February 24th - The Day Profile Linking Died?

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by dp40oz

2 months ago a big time musician friend of mine linked to one of my brand new sites on his Facebook page. I got 1000's of real backlinks all over blogs and profiles in a few days. This happens all the time all over the Internet. Not to mention my rankings skyrocketed. Its harder for a robot to determine this then people think it is. I'll just keep saying it, Google is not as smart as people like to believe.

entirely different matter. we were talking about all profile backlinks. You can say it all night long but as a part time programmer I can tell you a computer recognizing "powere by vbulletin" "user " 'profile" on a page is extremely easy to program for. Again Scrapebox does this for under a hundred dollars.

I've heard it all before its not the the quantity of links its the quantity of those kinds of links. Most automated software leaves a footprint. your example is off the point it did not involve all forum profile links. No one ever said you couldn't get a ton of natural links or a variety of links.

[Oranges]

Algo. Tweaks will always be there, but ranking will be based on On-Page + BACKLINKS always. enough said!

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Dumkist

We'll before you guys go nuts about profile links being dead go type "Angela" in Google then you will have the answer whether or not profile links are dead

Then they are dead because Angela is neither a business or a product and angela has a long time ago fell from the top five for the term backlink. That serp page now has quite a number of pages being held up by bought links.

and no I don't think they are entirely dead but thats not a good argument for it being alive and well.

[jimmypate]

I tried link profile as a backlink strategy and it didn't work for me. I can get the backlinks indexed well, it takes time.

[dagaul101]

I agree, the days of mass linking with the same profile is about to come to its death, Google is all about being unique, so it's a good idea to give them what they want

[jazbo]

Well, Google has been lining up to try to do "something" about profile links, autoblogs, cuto comments, auto sites, scraped and spun content, auto scrape, spin..scrape, auto auto auto.

but again they have failed, unless my sites are all in a different Google to the rest of the worlds!

Good to see you posting btw Mike - you open proper debates which is good.

[Steve Crooks]

I love these threads that always appear after a major Google algo change.. Anyone reading would think that the sky has fallen in! The truth as always is that backlinks with PR will still help a page to get ranked. Valuable content will always win in the end and a link from a bad neighbourhood will do more harm than good.

It is not about some arbitrary link scheme being banned or anything like that, it is just they are getting better at doing what they have always done.. seek out the wheat from the chaff!

Just because a a backlink comes from a Vbulletin site doesn't mean it will not be accepted, this is ridiculous.. A link is a link but Google are getting better at finding the bad neighbourhoods.

Rather than blame tools like Scrapebox, blame the person using it. Use it in an automated way and you are asking for trouble. Use it in a smart way and it becomes an incredible research tool for finding amazing places to get backlinks from.

As always.. Be smart with your promotions and all will be fine.

[jazbo]

On a more general point, I am not sure Mike that the premise of your opening post is correct.

You seem to be saying Googles new update is targeting LINKS. that is not actually the case:

"Many of the changes we make are so subtle that very few people notice them. But in the last day or so we launched a pretty big algorithmic improvement to our ranking—a change that noticeably impacts 11.8% of our queries—and we wanted to let people know what’s going on. This update is designed to reduce rankings for low-quality sites—sites which are low-value add for users, copy content from other websites or sites that are just not very useful. At the same time, it will provide better rankings for high-quality sites—sites with original content and information such as research, in-depth reports, thoughtful analysis and so on."

(from google's webmaster blog).

So its targeting CONTENT, not links, from how I have been understanding it.



From my site members and others, and data, I am seeing articles and link sites/directories taking a hit. Google massacred them a couple of years ago, and it looks they are slapping them back down again now.

Glad my income does not rely on article marketing.....

[dp40oz]

Well funny enough after arguing profile backlinks on this thread I wake up this morning to one of my pages jumping from 347 to 16 for a slightly difficult keyword. This page has only xrumer style forum profile links. I did a 7000 link blast about 3 weeks ago. The next day the page started at 34 then fell fast and stayed in the 300's until now. If anyone wants proof I have no problem showing proof.

This idea that up until yesterday Google decided not to do anything about profile links and now the 24th comes and they're worthless is just BS. Xrumer has been around for years, Google knows it and Google also knows something about their algo can't be changed to fully discount this type of link building.

[mejohn]

None of my sites have been affected, so far as I can tell. Just a good, steady stream of traffic.

[Rita012]

Take a look at what ezine articles just posted about the Google algo change on their blog:

Search Engine Algorithm Changes

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by jazbo

On a more general point, I am not sure Mike that the premise of your opening post is correct.

You seem to be saying Googles new update is targeting LINKS. that is not actually the case:
.

Not really. I am reporting what I have seen and heard form many people who have been affected. Now like I said in an earlier post its possible that those who have content that Google is targeting also tend to have profile backlinks. too early to tell. Which is why there is a question mark in the thread title. I don't know.

What I do know is that no computer or algo can tell what good content is. Thats still something only a human being can properly evaluate. This IS something more than just duplicate content. That was the early January update. SO yes the target is content. It almost always is but the question is HOW is the content being targeted.

One way for Google to determine good content is to look at bounce stats and another is to reevaluate the votes that come in from other site - the links. Or maybe Google now has a bullseye on the big article directories but simple devaluing a site isn't really an algo change and the fact that whatever they implemented matches the user experience of their recent extension seems to suggest some new way of evaluating that content.

Originally Posted by dp40oz

Well funny enough after arguing profile backlinks on this thread I wake up this morning to one of my pages jumping from 347 to 16 for a slightly difficult keyword. This page has only xrumer style forum profile links.

Sure. Pleas go ahead and put up the evidence. I'm going to bet there was nothing difficult about the keyword at all. On about 80% of the research I do forum profile links are dead in their ability to get you the top spot by themselves. They work only in select niches or in combination with other kinds of links.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Steve Crooks

I love these threads that always appear after a major Google algo change.. Anyone reading would think that the sky has fallen in!.

Actually you would have to NOT read to come to that conclusion. the only people I think read it as the sky is fallen are those who rely exclusively on one strategy or another. Why should you be in panic or sky is falling mode when you have more than one other way to rank? Wouldn't make any sense. Change in SEO is inevitable. You'll have to live with it. The fact that its a major algo change is worth discussing and theres no legitimate reason for anyone to get spooked over a question mark.

Just because a a backlink comes from a Vbulletin site doesn't mean it will not be accepted, this is ridiculous.. A link is a link but Google are getting better at finding the bad neighbourhoods.

Please do a better job reading. NO one in this thread has ever said that links from Vbulletin have been dismissed. Your inventing that IS truly ridiculous. Google has always evaluated links and no a link is not a link as in all are not equal.

High on page Pr links are valued higher than PR N/As
Editorial in content links have been shown to have higher value
Too many links on a page has an effect

and as you say bad neighborhoods but you need to understand what that means from a programming concept. It means that Google is already evaluating what else is happening on a page besides your link. If so what would be ridiculous about google observing the content on the page? Thats a basic on page SEO reality. So if all your link pages have "powered by vbulletin" and profile user text how hard is it to determine they aren't in content/editorial links?

Whether that happens or not remains to be seen (but it certainly takes more these days then it used to rank using profile backlinks).

knee jerk reactions to alleged knee jerk reactions can be kind of entertaining too.

[thebitbotdotcom]

Originally Posted by Fraggler

My main money maker has seen a spike in traffic over the last couple of days. Even today is higher than a weekday last week.

I haven't used profile links on the site for over 12 months. I built its original rise on high PR blog commenting and then started profile links before it took a big dive at the end of 2009 (due to hosting issues and C&Ds lol). The comments were before the power tools hit the market (except xrumer and other private ones).

When it came back 'from the dead' (July last year) I only used BuildMyRank, articles, and paid links (renting). There is 10x more content on the site than before the crash too.

My site hasn't experienced a drop from any of these algo changes.

My links aren't exactly high qaulity, but I would like to believe they are a step up from profile spam.

I personally think the stability has come from the inclusion of a lot of relevant content and less focus on sniping keywords. I have less keywords at #1 but the traffic is spread a lot wider. When the changes happen this might lower the impact as any drops for specific keywords results in a lower % of the total drop.

I think to get a better picture of what these algos are REALLY doing is by finding the difference between the stable sites and the volatile.

I have been doing the same thing (going wide not deep) and haven't noticed any notable traffic or SERP changes. Actually, traffic has increased about 300% over the first quarter of this year. Seems pretty steady thus far.

[Steve Crooks]

Maybe you should consider revising the title of this thread then or consider getting a job at a tabloid writing headlines..

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Actually you would have to NOT read to come to that conclusion. the only people I think read it as the sky is fallen are those who rely exclusively on one strategy or another. Why should you be in panic or sky is falling mode when you have more than one other way to rank?

[idealwalkintubs]

Originally Posted by theseoguys

Hopefully the title can be changed to, the day AUTOMATED profile linking Died...i.e. xrumer, dripfeedblast...and scrapebox...

I agree with you , I also bought one software to blast making backlink, there isn't any effect , while if i made backlink by hand , it is very good .

How does the profile link work ? there isn't anchor text. is there any difference and effect between anchor text link and profile link ?

[Alminc]

I have a lot of profile links and none of my sites went down in rankings.
Actually, I noticed improved rankings for some keywords during the last
7 days, so I don't think that profile links are targeted by google.

People make the mistake of creating 3-4 links (or more) per profile with
no description included or just a few words as a description.
All my profiles contain only 1 link and minimum of 3 lines of text in
description. That's maybe something to think about when you create
profile links.

[daxcheng]

Originally Posted by sree94

A site I have spent day and night trying to get to the top for 6 months is now on page 2 after jumping to the #3 position on page 1

Speaking of jumping... good thing there are no ledges around me right now

This is sad.... I had the same issue... was working on a page for 6 months and got it to number 7 (bouncing between #5 to 7 for the last 2 months). Now it is at #18!!! Ergghhhhh....

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

The real point was - "quality" - white hat only sites - the indestructible ones we read so much about ... seem to have been hit and hit hard - whether thats you or not - enough folks other than you ... produce a significant enough sample to make it "an issue".

Yeah... my site is PR4 8 years old. And I do use some profile links. But to say profile linking is dead is quite an over statement... I believe it is only not as effective.

As with all Google updates, it is still way too early to tell. It does take a lot of computing power and a few runs before the algo stabilize. I took a hit a few years back and within a month I regained most of my rankings... that's just how google works.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Steve Crooks

Maybe you should consider revising the title of this thread then or consider getting a job at a tabloid writing headlines..

Title is fine and won't be changed. Again I don't see the end of something like profile links a disaster or sensational. They already are less effective than they used to be. Try not to jump off a high building should the news report that a single income tax deduction has been eliminated.

My suggestion for you is to learn the meaning of this character "?".

I can see why you wouldn't want threads about the latest algo though. PLR articles are definitely a target.

[Paleochora]

This update is designed to reduce rankings for low-quality sites—sites which are low-value add for users, copy content from other websites or sites that are just not very useful.

Ok, so from that quote it is clear that duplicate content is now, more than ever, an issue Google is tackling - a good day for original content writers and people who habitually spin their original content for submissions to multiple sites.

.....or sites that are just not very useful.

That is the worrying bit of the quote. The only way a bot can determine if a site is "not very useful" is by looking at the amount of content (which would penalise perfectly useful single page static sites which can provide excellent original information) or by evaluating backlinks.

The only way to properly evaluate backlinks is by quantity and whether they come from sites which the same bots declare as 'useful'.

SEO will always be a challenge as all search engines try to improve the algos to represent an organic, quality-based result which the searcher is happy with.

Automation is irrelevant. Think about it. By doing any SEO task, big or small, on or offpage, manual or automated, we are attempting to manipulate the ranking of a site or page in a non-organic, artificial way. We are all spammers, big or small, at the end of the day, lol.

In the end, the main losers in a major algo change are simply those whose whole business strategy relies on free search engine traffic and who have spent their whole focus in trying to manipulate the previous algo to their favour.

I am not being judgmental here. I, too, make sure that everything I put out is as optimised as possible and build backlinks regularly. I play the same game. I just do not rely on free search engine traffic for an income and would suggest that it does not make such good long-term business sense to do so.

[Holiday Car Hire]

interested in this thread

[McBrett]

@mikeanthony - I actually ran an Xrumer blast to one of my test websites a few weeks ago. Rankings improved modestly for numerous terms that I was targeting so I still believe profiles have hold some weight with the algorithm.

Whether or not these rankings stick around longterm is another question, but I think acquiring profile links is not a bad idea.. as long as your acquiring links from a variety of other places as well.

[Steve Crooks]

Don't quite understand your last comment about PLR and what it has to do with me, and I also find your reply a bit patronising to be honest. I was actually paying you a bit of compliment by suggesting you become a headline writer at a tabloid newspaper.. Never mind.. Oh, and by the way, I do understand what a question mark is. Maybe you should look at how to construct a question properly though, a simple "Is it" in front of "The" might be better.

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Title is fine and won't be changed. Again I don't see the end of something like profile links a disaster or sensational. They already are less effective than they used to be. Try not to jump off a high building should the news report that a single income tax deduction has been eliminated.

My suggestion for you is to learn the meaning of this character "?".

I can see why you wouldn't want threads about the latest algo though. PLR articles are definitely a target.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Steve Crooks

Don't quite understand your last comment about PLR and what it has to do with me, and I also find your reply a bit patronising to be honest. I was actually paying you a bit of compliment by suggesting you become a headline writer at a tabloid newspaper.

steve at least a little honesty. compliment to be associated with a tabloid? Nothing to do with PLR? You advertise it in your signature site. "is it" having to be put at the front of all questions to satisfy you? In what English grade school? I have long debates with people but once theres disingenuous comments there's no reason to go on.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by McBrett

@mikeanthony - I actually ran an Xrumer blast to one of my test websites a few weeks ago. Rankings improved modestly for numerous terms that I was targeting so I still believe profiles have hold some weight with the algorithm.

Don't deny it but when I refer to ranking I refer to spots that actually get traffic - so I mean for truly competitive terms, top five placement and by themselves because yes they still do help when mixed. The fact that you saw moderate improvement after a blast is not inconsistent with what I am saying. It sounds like the effect was weak.

In some niches more beneficial than others but in many not worth it so that people in those serps consider those links already dead.

Originally Posted by Paleochora

The only way to properly evaluate backlinks is by quantity and whether they come from sites which the same bots declare as 'useful'.

Not entirely true. You can have a matrix that determines a link by where it appears and what context. so that a link embedded in a long enough relevant article MAY give a better score

Think about it. By doing any SEO task, big or small, on or offpage, manual or automated, we are attempting to manipulate the ranking of a site or page in a non-organic, artificial way. We are all spammers, big or small, at the end of the day, lol.

Thats not the definition of spam though and SEO long term does not make you dependent on anyone else. You can build up steady return traffic. Many visitors to this forum came initially by search engines referral but no longer do. We are all dependent on other sites for initial traffic.

The idea that SEO has a drawback as a traffic source is because there are too many people looking at low quality MFAs sites that no one would want to return to. You can build traffic of 30,000 a month off a 4,000 search per month keyword if people return and they won't use Google to come anymore.

[Steve Crooks]

I don't advertise PLR in my signature.. I do offer a PLR package every month as a bonus for my members but that is just a small part of my offer. Anyway, this is getting way off target for this thread.

The short of it is that no.. profile linking did not die on February 24th.. Poor and thin content along with other low quality tactics have certainly taken a hit. As always, work smarter and harder at what works. Profile backlinks will count as backlinks but don't abuse it and do it properly and you will be fine.

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

steve at least a little honesty. compliment to be associated with a tabloid? Nothing to do with PLR? You advertise it in your signature site. "is it" having to be put at the front of all questions to satisfy you? In what English grade school? I have long debates with people but once theres disingenuous comments there's no reason to go on.

[Cataclysm1987]

Google is trying to remove as many sites as they can from their index that contain no content or no unique content. As most spammers blast forum profiles all day long with nothing in them, Google is working to keep that from bogging down their index.

However, there are still productive ways to use forum profiles. Just don't expect them to be as powerful as they used to be and certainly don't expect them to be your sole backlinking strategy unless you are trying to rank for, I don't know, "best weight loss books for teenagers with depression". Yeah, forum profiles might still work on that.

Everyone else should probably focus on high page rank links and content submissions.