Comments on: Link Buying: Reviewed and not Guaranteed is the line in the sand. http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/ Internet Marketing, SEO, and Link Building. Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:41:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: charles http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-29687 charles Tue, 25 Mar 2008 05:28:05 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-29687 google can say all they want but the reality is, how can they really check it all? I recently watched a little video by and SEO expert and the one thing that hit me dead on was, would google pay the costs necessary to do all that they are hinting at? NO! It's isn't in their interest to purchase the amount of equipment necessary to do all they require and there really isn't any reason. They know there are all types of "link exchanges" going on, but the reality is they can't do anything about it. All they can do is notice if you suddenly get 1,000 links over night--well, that's not normal. . .let's slap them down. However, if it is natural building of links, paid, exchanged (one-way, two-way, three-way) then they can do nothing other than say, well. . . that site is about widgets and your site is about guitars, we don't think they are as relevant thus we don't give you full credit. Well, that's the game. . .if it is at all true. I doubt that it is. I'm in "alternative medicine" and the compitition isn't that great, thus you can see clearly that google does accept a lot. Just recently looked at a friends site--they didn't do anything but they were ranked high, with bad on page SEO. . . how? Well, a site wide leak from an author's blog. I don't know about you but writing and acupuncture?!?!? Just as much a strech as widgets and guitars. I'm a newbie to all this, but it does seem that google looks for over optimization more than link buying....just my two cents..... google can say all they want but the reality is, how can they really check it all? I recently watched a little video by and SEO expert and the one thing that hit me dead on was, would google pay the costs necessary to do all that they are hinting at? NO! It’s isn’t in their interest to purchase the amount of equipment necessary to do all they require and there really isn’t any reason. They know there are all types of “link exchanges” going on, but the reality is they can’t do anything about it. All they can do is notice if you suddenly get 1,000 links over night–well, that’s not normal. . .let’s slap them down. However, if it is natural building of links, paid, exchanged (one-way, two-way, three-way) then they can do nothing other than say, well. . . that site is about widgets and your site is about guitars, we don’t think they are as relevant thus we don’t give you full credit. Well, that’s the game. . .if it is at all true. I doubt that it is.

I’m in “alternative medicine” and the compitition isn’t that great, thus you can see clearly that google does accept a lot. Just recently looked at a friends site–they didn’t do anything but they were ranked high, with bad on page SEO. . . how? Well, a site wide leak from an author’s blog. I don’t know about you but writing and acupuncture?!?!? Just as much a strech as widgets and guitars.

I’m a newbie to all this, but it does seem that google looks for over optimization more than link buying….just my two cents…..

]]> By: Rooms in York http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-29678 Rooms in York Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:30:24 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-29678 That is a very interesting article, there does seem to be a lot of inconsistantcy on googles part i mean there are loads of directorys that will review your site for a fee but most of those have now been penalised with pr0 where as Yahoo continues un penalised and also as the most expensive directory out there. Maybe if i start my own directory and charge $500 a listing google will think its great too! That is a very interesting article, there does seem to be a lot of inconsistantcy on googles part i mean there are loads of directorys that will review your site for a fee but most of those have now been penalised with pr0 where as Yahoo continues un penalised and also as the most expensive directory out there. Maybe if i start my own directory and charge $500 a listing google will think its great too!

]]> By: Prisoners of War in the Battle for Paid Links at Web Optimization 2.0 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-28708 Prisoners of War in the Battle for Paid Links at Web Optimization 2.0 Sat, 09 Feb 2008 13:52:07 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-28708 [...] To be clear I’m not talking about hiding things from search engines, or burying text below the fold (which while not a technical violation is clearly a violation of the spirit of the recommendations), I’m talking about clearly labeled advertising, sponsorship, or reviews. Why is it OK to pay for a Yahoo directory review but not a review from a another service. [...] [...] To be clear I’m not talking about hiding things from search engines, or burying text below the fold (which while not a technical violation is clearly a violation of the spirit of the recommendations), I’m talking about clearly labeled advertising, sponsorship, or reviews. Why is it OK to pay for a Yahoo directory review but not a review from a another service. [...]

]]> By: Google’s Line is Just Too Thin | Wiep.net http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-28517 Google’s Line is Just Too Thin | Wiep.net Mon, 04 Feb 2008 20:33:08 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-28517 [...] Last month, Jim Boykin wrote a great post about where he tries to determine where Google draws the paid links line. In the discussion at Sphinn, even Matt Cutts joined in to leave a comment, but he also wasn’t able to make the line clear. Well, after seeing something like this, it’s getting more and more clear to me that it’s not possible for Google to draw a line anywhere. [...] [...] Last month, Jim Boykin wrote a great post about where he tries to determine where Google draws the paid links line. In the discussion at Sphinn, even Matt Cutts joined in to leave a comment, but he also wasn’t able to make the line clear. Well, after seeing something like this, it’s getting more and more clear to me that it’s not possible for Google to draw a line anywhere. [...]

]]> By: tyler dewitt http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27742 tyler dewitt Mon, 28 Jan 2008 04:32:43 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27742 Jim, I feel the same way about things yahoo directory, botw and many other directories continue to sale links, but no google is not going to hold the page rank peter over there head... The thing is Google will continue to do what they want even to people that are actually trying to promote ethical brands thats just the way Google works. I will still continue to do what our clients want and thats paid links, most of our clients that call us want paid links. Jim,

I feel the same way about things yahoo directory, botw and many other directories continue to sale links, but no google is not going to hold the page rank peter over there head…

The thing is Google will continue to do what they want even to people that are actually trying to promote ethical brands thats just the way Google works.

I will still continue to do what our clients want and thats paid links, most of our clients that call us want paid links.

]]> By: Jim McNelis http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27733 Jim McNelis Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:17:51 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27733 Jim, I have attempted to weigh in as well on this debate several times over the last couple months. Here is a recent post on Matt's blog, which I doubt got much attention. I address the Yahoo Directory specifically: <blockquote># Dito Said, January 8, 2008 @ 6:45 am Matt, Let’s say a blog does PPP or ReviewMe or a similar service. Let’s say they get 20 requests per month for these reviews or posts, and let’s say a reviewer only takes 5 or the 20 requests per month. Let’s say he/she only takes reviews of products that he/she endorses, and chooses not to review inferior products. Let’s say this person has a blog about electronics and all of the products that have paid reviews are in fact electronics. Please explain (if you don’t mind) the difference between this example and a paid directory that has not been penalized for selling links, such as BestOfTheWeb or Yahoo! Directory. I still am failing to understand the difference between paid links in a directory vs. a blog or any other website that sells links. I do think it should be equal across all websites, rather than these perceived double-standards. We have discussed this before, in brief in this post: Selling links that pass PageRank. Your reply referenced this article. I have been pondering this issue since then, and I have even made a post recently on my blog about the same topic (Click my user name if you care to read the post). Am I missing some important piece of the puzzle here? Thanks Matt, Jim McNelis</blockquote> http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-report-paid-links/#comment-120219 Jim,

I have attempted to weigh in as well on this debate several times over the last couple months. Here is a recent post on Matt’s blog, which I doubt got much attention.

I address the Yahoo Directory specifically:

#
Dito Said,

January 8, 2008 @ 6:45 am

Matt,

Let’s say a blog does PPP or ReviewMe or a similar service. Let’s say they get 20 requests per month for these reviews or posts, and let’s say a reviewer only takes 5 or the 20 requests per month. Let’s say he/she only takes reviews of products that he/she endorses, and chooses not to review inferior products. Let’s say this person has a blog about electronics and all of the products that have paid reviews are in fact electronics.

Please explain (if you don’t mind) the difference between this example and a paid directory that has not been penalized for selling links, such as BestOfTheWeb or Yahoo! Directory.

I still am failing to understand the difference between paid links in a directory vs. a blog or any other website that sells links.
I do think it should be equal across all websites, rather than these perceived double-standards.

We have discussed this before, in brief in this post: Selling links that pass PageRank. Your reply referenced this article.

I have been pondering this issue since then, and I have even made a post recently on my blog about the same topic (Click my user name if you care to read the post).

Am I missing some important piece of the puzzle here?

Thanks Matt,

Jim McNelis

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-report-paid-links/#comment-120219

]]> By: Buying links: The debate rages on… http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27732 Buying links: The debate rages on… Sun, 27 Jan 2008 12:21:37 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27732 [...] The debate rages on. Interesting reading here and here. [...] [...] The debate rages on. Interesting reading here and here. [...]

]]> By: tyler dewitt http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27715 tyler dewitt Sat, 26 Jan 2008 04:30:09 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27715 Its funny how Google says Editorial Links are ok, but yet they want to pick and choose on who they penalize. Its funny how Google says Editorial Links are ok, but yet they want to pick and choose on who they penalize.

]]> By: Why Google is Screwed Up http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27714 Why Google is Screwed Up Sat, 26 Jan 2008 04:01:57 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27714 [...] Also take a look at a post Jim Boykin wrote called Link Buying Reviewed now read down and look at Matt Cutts responses which I’m not going to say anything Bad about Matt Cutts, but I will tell you this Google picks and chooses there people put it this way if someone out there had more power then them or right next to them they won’t touch them and I think Yahoo has made that clear and a few other people which like I said I’m not going to get into names, but the bottom line is they don’t want certain people making it, but yet some of these big brand names can get away with whatever they want and thats how it works. [...] [...] Also take a look at a post Jim Boykin wrote called Link Buying Reviewed now read down and look at Matt Cutts responses which I’m not going to say anything Bad about Matt Cutts, but I will tell you this Google picks and chooses there people put it this way if someone out there had more power then them or right next to them they won’t touch them and I think Yahoo has made that clear and a few other people which like I said I’m not going to get into names, but the bottom line is they don’t want certain people making it, but yet some of these big brand names can get away with whatever they want and thats how it works. [...]

]]> By: Link Building this Week (04.2008) | Wiep.net http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27680 Link Building this Week (04.2008) | Wiep.net Fri, 25 Jan 2008 14:57:09 +0000 http://www.jimboykin.com/link-buying/#comment-27680 [...] Jim Boykin has been digging up some Google and/ or Matt Cutts quotes to outline what Google’s stance is in the paid link discussion. Not only does his post show that Reviewed and Not Guaranteed is the red line here, but he also unleashed a discussion at his own blog and at Sphinn. [...] [...] Jim Boykin has been digging up some Google and/ or Matt Cutts quotes to outline what Google’s stance is in the paid link discussion. Not only does his post show that Reviewed and Not Guaranteed is the red line here, but he also unleashed a discussion at his own blog and at Sphinn. [...]

]]>