A link is a link, A link is like a vote...Not really

[BenJackson]

[Warning: this is a rant]

I've grown tired of over-simplifications and nonsense sayings like the ones in the title. The mentality that "a link is a link" is a very poor one. The point in learning SEO (off-page at least) is to understand the specifics that make one backlink better than another, how to obtain these links, and how to augment the effectiveness of a backlink through strategies like tiered link building. If you truly think a link is a link and you wish to negate all properties of a backlink then why are you even in the SEO forum discussing it?

All backlinks are not created equal.

Also, this saying...

"A backlink is like a vote for your site"

It's an extreme over-simplification. Some people might argue that it makes it easier for newbies to understand. No, it doesn't. It confuses them into thinking in terms of quantity rather than quality because that is the connotation of a vote. It's a mindset that is responsible for the success of so many mass profile linking services. More links = more votes = higher rankings right?

What if you're running for Mayor and I vote you for 'best hair', that's a vote, does it help you become Mayor?

I've just grown frustrated with discussions that have no depth because they are cut short at the point where we equalize all backlinks. I know this thread probably won't make much of an impact, but please, if we're going to talk about SEO then lets get into it and learn from each other, not simply speak in short adages that have no place in such a complex field.

[end rant]

[mince001]

This is so true. But it would be way to complicated to explain to people that are just starting out in seo about which backlinks are the best and how things have changed over the year. Understanding the Google algorithm is key... and then do what google wants.

[grotto_from_canada]

this panda update really hurt

[mince001]

Originally Posted by grotto_from_canada

this panda update really hurt

None of my sites got affected by the panda update... not in a negative way anyway. I guess I always think about the future when I create a new site and backlinking strategies. I think of what google might look for in the future.

[patrich]

What if you're running for Mayor and I vote you for 'best hair', that's a vote, does it help you become Mayor?

Actually, it very well could help you become mayor indirectly. If someone is running for mayor and a hundred different people say well we don't think he would make a good mayor, but I love his hair and we are going to vote for him in the hair contest, what happens? He goes off to win the hair contest, his name gets out there in the hair community and he quickly begins to gain popularity. Now half of these big hair fans say I really like that guy and they all head out and vote for him as mayor.

So while the vote for his hair didn't necessarily increase his votes as mayor, it helped to increase his popularity which led to more votes and eventually being elected mayor.

The same is true with backlinks. Sure you get some crappy backlinks(votes) but those votes may lead to increased popularity which could lead to more valuable votes(backlinks) which would give you all of the rankings that you would ever want with that site.

Yes, the terms you used are a way to oversimplify things, but, even the little votes count when you look at the bigger picture.

[BarryWheeler]

Originally Posted by mince001

This is so true. But it would be way to complicated to explain to people that are just starting out in seo about which backlinks are the best and how things have changed over the year. Understanding the Google algorithm is key... and then do what google wants.

It's not that it's complicated. Haven't you realized that people starting out in SEO just want to obtain a "link"?

They could care less about where it comes from or what impact it will have on their site.

[Valera]

I agree with you and your rant... a link is a link attitude is wrong and will lead most newbie SEO's down the wrong path of trying to get as many backlinks as they can get even if they are not worth anything (eg, no follows, PR=NA, forum profile links) etc...

I much rather spend a little bit more time and get a few good quality links than spend few minutes on links that will do as much as a fart in a hurricane

[BarryWheeler]

Originally Posted by Valera

I agree with you and your rant... a link is a link attitude is wrong and will lead most newbie SEO's down the wrong path of trying to get as many backlinks as they can get even if they are not worth anything (eg, no follows, PR=NA, forum profile links) etc...

I much rather spend a little bit more time and get a few good quality links than spend few minutes on links that will do as much as a fart in a hurricane

Then ask why is Angela V. Edwards doing so well with her "link packs"?

She's perfected her pitch, falsely advertises her links as PR9 etc, when they are nothing more than profile links spread across irrelevant sites with little to no relation to the sites being promoted.

[Valera]

Yes, they all have PR=NA

Just because the forum is a PR9 doesnt mean that the profile link is going to be a PR9 also.

Its a massive false advertising campaign hahah

[amoeba]

i believe you are seo pro and the point you have taken is very true..but just a thing i wanna add...

What if you're running for Mayor and I vote you for 'best hair', that's a vote, does it help you become Mayor?

What if you're running for Mayor and I am hair dresser, and i vote for you for "Mayor" with all relevant reasons, does it help you become Mayor? what if there are 2k like me?

[Valera]

LOL,

As we mentioned above all backlinks are votes and all votes do count, however, with SEO its way different than regular government voting for obvious reasons...

A. If you vote for the government every vote counts the same.

B. Links as votes in SEO terms all count differently, that is why he used the mayor example I guess...

Lets put it this way, its gonna sound retarded but its the best way I can think of explaining it right now...

Say you are going for a job, and you have a reference from high school teacher, and I am going for the same job and I have a reference from chancellor of Harvard...

My reference is going to be deemed more authoratitive than yours and I will most likely get the job.

Thats why some people like to try and build .edu backlinks, do follow links and high PR links, because they carry a lot more authority.

[mince001]

Originally Posted by BarryWheeler

It's not that it's complicated. Haven't you realized that people starting out in SEO just want to obtain a "link"?

They could care less about where it comes from or what impact it will have on their site.

I guess...but that's not the right way to get going. Research first, action second. That's if you want long term rankings.

[Josh MacDonald]

Actually it's [/Warning: this is a rant] to end it.

Yeh, but regardless, you want all kinds of links. If you have all pr3+ do follows, Google will be skeptical, however if you have some no follow links from blogs and Yahoo Answers, then it will all seem natural.

[packerfan]

If I'm running for mayor, and people are talking about how awesome my hair is, I'm thrilled. At least their talking about me and not the other guy running.

All pub is good pub, and I think of links the same way. Some are better than others, but I'm not going to sit around and like I'm too good for people to talk about my hair.

[BenJackson]

Originally Posted by packerfan

If I'm running for mayor, and people are talking about how awesome my hair is, I'm thrilled. At least their talking about me and not the other guy running.

All pub is good pub, and I think of links the same way. Some are better than others, but I'm not going to sit around and like I'm too good for people to talk about my hair.

I didn't realize that analogy was going to get so much attention

The problem is that you are listing a scenario where you just acquire what we are considering to be lousy backlinks (irrelevant votes) for nothing. If people just link to your site because it's great then sure, you don't even have a choice to turn those away. But you wouldn't run a campaign for 'best hair' if you want to be the mayor - you wouldn't get those votes on purpose and they wouldn't help you achieve your goal. It's like getting a link from a page about tennis with the anchor text 'tennis' to your page about 'tv reviews'. Sure, I suppose it's a link, but its entirely irrelevant and is not going to help you with your ranking.

But to reiterate, the main point was that calling a backlink a vote makes all backlinks sound equal, and they are not.

[BarryWheeler]

Originally Posted by mince001

I guess...but that's not the right way to get going. Research first, action second. That's if you want long term rankings.

This is a start, but it isn't always about the link.

Please, don't interpret that as me saying link building isn't important. It is.

There's just much more to SEO than link building.

There's keyword analysis, competition analysis, inbound / outbound link analysis, site structure, social media, local search, Bing/Google/Yahoo considerations etc. These are just a few.

It's also not a "Do It" and "Forget It" approach either. It is long term as you say, but it also has to be ongoing.

Otherwise your competition is going to fly up your butt and outrank you!

[HKSEO Rotzee]

Originally Posted by BenJackson

[Warning: this is a rant]

I've grown tired of over-simplifications and nonsense sayings like the ones in the title. The mentality that "a link is a link" is a very poor one. The point in learning SEO (off-page at least) is to understand the specifics that make one backlink better than another, how to obtain these links, and how to augment the effectiveness of a backlink through strategies like tiered link building. If you truly think a link is a link and you wish to negate all properties of a backlink then why are you even in the SEO forum discussing it?

All backlinks are not created equal.

Also, this saying...

"A backlink is like a vote for your site"

It's an extreme over-simplification. Some people might argue that it makes it easier for newbies to understand. No, it doesn't. It confuses them into thinking in terms of quantity rather than quality because that is the connotation of a vote. It's a mindset that is responsible for the success of so many mass profile linking services. More links = more votes = higher rankings right?

What if you're running for Mayor and I vote you for 'best hair', that's a vote, does it help you become Mayor?

I've just grown frustrated with discussions that have no depth because they are cut short at the point where we equalize all backlinks. I know this thread probably won't make much of an impact, but please, if we're going to talk about SEO then lets get into it and learn from each other, not simply speak in short adages that have no place in such a complex field.

[end rant]

I agree calling it a vote isn't the easiest way to explain in to a newbie...I find using currency as an analogy works well in some cases.

Some links are like pennies, some like dollars. It may take 100 pennies to equal one dollar but both are a dollar. Saying something like "Some times its easier to just throw 100 pennies at a site than it is to take a 100 pennies and go the bank, turn it into a dollar bill and then throw it at the site, etc".

I think it explains it a little easier that way IMO.

[Steadyon]

Originally Posted by BenJackson

[Warning: this is a rant]

I've just grown frustrated with discussions that have no depth because they are cut short at the point where we equalize all backlinks. I know this thread probably won't make much of an impact, but please, if we're going to talk about SEO then lets get into it and learn from each other, not simply speak in short adages that have no place in such a complex field.

[end rant]

Well, let's get into it then. You have said a lot without saying much. So are you able to clarify a bit more of your link building strategy etc...?

Originally Posted by mince001

None of my sites got affected by the panda update... not in a negative way anyway. I guess I always think about the future when I create a new site and backlinking strategies. I think of what google might look for in the future.

Well good for you. And the point of your post?

A great many decent sites have been badly affected. Jobs lost and businesses closed. so are you gloating or just rubbing people's noses in it?

If not, share why you think your sites weren't affected. Or where they already ranking poorly to start with.

I don't mean to be too harsh with you, but your comment really p*ssed me off, even if it wasn't intended.

Sam

[esdavis]

I like the currency model for describing links built. Yes, all links are a vote, but unlike an election where all votes are created equal, links carry different "value" or "weight".

All that means is that some links are worth $100 and others are worth $0.01. The higher dollar links do more good, and you waste less time in your life building links, because the "big guys" hold more value to your site.

But that doesn't mean a few big links win the day. Google also likes a diverse link profile. So a few $100 links coming from a couple of places isn't diverse. You need a nice mix of them. Just weigh the "person time" or "money spent" cost for obtaining the links versus the value impact of the links.

That's why so many of us holler out about profile links and comment links. Inherently, they are usually lower value links, so you need to spend a lot of time or money chasing down a lot of them. The total volume, and the diversity, can help, but quantity by itself is not the determining factor in deciding your ultimate link value to Google.

Ben's viewpoint is shared by a lot of us, but I disagree on one point. If we are sharing knowledge here for newbies, then we need to share both sides of the coin. Not just the issue of "value of a link" but also the issues of link diversity, opportunity cost in link-building, varying results with different types of links, and so on.

Link-building doesn't have to be considered "complicated" versus "simplistic." We just need to share a model of link-building that includes not only the quantity and diversity issues but also the quality and value issues.

Each of those points are pretty simple in concept, but often in posts here people only bring up one part of the model and don't mention the impact that it has on the other parts of the model. So newbies who aren't familiar with the whole ball of wax are only picking up the pieces they have been reading about. Like profile linking or whatever.