all for arbitration, so here are today’s guaranteed winners based solely on Google backlinks. Guaranteed! 2006 March Madness has been tamed!

#15 DAVIDSON (1,820 links) loses to #2 OHIO STATE (8,310 links)

#14 NORTHWESTERN STATE (452 links) loses to #3 IOWA (10,200 links)

#9 WISCONSIN (28,000 links) beats #8 ARIZONA (9,910 links)

#9 BUCKNELL (1,850 links) beats #8 ARKANSAS (1,470 links)

#10 NORTHERN IOWA (2,880 links) loses to #7 GEORGETOWN (3,440 links)

#11 SOUTHERN ILLINOIS (530 links) loses to #6 WEST VIRGINIA (5,540 links)

#16 MONMOUTH (649 links) loses to #1 VILLANOVA (2,340 links)

#16 ORAL ROBERTS (351 links) loses to #1 MEMPHIS (1,850 links)

#12 KENT STATE (4,060 links) loses to #5 PITTSBURGH (6,820 links)

#11 GEORGE MASON (3,590 links) loses to #6 MICHIGAN STATE (8,480 links)

#10 NORTH CAROLINA STATE (8,430 links) loses to #7 CALIFORNIA (15,700 links)

#16 ALBANY (2,220 links) loses to #1 CONNECTICUT (5,870 links)

#14 MURRAY STATE (1,110 links) loses to #3 NORTH CAROLINA (21,400 links)

#13 BRADLEY (841 links) loses to #4 KANSAS (4,540 links)

#15 PENN (9,320 links) loses to #2 TEXAS (29,700 links)

#9 UAB (654 links) loses to #8 KENTUCKY (3,850 links)

NCAA March Madness 2006 Decided by Link Popularity
Posted by tom at 09:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

March 09, 2006

If the Brady Bunch Were a Links Page . . .

Sha na na na na na na na na, Sha na na na na.

If the Brady Bunch were a links page, how would you know the Bradys had jumped the shark?

It is necessary for Link Building to be about as time consuming (and exciting) as trying to set the teeter-totter record. After all, you cannot judge a room by its beaded entrance. You have to check out each site, but if you are going to be efficient, you must train your eyes to easily catch the least groovy characteristics of a links page and move on.

So here are some Link Building thoughts inspired by the one day when the lady met this fellow.

• Don't waste time looking for Tiger if you go to his site and get a 404. Just find a new dog.

• If Greg invites you to his room but takes you to his dad's den, assume the worst. A redirected links page is a bad sign!

• Vacations bring bad luck. If you see links to travel sites (and you are not in the travel industry) avoid it like the Brady Tiki.

• Just one Cousin Oliver link can kill. A page linking to a gambling, payday loan, or adult site bears the kiss of death.

• If a site looks like it took a football to the nose, assume it is not being updated or damaged goods, at best.

• A Marcia Marcia Marcia links page has the same keywords repeated too often and is considered Spam Spam Spam.

• Like a bathroom occupied by 6 kids, you never get your due and proper on a page with too many links. Just go somewhere else.

• It looks like somebody stole the playbook when you start to see the same links section duplicated on many different sites. Don't get involved, unless of course it was DMOZ's playbook.

• If you cannot easily find a site's contact information, consider him George Glass.

• Paying someone to date your sister is wrong, unless that person is Yahoo or an established, relevant directory offering link text.

You see kids, a gift is only a good thing when the giver has given thought to that gift. But when the gift the giver gives gives grief, then that gift should give the givee regrets.

If the Brady Bunch Were a Links Page . . .
Posted by tom at 04:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

February 23, 2006

Join Bode Miller in a Temporary Relocation

Much like his ability to dominate Alpine Skiing, Bode’s website has been temporarily redirected. Bode may prompt you to join him at www.joinbode.com, but this is not where you will find him.

Although it is not the intention of the 302, big brands use it to combine catchy-name appeal with trusted-site value.

Google shows an attractive first result for [Join Bode] with “join bode” throughout, and because Google believes the redirection is temporary, it shows the Join Bode domain name. Click on the result and you are taken to a page at Nike boasting a Nike-like PageRank.

Now Nike could not have predicted Bode’s performance -- of course, that did not stop them from signing him, designing his site, shooting his commercials, and airing them – but let’s pretend that Bode Miller’s Torino performance was good enough to garner more than 40 searches per day for [Join Bode]. Nike and Bode would still just have one good result for one keyword phrase, and way too much room for stolen traffic. If they used the actual Join Bode domain then discussed and linked to it at Nike, they could have had the top 4 results for [Join Bode], and much better results for other Bode searches. Instead, they have a no link presence and no Nike mention. If you think flashing a web address constitutes search engine marketing, see Erik’s post about domain deafness.

If Nike did not want to concern themselves with search results, they should have hidden them like NBC does for [Bode Miller], which grabs 1400 searches per day. The second result is only slightly visible above the fold because the first result has no description.

Fortunately for Nike, all will blame Join Bode’s sub-par performance on Bode.

Join Bode Miller in a Temporary Relocation
Posted by tom at 01:50 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

February 16, 2006

Atop Brokeback Mountain

If you need help inserting a joke here, . . .

I must admit that I devised the linking structure for IMDb (that should be read as “I have absolutely nothing to do with IMDb, but I love the site”). The site is incredibly helpful to its visitors in terms of quickly tracking down important (some people might read that as “trivial”) information about your favorite movies, and its linking structure is more than helpful when it comes to ranking well in search engines.

It is no surprise who is atop [Brokeback Mountain], a phrase currently searched for more than 27,000 times per day. IMDb adds movies to its database as quickly as possible, and thereafter generates internal links from all involved parties ranging from star to assistant dialect coach. Each link -about 200 for Brokeback, which is not a large budget movie by an means- includes the movie name in its text and comes from a page filled with unique content. If that were not enough, other features like Movie News, Now Playing, and Awards keep the content and internal links coming.

2 Thoughts in closing:

Your internal linking structure has the power to propel your Link Building campaign.

and

IMDb, I'll never quit you!

Atop Brokeback Mountain
Posted by tom at 02:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

January 19, 2006

Link Building is Getting Easier

It has always been my practice to make outrageous claims like I invented the question mark, so it is against character that I do not take credit for improving results in Link Building campaigns. While recent times have seen great improvements, the two greatest factors leading to improvements are completely external and available to all link builders.

The spams getting spammier, and Leon’s getting larger.

I have stated before that the open rate for link requests is very low because people delete anything they think might be spam. Well, spam is getting much worse and much more obvious every day. Open rates are improving because a well-written link request is looking less and less like spam.

The Seed of Jagger

Similarly, a good link is looking less and less like spam. Google is getting much better at devaluing bad links, which leads to increased value for every good link. Your relevant links, internal and external, are gaining value.

Stay the Course, Link Builders!

Link Building is Getting Easier
Posted by tom at 12:48 PM | Comments (0)

January 05, 2006

'Tis the Season for Link Building

Like my friend Erik, I have developed an allergy to the ubiquitous 2005 retrospectives and 2006 prognostications. The clichéd trend reminds me of college years past when party discourse mandated Swingers statements about being so money, baby, and not even knowing it, at a clip of 7.1 per conversation. Escaping this game might have been the only reason I felt compelled to graduate. One might wonder what I would have become without this venomous dose of motivation.

Obviously, we all hope for our new year's post to be picked up like a Jean Shepherd movie, but what about other holidays? Can we not manipulate them for blog links, as well? We can at least try. Below are just a few suggestions for 2006 Holiday manipulation:

• Ask Matt Cutts to be your Valentine.
  
• Give updates for an industry conference taking place at a pub on St. Patrick's Day.
  
• Claim your blog's success is due to automatic search engine submission and scraped content on April 1st.
  
• State the reasons why a search engine ground hog might not see a site's shadow.
  
• Post a Declaration of Independence from typical blogaucracy.
  
• List the Top Ten Halloween Costumes for spammers.
  
• End a post with Happy Festivus!
  

'Tis the Season for Link Building
Posted by tom at 11:02 AM | Comments (0)

December 23, 2005

Avoid Link Candidates that Stop Short!

It’s not acceptable for someone to stop short with your wife, and it shouldn’t be acceptable for someone to stop short with your link!

Most times, you can predict that a link candidate will stop short. If other links on the page indicate a predilection for the stop short, get out of the car! Unless you feel that the stop short link will directly send traffic, save your time for link candidates that will give you full value for your link.

When link candidates stop short, their links do not impact your search engine relevance. Below are the most common stop short tactics:

• seoblog.intrapromote.com – A url link only tells the search engines that your site is about the url.

• seoblog.intrapromote.com/ – If links are not clickable, they do not tell search engines anything.

• SEO Speedwagon Blog – If you see JavaScript when you mouse over a link, assume search engines will never see it.

• Click here – Your site is not about click here, so avoid sites that tell search engines your site is about click here.

Your time is your greatest commodity. Devote it to the quality sites that also offer clean text links.

Happy Festivus!

Avoid Link Candidates that Stop Short!
Posted by tom at 10:06 AM | Comments (0)

December 15, 2005

Directory Submission: The Wagon Way

Since the birth of the link building craze, opportunists have responded with the creation/inundation of directories awaiting your submission fee. Pay me to “review” your site, and I will add it to my directory if I “approve” it. Not much different than Dr. Lecter’s quid pro quo tactics or your average reciprocal linking arrangement, methinks.

You can easily get lost while searching for directories to which you should submit, so stick to the path created by various blogs and forums. Also, largely since Jagger’s birth, search engines strive to assess value to directory links in a fashion similar to how they treat reciprocal links. Value still resides in links from human-edited, focused directories, but the opposite types are bereft of value, even harmful in extreme cases.

What should you pay for directory links? Below is the short answer:

• $299 – Yahoo is a must.

• $40 – Only if substantial traffic is associated. Joeant, for example.

• $10 - $20 – Only if focused, human-edited, and offering text links. Yeandi, for example.

• Free – Only if focused, etc., and RESPONSIVE. DMOZ is an exception, Illumirate is an example.

Directories are essential, but guard your time and wallet closely.

Directory Submission: The Wagon Way
Posted by tom at 02:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

December 07, 2005

Yahoo Site Explorer Enhances Backlink Feature

The Yahoo Search Blog announced enhancements to the Yahoo Site Explorer yesterday that make your backlink searches more efficient than ever.

The interface now allows you to filter your backlinks (Yahoo calls them "inlinks") so that your own domain does not appear in the list:

• Select Except from this domain to filter out your top-level domain, along with all subdomains on that domain.
• Select Except from this subdomain to filter out only your specific subdomain. For example, if you have a blog on the blogspot.com domain, selecting this option will show links from other blogspot.com blogs, but not your own.

Like always, Yahoo shows incoming links even if they contain the "nofollow" attribute. This underscores the point that the nofollow link attribute is quite different from the nofollow command in the robots meta tag. Links that contain the nofollow attribute are recognized as links and crawled just as any other link. They're simply not offering an authoritative "vote" that might help the recipient site's rankings.

Yahoo Site Explorer Enhances Backlink Feature
Posted by erik at 12:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

December 02, 2005

Respond to All Link Building Responses

Even if it is just a thank you for responding to your link request, respond to all responses. It is a simple, but important link building rule.

As I have often discussed in link building articles, the most important thing to establish is that you are not a machine. A personalized response shows you are a human who is really interested in a link, and that is what leads a link candidate to consider your site. Furthermore, not responding as a human has very serious repercussions. You could easily be mistaken for a spammer, and your link candidates aggressively hate spammers.

We have found that a link candidate responds to your request for only a few different reasons:

• The person hates you(r link request). Respond very briefly with an apology. As you never want to contact someone not interested in link requests, this is a very important response.
• The person loves you(r link request). Respond with a thank you. Let them know you appreciate their consideration.
• The person has questions. This is an excellent opportunity to tell somebody more about the site in extended fashion. You certainly do not have this luxury in your initial request.
• The person has objections. If the objection is valid, thank them for considering the site. If the objection stems from a misconception, politely attempt to clarify.

Any correspondence is helpful to your site. At a minimum, you are introducing your site to a new set of eyes. At maximum, you are helping to create a link with a very personal touch, which search engines love to see. Whatever the reason for the response, indulge the candidate who sent it.

Respond to All Link Building Responses
Posted by tom at 10:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

November 28, 2005

Comment Spam the Wagon? ITSOK with Me

Maintaining the SEO Speedwagon is not quite as glamorous a task as, say, Alfred might have with the Batmobile, or Q with his fleet of Aston Martins. In fact, our version of machine guns hiding behind headlamps is a simple button marked "Ban IP Address," which we reserve for commenters and trackersback who attempt to hijack our fair vehicle to carry dirty links across the border.

I'm not the first one to notice a new, two-tiered spamming tactic among blog comment spammers. First, the links these spammers are pointing to are usually large, legitimate brands, such as Apple or Microsoft. Second, they include the rel="itsok" attribute on a link. Of those sites that have noticed this approach, however, not too many have figured out exactly why spammers are using it. Surely, SURELY, they're not dumb enough to think that it's overriding the rel="nofollow" attribute (definition), about which I became all sappy last week.

Turns out they don't believe that at all. A very articulate explanation at Concurring Opinions reveals the motive - which only hardcore spamhunters (or hardcore spammers) would naturally intuit:

These comments are a funny sort of trojan horse. They are designed to be easily and readily flagged as spam; however their links are to popular and legitimate sites. Spammers do this so that popular legitimate sites will be added to the blacklists, corrupting them. If the blacklists are full of mainstream sites, and kill comments that use links to apple.com or yahoo.com, then bloggers will stop using the blacklists. And they will once again be easy prey for the spammers.

Sigh. No wonder I thought spammers were lousy at checkers; turns out they've been playing chess the whole time.

Comment Spam the Wagon? ITSOK with Me
Posted by erik at 03:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

November 23, 2005

No Fearing the Nofollow Link Attribute

While I believe that sites that are ultimately successful do have high quality, user-focused content, many people incorrectly infer the converse of that statement: that if they have high quality, user-focused content, they will be ultimately successful. I don't necessarily believe that, because the demand is simply not great enough for all the high quality, user-focused sites out there. Many will do great, but not everyone is going to get rich.

But my pessimistic outlook is still no reason to avoid creating the best content you can - both at your own site and elsewhere. Think about the "nofollow" link attribute and its recent influence in SEO.

The mass adoption of the "nofollow" attribute about a year ago meant that site owners now had a way to illegitimize comment and trackback spam, even if they couldn't control its spread. If a link on your site has the "nofollow" attribute, engines know that you don't "vouch" for the authenticity of the link. Consequently, the engines won't reward such sites with any rankings benefits.

This effectively squashes a spammer's chances of benefiting from your site's status. He can add all the comments he wants to your PR4 post, but the links back to his site don't get a vote of confidence like they would if you made the exact same link in your post.

Unfortunately, however, many people promote their sites via forum and blog comments that are well reasoned, helpful to the discussion, and quite informative. And many of these people now feel that their sites no longer benefit from the links in comments. A mass exodus from SEO Chat forums is a recent example. While the introduction of the "nofollow" attribute was only a small reason for the members leaving, it was certainly a factor.

But if you think back to the days before link popularity was a religion, it's no different now. If you have something intelligent to say, if you're contributing to the discussion, and if you're offering a fresh perspective - and you do this long enough - you'll earn links the old fashioned way: By earning them. People will click through to your site via your profile, and eventually, if you impress them long enough, they'll want you to be a part of their community.

You've always had to impress potential customers with your intelligence and perspective. Be glad that "nofollow" is here, because all it has done is allow the specter of easily gained popularity to find peaceful rest.

No Fearing the Nofollow Link Attribute
Posted by erik at 11:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

November 17, 2005

Link Building Anecdote: Big and Small Business

The Intrapromote client list shows off a diverse bunch. While the big names may seem more impressive, we are just as proud of our small business clients. It has always been our goal to succeed with big and small brands alike.

You learn not to be surprised when you deal with such a variety. Take a couple meetings I had this morning, for instance. The first was with a large client. As I made recommendations to the site’s internal linking structure, the client told me he would have to run the changes by marketing, legal, IT, parliament, and the Vatican. About a half hour later, I was making similar recommendations to a much smaller client. Before I finished speaking, he told me to refresh the page and asked me if the changes looked right.

Just Another Day. Du Du Du Du Du

Link Building Anecdote: Big and Small Business
Posted by tom at 03:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

November 15, 2005

An SEO Checklist for Site Redesign

When you're about to unleash a site redesign, your to-do list probably appears endless. And once you've taken care of the design itself and the graphics, page files, and remaining assets are accounted for and tested, you still have to consider SEO.

A more comprehensive SEO checklist for site redesign surely exists somewhere, but my goal is to show things that site owners typically overlook and that, when added up, can have significant impact on a site's performance over time. Note: When I refer to "redesign" in this context, I'm not talking about changing domains. Instead, I'm referring to changing the entire file, folder, and page structure of the existing site, and perhaps (but not necessarily) a migration to a new code type, such as going from PHP to ASP (or back).

• Account for your top URLs. Analyze the last few months of web stats and determine your highest performing pages, both in terms of entry pages and strict page views. Brochure-type sites will have a smaller number than database-driven sites. Determine whether these top pages will have counterparts on the new site. If so, map the old pages to the new ones using a 301 (permanent) redirect. (James discusses 301 redirects here.)

  As for your non-performers, that's a judgment call. Even if certain pages don't get too many views or don't have new-site counterparts, you need to account for them when you roll over and make sure that if users land on them, they end up somewhere relevant. You can map those remaining pages to the home page (again, using a 301), or, you can avoid a lot of work and let a custom 404 page handle it (see below). Using a 301 will transfer lots of little fragmented bits of link pop and PR to the root, but a well built custom 404 page will likely be more help to your users and save them a click or two in getting to their final destination.

  Along these lines, do a thorough backlink check to see who's linking deep into your site. (Yahoo Site Explorer is currently one of my favorite backlink checkers.) Even if these links don't send much traffic, chances are the traffic is pretty qualified, so you should take special care of the visitors that come from reputable industry sites and make sure that the page they land on isn't a black hole.

  I often read articles that recommend you contact everyone linking to you and request that they update their links. In my experience, this hasn't been necessary. When a 301 is properly implemented from old_page.htm to new_page.asp, I've always seen links to old_page.htm eventually show up in a backlink check of new_page.asp.

• Prepare your custom 404 page. A custom 404 page is like a trapeze artist's safety net. Even if a user calls for a page that doesn't exist, she'll still end up on your site instead of seeing the ugly (and near-useless) default 404 page. A well made 404 page is often a variation of the site map, along with an introductory note that apologizes for the lost page, and an earnest hope that the user will find what she needs by following one of the links on the page. Most important, make sure that the links on your 404 page correspond to your new site content, not the old content. Otherwise, your users might just end up swallowing themselves in an endless 404 loop. (One more thing: If you're on a Microsoft platform, make sure that your 404 pages give a true 404 error code.)

• Update your robots.txt file. Many people forget to update their robots.txt exclusions when their folder structures change. If your private data, images, or testing area has changed locations, make sure to add a line in the file to account for it. Now this is important, and it needs emphasis: Don't replace old exclusions with new ones. Instead, add new exclusions and retain old ones. From the engines' perspectives, those old folder structures will still be around for a while, so if you delete old exclusions, you could see some funky things happen for several months.

• Update your analytics and conversion definitions. Here's another item that often goes overlooked until the monthly reports come out. If your analytical conversions are based on views of certain pages, specific click paths, or hits on certain files from the old site, make sure to update your conversion definitions to account for the new site. You don't need the accounting mess created when the revenue and the analytics program disagree about conversions and ROI.

• Remember your outgoing links. When everything else is done and you have time for a bit of altruism, remember that your outgoing links are likely benefiting someone else - either another site you own or a site you have recommended. Any old articles or resource pages that link to those sites will no longer benefit them if they're deleted. So if you still think those sites are worthy of your link, make sure to recreate them somehow.
  

I hope this list brings up some issues you hadn't thought of. If you have other ideas, drop a note in the comments and I'll post them later on.

An SEO Checklist for Site Redesign
Posted by erik at 11:10 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

November 11, 2005

Reciprocal Linking Horse: OK, OK, I’m Dead!

Hark! 2 in every 3 heralds are singing. In sooth, only time will tell if the backlash truly matches the ballyhoo, but white hatters deserve this moment of frivolity. We have, each one of us, experienced the frustration of battling competitors who perform well with not-so-admirable linking strategies.

So, what's the next focal point? Link extraction. The price for Google holding sites more accountable for their links is that Google will be holding you more accountable for your links. This is much more of a concern if you have employed unethical linking tactics in the past, but it is a concern for all sites, nonetheless. Google will penalize you if an overwhelming majority of your links are irrelevant and identical.

Review your links every time Google updates links. You want to make sure your link text varies and that your links are coming from reputable, relevant sites. Do not allow this defensive link strategy to keep you from the offensive, though. Look for opportunities to upgrade link text from good sites as you seek to remove links from bad sites.

Enjoy the moment, white hatters! Take pleasure in the fact that Jagger aftermath for you is just business as usual.

Reciprocal Linking Horse: OK, OK, I’m Dead!
Posted by tom at 11:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

October 24, 2005

Google on Link Building

Normally, I post about something that I know about, something that I understand. There are some things however that are universally understood, and therefore easy to recognize the importance of.

Before I get tongue-tied, let me give you an example to set the stage. It doesn’t take an accountant to understand what Benjamin Franklin meant when he said “A penny saved is a penny earned”.

With that in mind, it is fairly safe to assume that there are certain things that fall under the general classification known as “common sense”.

That is what compels me today to write about Link Building. As I was perusing one of many different blogs with my usual morning coffee, I came across this in the Official Google Blog.

“…Google's search results are generated by computer programs that rank web pages in large part by examining the number and relative popularity of the sites that link to them…” - Official Google Blog - Googlebombing

Now, at the risk of being redundant, it was a clear extrapolation to me (definitely no link building guru) that relevant links are very important to a comprehensive and well designed SEO campaign.

I am reminded of the old EF Hutton commercials that stated “When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen”. More than giving away my age, this phrase is definitely applicable to Google and search.

So when Google talks about link building, are you listening?

Google on Link Building
Posted by brent at 10:58 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

October 20, 2005

Vertically (Un)Challenged Link Building

I agree with Jim Boykin that 99.9% of link requests are worthless. As I have discussed in the past, a link builder’s greatest challenge is proving that his or her request represents the supplement. If you can accomplish this Sisyphean task, you will find recipients more receptive than ever.

The greater issue these days is the disparity between worthless and worthwhile links. As it becomes harder to find these worthwhile links, their value becomes greater. It is not until Google dances with your vertical, unfortunately, that this value is calculable. It is becoming more and more apparent that it is not a laissez faire algorithm that devalues links. If it were, we would not be discussing specific verticals impacted by Google updates. It is very specific attention that leads to serp eruption. It will benefit you sooner or later.

This is little solace if your competitors are beating you with links from payday loan sites. You can still beat them with good links, but you are looking at a long, constant battle. Keep building good links. One day we will be discussing a shake up in your vertical.

Vertically (Un)Challenged Link Building
Posted by tom at 11:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

October 13, 2005

Hey MLB, Don’t 302 My White Sox!

With more than 2 million pages on its domain, Major League Baseball can write its own ticket for link popularity. Lauded as one of the great internet successes, they can establish important pages with little or no effort. In fact, they can establish pages with what seems like the opposite of effort.

Let’s take a look at the MLB domain. Note the relevant urls displayed in the bottom left hand corner when you mouse over the navigational links such as “Scoreboard” and “Standings.” If you can see where the link takes you without having to click, it is most likely that the search engines can also see the link. Compare that to the “Team Sites” box. A search engine spider cannot click on the box to display the links. And even then, note that the relevant urls do not show in the bottom left hand corner.

Now look at the first result when you search for [white sox], chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/ . This is also where you would expect the link at MLB.com to take you. Both links, however, use a 302 to redirect to http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/index.jsp?c_id=cws . A 302 is a temporary redirect that can be confusing to search engines when used in perpetuum. Because of its use here, google cannot figure out which page to index. These two pages combine to form the number one result for [white sox] which is cached, yet neither is actually indexed by google!

Huge sites have a much larger margin of error, so don’t try this at home. Your site would disappear from the rankings, and google does not seem to have such a lenient dropped 3rd strike rule to get you back in the game.

Hey MLB, Don’t 302 My White Sox!
Posted by tom at 11:55 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

October 12, 2005

Diagnosing Crawling and Indexing Issues with Yahoo Site Explorer

Yahoo recently released the Yahoo Site Explorer, a very helpful way to diagnose issues that may be hampering your performance in Yahoo natural search.

Enter a URL in the Search box, and Yahoo returns two values: First, the number of indexed pages for a given site, and as a second option, the number of incoming links pointing at that site. The following image shows the location of the key data points.

Drilling down, you can select specific URLs from the results page, and "explore" those pages in depth - finding, for example, the number of pages from a specific section of your site that have been indexed, or the incoming links pointing to a specific page of your site. To find an index count for a specific site section, enter or click a URL such as http://www.site.com/press/. This returns indexing and linking results for this specific URL, as well as any pages in the /press/ directory.

Unlike Google, which purposely returns only a percentage of a site's incoming links, Yahoo Site Explorer claims to show all incoming links that it knows about. This can come in very handy when performing a competitive link analysis for sites in your industry.

One of Site Explorer's largest drawbacks is the ability to download only the first 50 results into TSV format, for import into programs like Excel. It would be wonderful to have an entire site's worth of data to sort and play with in a spreadsheet program, but it's unlikely that Yahoo is too eager to spend processing time creating TSV files with tens of thousands of rows. A resourceful programmer named John Mueller has used the Yahoo Search API to create a custom version of Yahoo Site Explorer that overcomes some of these common obstacles; it's worth a look.

If you find large blocks of URLs from your site that Yahoo has not indexed, it offers a submission system similar to that of Google Sitemaps. You can simply fill a text file (such as pages.txt) with the URLs you want Yahoo to index, separated by a hard return. Upload the text file to your web server, then submit the entire URL of the text file (such as http://www.site.com/pages.txt) to the Yahoo Free Submit page.

We don't yet have significant data on the crawl rate for URLs submitted via this method, but we'll be sure to publish any information we collect.

Diagnosing Crawling and Indexing Issues with Yahoo Site Explorer
Posted by erik at 06:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

October 06, 2005

Link Text Leads to [Home] Field Advantage

Are these pages really about [home]? Was it their intention to tell the search engines that their sites are relevant to the search [home]? In most cases I doubt it, but that is exactly what they have done.

Realize that you send a message to search engines every time you link to a page using text. #7 Microsoft is not about home, but the site links to "home" in the header navigation on most of its pages (other than the homepage). Chances are, you are doing the same. You do not show on page one, however, because you do not have 22,000,000 pages indexed.

Realize your internal linking structure is essential to telling search engines what your site is about. Tell search engines on every page of your site that your main page is about your keywords. Do not waste this opportunity on words that do not drive relevant traffic.

Link Text Leads to [Home] Field Advantage
Posted by tom at 08:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 29, 2005

Link Building Subject Line – Persuade or Perish

Three seconds and 40 characters.

According to Karon Thackston’s High Rankings article (soon to be archive here), it is within these parameters that your audience will decide to open or delete your e-mail. And be advised that the open rate will resemble the batting average of . . . let’s say . . . White Sox outfielder Aaron Rowand(.272). As in the bigs, get above .300 and you’re an All-Star.

Karon’s article applies more towards sales campaigns, so I wanted to push the idea towards Link building. How can your subject line persuade your audience to look at your link request? Think about your ideal candidate. This person actually posts links out of interest and to serve his or her readers (our results show that this person still exists and has many friends). The problem is that this person gets as much spam each day as the rest of us.

Two important guidelines here: honesty and relevance. Be honest. If you trick them into opening, you’ll evoke wrath. Do not hide the fact that it is a link request in anyway. Include the word suggestion, inquiry, addition, question, etc. Many people will delete based on these words, but that is OK. These people would not have posted your link anyway.

Realize that you are not selling your site to the individual. You are selling its relevance to the individual’s site. If the candidate buys into that relevance, he or she might visit your site and decide to add the link. Include the site name or the title of the links section to show you have been there. Then include your site name. If the connection does not seem obvious, add a relevant keyword to your name. If this makes no difference, do not send the link request.

Keep in mind that a relevant link request is not the enemy - spam is. Your open rate will improve if your audience has reason to believe your link request is relevant.

Three seconds and 40 characters. Good luck!

Link Building Subject Line – Persuade or Perish
Posted by tom at 02:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 22, 2005

David Manning Link Building School Opens its Doors!

Famous movie critic David Manning has thrown his animated hand into the evolving world of Link Building. How can this rather abstract movie critic offer improvement to your link building campaign? I think there is plenty to learn from the similarities between Link Building and Movie Criticism, in addition to the storied existence of David Manning.

Link Building, in principle, is very similar to movie criticism. A link is a vote of recommendation. The more recommendations a site has, the better the site must be (perceptional value, anyway). I am more likely to go to a movie if somebody tells me it is a good movie, especially if the person is an authority on movies such as a movie critic. A link recommendation is also more meaningful when it comes from an authority on the subject, and as in movies, the more authorities making the recommendation the better.

The need for recommendations to generate traffic has affected the Web in the same manner it has affected the movies. Sites desperate for recommendations tend to forget the significance of authority level and subject relation. I will see any movie Roger Ebert recommends, but I would not buy lingerie for my wife based on his recommendation.

Enter David Manning. Better yet, enter the Sony Studio Executives. Faced with movies for which even 3rd class movie critics (authority levels vary – pay attention to superlative-saturated commercials for Summer Blockbusters) would not vote, Sony created David Manning, and the recommendations were outstanding!

The David Manning School of Link Building is now open, and students are evident across the Web in the form of sites created with the soul purpose of linking to a site. Now a site created to serve a subject or a geographical area is wonderful. Such link sites serve a useful purpose. However, a link from a site lacking useful and unique, subject-related content is as valuable as a David Manning recommendation.

Keep one thing in mind, whether you are promoting a movie or a Web site. The best way to get recommendations is to have a good product. Would you recommend the product if you were not already associated with it? Do not ask for recommendations until you can confidently answer in the positive.

David Manning Link Building School Opens its Doors!
Posted by tom at 12:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 15, 2005

Google Backlinks vs. Google Indexed Pages

In a recent post, the Maestro illustrates the problem with focusing entirely on Google backlinks. He is discussing the noble “deconstruction of 2,690 links to George W. Bush,” which shows an even split between legit links and google bombs.

The problem is, Google only reports a slice of whatever links point at a particular page.

Go over to MSN Search, and it has nearly 30,000 links point at that page. Google certainly knows of around this many and uses them as part of the ranking process. It simply doesn't report them all, as any experience search marketer knows. The analysis is skewed by not taking that into account. It operates using partial data.

Most link building campaigns try to win the partial data war. You must realize that Google knows about much more data than they show. If google indexes the page, they will see the text link. It’s reasonable to assume that most of the other 27,000 MSN backlinks are indexed by google, and are impacting the performance of the bio page for [miserable failure].

It is a simple distinction. Do not focus on Google backlinks. Focus on Google indexed pages and keyword-rich text links.

Google Backlinks vs. Google Indexed Pages
Posted by tom at 12:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 08, 2005

Building Links with Google Search Operators and Google Alerts

You probably know that google search operators provide an excellent platform for building links to your site. You should look at any pages linking to your competitors [link:www.yourcompetitor.com/] in search of potential link candidates. You should also look at backlinks with the other search engines, but realize these are not nearly as filtered, which has both positives and negatives associated.

Google Alerts represent a good way to keep track of the new links to your site. Enter the backlink search operator [link:www.yoursite.com/] as your search term, and change the type to “web.” You will be notified whenever google adds to your list of backlinks. Let this also serve as a reminder to check your competitor links for candidates, once again, as they also will have been updated.

Obviously, there is much more to link building, but the above is a good way to build links on a small scale when your clock and budget prohibit other means.

Building Links with Google Search Operators and Google Alerts
Posted by tom at 01:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 06, 2005

Hurricane Katrina and Fast-Acting Search Results

When I added the Red Cross ad to the blog recently (please give to some type of rescue organization if you're able!), I was curious about the flurry of activity surrounding Katrina over the last week, and to what extent it had affected organic results pages. Unlike specific news engines (where I typically get my news), the organic algos are generally a little more sluggish (or stable, depending on your worldview). Still, when comparing results for [katrina] at large engines, I noticed several interesting results.

First, an analysis of the first page of Google results for the query [katrina]:

1. Red Cross root page (www.redcross.org). The #1 ranking for this site is due in large part their massive viral banner campaign (which we found out about thanks to Threadwatch). Also at play here, in my opinion, is the phrase "katrina" in close proximity to the link to redcross.org in blogs and news stories. For example, "To help victims of Hurricane Katrina, please give to the Red Cross." This "proximity credit" is an ages-old part of the algo that accounts for web coders who use "click here" as anchor text instead of the nearby money phrase.

2. National Weather Service's National Hurricane Center and Tropical Depression Predictor (nhc.noaa.gov). In case you're curious, the NOAA stands for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. If you're familiar with American bureaucracy, it should be no surprise that the NOAA is part of the US Department of (wait for it...) Commerce. The NOAA site, an XML/RSS smorgasbord, is to serious weather chasers what Slashdot is to 30-year-old gadget freaks living in their parents' basements. Plenty of legacy link pop here, probably using link text like Hurricane Katrina, since weather enthusiasts are keen to note (and anchor) the difference between tropical storm, tropical depression, hurricane, and so on. Also note that this site ranks in the top spot for [hurricane katrina] and [tropical storm katrina], so it's been building momentum for a while.

3. Wikipedia entry for Hurricane Katrina (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina). Yahoo shows over 24,000 links to this page, and at least right now, Wiki can do very little wrong in Google's eyes.

4. Home page of an on-the-ball web developer whose name is actually Katrina (katrina.com). She's had the domain for the better part of a decade, and probably had the top rank until about a week or so ago. Kudos to her - she's taken advantage of her rank to show tons of missing persons and disaster relief information. (Question to self: What's the moral and semantic opposite of a scraper called?)

5. Weather.com homepage (weather.com). Certainly helped by current radar images, slide shows, and the accompanying incoming links to those features. And it doesn't hurt that a "synonym search" at Google for [~hurricane] shows "weather" as a bolded phrase - meaning that Google's algo considers them very similar terms. LSI, anyone?

6. A Red Cross credit card contribution page tied to a specific site. Hard to say why Google picked this specific iteration of the "Contribute" page without further investigation. The link redirects from www to give.redcross.org, so the second subdomain (or maybe the https protocol) is probably the reason it's not an indented entry under the first Red Cross result at #1.

7. Official site of Katrina and the Waves (katw.com), '80s pop group behind such hits as "Walking on Sunshine" and ... um ...

8. See #7, but this time (katrinasweb.com) it's the personal site of the band's lead singer. Entries 7 and 8 are like the Moe Green of [katrina] - making their bones when the Red Cross and National Weather Service were going out with cheerleaders.

9. FEMA (fema.gov), likely helped along by some linking discussing their handling of the hurricane aftermath.

10. Local New Orleans TV station (wwltv.com) offering a prolific blog about events in the city as they happen. Yahoo shows about 16,000 links directly to this page, and over 72,000 to the domain.

So what's the moral here? Google loves links - all shapes, sizes, and locations. Linking during national crises is a hyperbolized version of natural linking. It happens more quickly and in greater numbers. Still, there appears to be no temporary link devaluation (TLD) or backlink over-optimization devaluation (BLOOD) going on here. Is the onslaught of new links spread out over enough sites as to appear natural (which it is), even with the accelerated timeframe? Apparently so, assuming there's no manual intervention going on.

In my next post, I'll tear apart Yahoo's SERP for the same query.

Hurricane Katrina and Fast-Acting Search Results
Posted by erik at 10:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 01, 2005

The Heart of Reciprocal Linking

We at the Wagon are susceptible to 80’s allusion. It is no secret that we totally long for days of boat shoes, pegged jeans (preferably stonewashed), and popped collars. Sometimes we might even make up 80’s stories just to prove a point. It’s the perfect platform because it was such an obvious time, best depicted by the music. If you wish you had Jessie’s girl, you just repeated that over and over in the chorus. If you wanted to make sure that people realized Billie Jean was not your lover, you repeated that in the chorus. I’m sure the SEO gods also look back in fondness – these songs definitely were about what they said they were about.

Doug’s SEOs Wang Chung Tonight reminded me of a reciprocal linking campaign I ran in the mid-80’s. We did not call it that, but I have always felt it was closer to reciprocal linking than payola. My client was a popular singer boasting a 50’s simplicity with which the 80’s audience easily identified. We developed a song which mentioned all major US markets. We then contacted stations in these major markets with the following request.

Hello **market** ,

We have already linked to your city, **market** , in our new song, **song** . If you have not already done so, please start playing this song on your station. If after a week’s time, we have not heard our song playing throughout the day and night, we will remove your city from the song.

It certainly worked. In fact, the only city we had to remove from the song was Stow, Ohio. The repetition of play created importance and popularity for the song, yet I feel like I wronged the SEO gods. I am not completely against reciprocal linking, but linking solely for the reciprocal link does not honor relevance. When search engines and humans pick up on this, your relevance and your credibility take a hit. Link only when it makes sense to link, and ask others to link only when it would make sense for them to link. Link building is much more than reciprocal linking.

They say the heart of reciprocal linking is still beating, but from what I’ve seen I don’t really believe them.

The Heart of Reciprocal Linking
Posted by tom at 09:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 24, 2005

The Scraping of My Success

After hard work, your titles, tags, text, and hypertext agree your site is about your keywords. The search engines notice the agreement, and your performance begins to improve. As the site continues to climb, you start practicing your Rocky moment atop the stairs. You can even hear the music.

You begin to notice many more backward links than just the ones you have requested. Great, but far too many look exactly the same. You want links, but do you want or deserve them from this questionable benefactor? As you continue your ascent, your impending moment feels more like Rocky III. Now you only hear Burgess Meredith yelling at you.

You are getting a boost from scrapers who want relevance for your keywords. They display scraped meta content from sites performing well for the keywords, along with much more prominently placed PPC or other products. This formula is applied to many pages over many domains, each including a keyword-rich text link pointing to your site. You have done nothing wrong, but you are benefiting from the game.

We see this all the time, enough to know that the text links impact search engine relevance. The scrapers either do not realize they are giving this impact away or they do not care. What can they be getting in return? These pages are clearly speaking to search engines, but what response are they getting? How are they benefiting?

We have bold theories softly backed by our substantiation disclaimer. Keep watching the wagon.

The Scraping of My Success
Posted by tom at 01:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 18, 2005

I’ll Look to Link, If Looking Linking Moves

Place linking information on your site. If somebody is pleased with your service or product, they very well might want to link to your site. Think of it as the tip jar in the local deli. It is an opportunity for your customers to show appreciation. No harm if they choose not to fill the jar, but at least you gave them the option.

Link Building is not just a campaign. Requests, arrangements, or payments do not have to occur in order to build links. You have resources available to you of which you should take advantage. You have colleagues, customers, and contacts – they have websites. Let them know how to link to your site.

Your site needs external links in order to perform well. This makes a more aggressive pursuit of links a necessity, but this should not stunt your natural progression of links. Do not overlook existing traffic to this end. Casual placement of the tip jar transforms any and all visitors into potential external links.

No harm if they choose not to fill the jar, but at least you gave them the option.

I’ll Look to Link, If Looking Linking Moves
Posted by tom at 12:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 11, 2005

SEOs Wang Chung Tonight

Have you ever seen a web site that has a link to their SEO company's site in the navigation of each page? I was speaking with someone today about just this - SEO companies that require or as a trade off for discounted services, attempt to promote themselves and increase their own incoming links in this way.

It reminds me of a lame music advertising fad from the 80's.

Depending on your age, you may or may not remember this, but there was a brief pop music advertising fad in the 80's to mention your band's name somewhere during a potential hit song. The thinking seemed to be, if the song was a huge hit, then thousands of people every day would be singing the name of your band. Who could ask for more than that?

There's a very good chance that you were an active participant in this ad fad. Perhaps the most blatant 80's group to try this was Wang Chung, whose "Everybody Have Fun Tonight", near the end, adds vainly "Everybody Wang Chung Tonight!"

Soon after, the Swedish pop/rock band Roxette at the end of their hit "Joyride" boldy exclaim, "Roxette!" (Do you know of other examples? Click on the Comments link below.)

Creative? Perhaps.

Tacky? Indeed.

Short term fad? Absolutely. (Can you imagine U2's "With or Without You" ending with a smug "With or Without U2"?)

The good news for our industry is that most SEOs are growing up and, like this brief time in the 80's, are seeing in advance that what may work temporarily will not work in the long run.

Can you name Wang Chung's next big hit after "Everybody Have Fun Tonight?"

Exactly.

SEOs Wang Chung Tonight
Posted by doug at 11:55 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Link Request Rule # 2 – Absolutely, Positively Never Speak Appositively

We focus on poorly crafted link requests, only in part, to replenish our better than thou air. Our goal is, more importantly, to better shape our own requests. So thanks to our readers for forwarding such material, and also thanks to the sacrificial lamb who send their link exchange requests to Intrapromote .

Absolutely, Positively Never Speak Appositively

The exception to this rule is when you positively want to convince the recipient that you are not speaking directly to him or her. “I was visiting your site, X, and I thought you might want to link to my site, Y.” Doesn’t that just feel formulaic? If you receive hundreds of link request a week, it definitely should.

If I saw you at the Sox game and wanted to tell you that I enjoyed eating at your restaurant, what would I say to you?

Hey, I ate at your restaurant, X, and have found it similar to my tastes, Y.

Or

Hey, I ate at X and thought it was great!

One of these statements is what I would say in the given situation. The other is what my robot proxy would hopefully say in that same situation. You see, I would leave the appositives in just to make sure that the recipient understands what I think I would have said in a similar situation. In the long run, I find it much easier and much more worthwhile to just go to the Sox game myself.

Link Request Rule # 2 – Absolutely, Positively Never Speak Appositively
Posted by tom at 10:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

July 20, 2005

Link Request Rule #1 - Link Building is Not a Booty Call

We spend a good deal of time focusing on what’s wrong with link requests. Our intention is only slightly to nourish our better than thou air. Our goal is, more importantly, to better shape our own requests. So thanks to our readers and clients for forwarding such material, and also thanks to the sacrificial lamb who send their link exchange requests to Intrapromote.

Link Building is Not a Booty Call!

“I have found your website, **insert URL here** by searching Google for **insert search term here**.” Any time I see an “I was in the neighborhood so I thought I’d stop by” -type request I picture Larry Dallas working his magic at the Regal Beagle.

Jack Tripper: Larry, haven't you ever thought of telling a girl the truth?
Larry: Well, I figure, anyone who puts on eyeliner, fake eyelashes, and plastic nails isn't someone who wants to hear the truth.

Larry, listen to your buddy. Skip the BS. Just get to the request!

Link Request Rule #1 - Link Building is Not a Booty Call
Posted by tom at 02:25 PM | Comments (0)