46 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
46 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

GP Pinging for Page Rank does this work

by Tara
39 replies
Hi guys!
Have anyone pinged their client's or their own GP listing? I heard that this could be done but am not sure how to do it or if it works. Someone also told me that citations can be pinged, why would you want to ping citations?

Still learning about GP...
#page #pinging #rank #work
  • Profile picture of the author k60mall
    Hi Tara

    The reason to pin the maps listing and the citation sites is so that you let Google know there is new content. So to answer your question, yes it does work.

    Use this site to ping you citation URL's

    Blog and Ping Tool - Use Pingler.com to Drive Traffic your Blogs and Websites

    Keith
    Signature
    [FACEBOOK AUTORESPONDER] UNLIMITED LISTS/SUBSCRIBERS + 99.9% OPEN RATE = IM WET DREAM!

    Local Business Listing Robot Posts Reviews 24/7 While You Sleep - Now Open
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3908826].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tara
    Coo...thanx! k60mall, do you ping a certain number of times per wk or month? This is great info...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3908900].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tara
    Looking for more input on pinging GP...maybe this is too much of a noobie subject
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3909465].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author k60mall
    HI Tara

    Every time you add a new review to a citation you need to ping it, again you are letting Google know there is new content on the page.

    Keith
    Signature
    [FACEBOOK AUTORESPONDER] UNLIMITED LISTS/SUBSCRIBERS + 99.9% OPEN RATE = IM WET DREAM!

    Local Business Listing Robot Posts Reviews 24/7 While You Sleep - Now Open
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3911592].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
      Originally Posted by k60mall View Post

      HI Tara

      Every time you add a new review to a citation you need to ping it, again you are letting Google know there is new content on the page.

      Keith
      Google will find things on its own. It is better to let it go naturally without risking anything.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3911622].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author thesorcerersapprentice
        Originally Posted by iAmNameLess View Post

        Google will find things on its own. It is better to let it go naturally without risking anything.
        Yes Google will find it on its own but that can take months for it then to find its way through to your GP listing. I fully agree that you don't want to Ping Spam your listing or citations but if you use it correctly it is a good way of getting your citations/reviews etc indexed quicker so that your ranking improves and you deliver for your client.
        Signature

        Tap into the Video Gold Mine with my Free 4 Part Offline Cash Secrets video course.

        If you want to FINALLY start making money online then check out Instant Internet Lifestyle blog.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3911913].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author One Smart Click
          Use Pingomatic.com to Ping with top Directories and Feed Directories
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3921431].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
    Pinging is a popular concept that many people do that have no idea what they're doing. You ping content went you want google to come index or crawl it. Sometimes it is good to ping, if you add something new, or adjust the on page optimization of a site. Unfortunately, most of the time this just takes away the power or juice of links, citations, and relevance.

    You're better off putting a citation, in your signature here, than you are pinging it.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3911618].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author k60mall
    Sorry but I disagree as I always ping my citations when I add a new review. This is not spam as I am just letting Google know about the new content just like wordpress does when you add new content.
    Signature
    [FACEBOOK AUTORESPONDER] UNLIMITED LISTS/SUBSCRIBERS + 99.9% OPEN RATE = IM WET DREAM!

    Local Business Listing Robot Posts Reviews 24/7 While You Sleep - Now Open
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3912602].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jsherloc
    I've seen what I view as "negative results" from "overpinging" on a few of my personal projects, but that was when I was pinging THOUSANDS of crappy backlinks to let Google know they exist. I'll never really know 100% though.

    That being said, we are not talking about pinging 10,000 xrumer profile links here, etc. First of all, these directory websites carry a TON of weight in themselves, and thus I agree it isn't really "necessary" in the grand scheme of things. However, pinging these citations every time you get a new review and what not, it is only going to help you by speeding up the crawling process. How much help really? I don't know, but it won't harm you in any way. I would agree though that you'd certainly see more "boosting" from placing links to your citation websites on other high authority websites, like this one, or perhaps your actual Google Places profile, etc.

    My view is that it is not going to hurt you whatsoever, but the positive may not be THAT noticeable. If it only takes an extra minute, why not? I got frustrated with pingler after awhile due to the "only one URL allowed" thing, there are a few pinging websites that will let you just paste in MULTIPLE URLs to make things easy. I know PingDevice.com is one of these sites.

    - Jim
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3915278].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MrJupiter
      There comments so far, so I'll try not to repeat what's been said.

      One thing I'd like to add, to hopefully lead you down the right path is that you should test these things on your own. In marketing testing is integral. I tend to ping my sites, because I've never seen it do any harm and I have (apparently) seen it do good.

      That said, testing should be more rigorous (i.e. scientific) than what I've described above; however, I tend to save testing time for other things. That's just me.

      p.s. citations can take a long time to 'stick'. Make of that what you will.

      All the best Tara.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3915517].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author k60mall
      I would agree with your comments about piging thousands of links at a time but when you think about it you will only add 4 or 5 reviews to your business on Yelp etc per month so pinging these citation URL's won't be a problem and be seen as spam.

      Originally Posted by jsherloc View Post

      I've seen what I view as "negative results" from "overpinging" on a few of my personal projects, but that was when I was pinging THOUSANDS of crappy backlinks to let Google know they exist. I'll never really know 100% though.

      That being said, we are not talking about pinging 10,000 xrumer profile links here, etc. First of all, these directory websites carry a TON of weight in themselves, and thus I agree it isn't really "necessary" in the grand scheme of things. However, pinging these citations every time you get a new review and what not, it is only going to help you by speeding up the crawling process. How much help really? I don't know, but it won't harm you in any way. I would agree though that you'd certainly see more "boosting" from placing links to your citation websites on other high authority websites, like this one, or perhaps your actual Google Places profile, etc.

      My view is that it is not going to hurt you whatsoever, but the positive may not be THAT noticeable. If it only takes an extra minute, why not? I got frustrated with pingler after awhile due to the "only one URL allowed" thing, there are a few pinging websites that will let you just paste in MULTIPLE URLs to make things easy. I know PingDevice.com is one of these sites.

      - Jim
      Signature
      [FACEBOOK AUTORESPONDER] UNLIMITED LISTS/SUBSCRIBERS + 99.9% OPEN RATE = IM WET DREAM!

      Local Business Listing Robot Posts Reviews 24/7 While You Sleep - Now Open
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3918392].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
    pinging your actual sites, will do good. Pinging you backlinks or citations, will hurt you over time. You will see. Look in the SEO forum for all the posts that lost their rankings and they don't know why...LOL

    SEO is my bread and butter, everything else is extra. If you want your links indexed, build back links to them. Link to your links.

    Do you know what pinging actually is? RSS feeds are almost always devalued now anyway, and the links inside a channel, might have a 10% crawl rate.... notice I said crawl rate, not index rate.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3915710].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jsherloc
      Originally Posted by iAmNameLess View Post

      pinging your actual sites, will do good. Pinging you backlinks or citations, will hurt you over time. You will see. Look in the SEO forum for all the posts that lost their rankings and they don't know why...LOL

      SEO is my bread and butter, everything else is extra. If you want your links indexed, build back links to them. Link to your links.

      Do you know what pinging actually is? RSS feeds are almost always devalued now anyway, and the links inside a channel, might have a 10% crawl rate.... notice I said crawl rate, not index rate.
      What you have described has not been my experience in doing SEO work the last few years. How exactly are you measuring "hurt" in this scenerio? Rankings plummet, total deindexing, etc?

      What do you think about all the new indexing/crawling services popping up like Linklicious, etc? They work to increase the actual crawl rate you mentioned, assuming A LOT of backlinks that people build may never get actually "indexed", but forcing the crawl rate higher can't be a bad thing. Though I did have concerns with footprints and what not....

      As I mentioned, we can all agree that building backlinks to your backlinks is the best idea here. But to say that pinging a few hundred directory/citation websites over time is going to "hurt you", I just don't see HOW that would even happen. How does it happen?

      - Jim
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3916432].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
        Originally Posted by jsherloc View Post

        What you have described has not been my experience in doing SEO work the last few years. How exactly are you measuring "hurt" in this scenerio? Rankings plummet, total deindexing, etc?

        What do you think about all the new indexing/crawling services popping up like Linklicious, etc? They work to increase the actual crawl rate you mentioned, assuming A LOT of backlinks that people build may never get actually "indexed", but forcing the crawl rate higher can't be a bad thing. Though I did have concerns with footprints and what not....

        As I mentioned, we can all agree that building backlinks to your backlinks is the best idea here. But to say that pinging a few hundred directory/citation websites over time is going to "hurt you", I just don't see HOW that would even happen. How does it happen?

        - Jim
        Hurt, means, not helping. LOL. It isn't going to cause deindexing, at least I haven't experience deindexing, but I have experience rankings plummeting, and the links being devalued. What will usually happen, is you get some links, everything is all good, you think pinging will help even more... a few weeks later rankings can plummet because your links have been rendered useless.

        How many sites have you done SEO for in the last couple years? Obviously the game changes regularly, but the truth is that a quality backlink, is going to be indexed quickly, without pinging. If you have to ping to get your links crawled, they're coming from low quality sources.

        Crawl rate, means absolutely nothing in terms of ranking. Index rate does.

        Do you believe keyword stuffing will hurt you? Duplicate content within your own site? Low quality links?

        I guess I don't have too much evidence... I have had this experience with about 50 sites in my network when I was attempting to do some case studies. When you ping a mass amount of links, you're not helping yourself. You're hurting yourself, because you're reaching out to google, saying, "hey come index this piece of **** link, because it isn't quality, and isn't getting traffic on its own, so mr. Googlebot isn't going to come unless I ping".

        There are many elements of SEO... there are many factors that are included in the algorithm on HOW to rank a website. There are MORE factors that tell it how NOT to rank a website.

        Linklicious... haven't done much testing yet, you have to keep in mind that the crawl rate and index rate are different things. I have used it a few times, maybe for 10ish sites... I noticed half of them did well, but the other half was off in lala land until I did some edu/gov backlinking.

        For those that do SEO for other businesses, other than just for their own websites, know a few tricks to get things indexed and create more power... When it comes to local sites, citations are no doubt huge, but you don't ping them... google is always at those sites anyway... your listings are probably crawled within a few minutes, just like our posts being crawled almost instantly here. CRAWLED... not indexed... there is a difference... You can ping a site or a link 1 million times and it isn't going to make google roll out the different data centers for the search index any faster.

        If you have a citation, for a local business, you can link to it from the actual website, or on another website... if it is on your website, build links to the page that has the link, and let it go. The spiders will go to your page, see the link, crawl it, go to the citation, crawl it, and so on. If you're pinging, then you just don't have quality citations.

        It also won't help you with getting your places ranked higher... pinging doesn't help you, it isn't going to help your citations go live any sooner, and it isn't going to make google speed up by calculating all the variables. Places isn't updated by the same algorithm as the actual engine.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3916744].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author jsherloc
          Originally Posted by iAmNameLess View Post

          Hurt, means, not helping. LOL. It isn't going to cause deindexing, at least I haven't experience deindexing, but I have experience rankings plummeting, and the links being devalued. What will usually happen, is you get some links, everything is all good, you think pinging will help even more... a few weeks later rankings can plummet because your links have been rendered useless.
          Yep, that is what I have seen happen with MASSIVE amounts of xrumer links, as I mentioned above in this thread. I still don't believe either of us can say that pinging itself is DEFINITIVELY what caused it though, even based on our own many experiences. As you said, too much at work behind the scenes of the algo....

          How many sites have you done SEO for in the last couple years? Obviously the game changes regularly, but the truth is that a quality backlink, is going to be indexed quickly, without pinging. If you have to ping to get your links crawled, they're coming from low quality sources.
          I've done seo work for at least a few hundred websites over the years, locally-targeted and my own online projects. Totally agree with you, as I mentioned in this thread above in regards to crappy profile links and what not. Still, in my experience...massive amounts of crappy links can easily beat out someone with a only a few "GOOD" links any day. Its the reality of the game we play every day.

          Crawl rate, means absolutely nothing in terms of ranking. Index rate does.
          I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Don't you need to be crawled first in order to be indexed? I understand they are different, but I wasn't aware indexation occurred outside of, or irregardless of, a site being crawled. I understand what you are saying in terms of many low quality links probably NEVER being indexed no matter how much link juice you throw at them. But, I would contend that crawl rate leads to indexation which leads to ranking which leads to profit goals...so you need to be crawled, and most people build a bunch of crappy links and then announce to Google to come and find them, just like you suggested.

          Do you believe keyword stuffing will hurt you? Duplicate content within your own site? Low quality links?
          Keyword stuffing in what sense? I'd recommend everyone have a decent kw density for their onpage work, no need to go overboard in my opinion and experiences. Saying that, I've seen all types of blatant kw-stuffing ranking well to this day. Shouldn't have dupe content on your own site, spin it a bit and give it a run around town though for sure. Low quality links are going to continue to be "devalued". To me, there is a distinct difference between something "hurting you", and something that is "not helping you" though.

          In my opinion, newer sites CAN be affected negatively by competitors by them throwing massive amounts of junk links at the newer site (less than a year or two) via TONS of xrumer blasts, etc. They'll usually recover stronger of course, but this could take months easily. But other than a scenario like this, as we all know, it is REALLY difficult for their algo to actually PUNISH website owners for anything that takes place OFFPAGE. It just can't happen. People would be runnin amok blasting all their competitions' websites with garbage xrumer links.

          All they can do is continue to adjust the value of a particular backlinking strategy down to "0", rendering it completely useless. The thing is, even if they are only valued a MINUSCULE amount, it will always be way easier to get tens of thousands of these type of automated crappy links in order to outrank the guy who spends time once a month manually commenting on relevant blogs. So, IMO, that is the ultimate dilemma Google faces with their linking algo issues. There is no way around the foundation of the algo itself, as it is inherently flawed in this respect. (people can sabotage their competitors if you punish webmasters for offpage linking methods)


          I guess I don't have too much evidence... I have had this experience with about 50 sites in my network when I was attempting to do some case studies. When you ping a mass amount of links, you're not helping yourself. You're hurting yourself, because you're reaching out to google, saying, "hey come index this piece of **** link, because it isn't quality, and isn't getting traffic on its own, so mr. Googlebot isn't going to come unless I ping".
          I didn't think we were really discussing garbage links in the OP though, but high authority directory citation websites. How would pinging these "hurt" you? These aren't "xxxxxxviagraxxxx.cialisssxxxx.ze/members/obio111.html" links were talking about. I agree that could potentially "not help" though.

          It also won't help you with getting your places ranked higher... pinging doesn't help you, it isn't going to help your citations go live any sooner, and it isn't going to make google speed up by calculating all the variables. Places isn't updated by the same algorithm as the actual engine.
          I'd have to disagree a bit with you on this one. Links need to be crawled before they are indexed, correct? We know some links aren't going to get indexed at all regardless, and Google is ensuring that this happens more often as us marketers get more creative with our "crappy linking" strategies. Personally, I don't believe it "helps" that much to ping anymore, but I certainly don't believe it is a complete waste of time to ping high-quality authority pages that you want Googlebot to visit asap at this point in time. I'm sure I'll change my opinion down the road. As mentioned, I personally wouldn't do it for indexing MASSIVE amounts of low quality links again (Google dancing occurs like CRAZY when pinging TONS of these crappy links, and I'm a control freak.), but IMO running directory websites like these through something like pingdevice COULD in fact make your citations go live sooner, knowing the nature of general SEO strategies.

          I'd agree the algo's are obviously different, but I'd be surprised if they weren't interconnected in a lot of ways. Look at what has happened the past year with the whole Places/Organic MERGER that they're still experimenting with.

          - Jim
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3917617].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
            Originally Posted by jsherloc View Post

            I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Don't you need to be crawled first in order to be indexed? I understand they are different, but I wasn't aware indexation occurred outside of, or irregardless of, a site being crawled. I understand what you are saying in terms of many low quality links probably NEVER being indexed no matter how much link juice you throw at them. But, I would contend that crawl rate leads to indexation which leads to ranking which leads to profit goals...so you need to be crawled, and most people build a bunch of crappy links and then announce to Google to come and find them, just like you suggested.

            You misunderstood... just because something gets crawled, doesn't mean it will be indexed. The more times you have a low quality link, or rss mashing and pinging, the less likely you will get indexed. It will be crawled many times without being indexed. Know why sites jump around after a bunch of profile links that get pinged? Because there are soooo many times google is crawling but not indexing.


            Keyword stuffing in what sense? I'd recommend everyone have a decent kw density for their onpage work, no need to go overboard in my opinion and experiences. Saying that, I've seen all types of blatant kw-stuffing ranking well to this day. Shouldn't have dupe content on your own site, spin it a bit and give it a run around town though for sure. Low quality links are going to continue to be "devalued". To me, there is a distinct difference between something "hurting you", and something that is "not helping you" though.

            Keyword density is the biggest bunch of BS that people spend way too much time worrying about. People trying to make a perfect 3.5% density, they are just wasting time. As long as you don't go overboard, that is all that matters. Keyword density used to play a big role maybe 4-5 years ago and before, but nowadays it accounts for less than 1% of your SERPs.

            I don't know how many sites or clients you have, and how many tests you have done... but the hundreds of my own sites on my own network, along with my clients, I have seen a lot of strange things happen, have used various techniques, and even though there is no formula for every site and every keyword the most important thing I have learned is what does not work.

            You may not have been effected yet, but I'm almost positive you will in the next few months. You may think of links, being devalued, as not helping you, but I think of links being devalued as harming you. The reason why this is a double whammy, is because you're losing links, and then you're losing points and trust rank with google on top of that, which is going to effect your rankings.

            In my opinion, newer sites CAN be affected negatively by competitors by them throwing massive amounts of junk links at the newer site (less than a year or two) via TONS of xrumer blasts, etc. They'll usually recover stronger of course, but this could take months easily. But other than a scenario like this, as we all know, it is REALLY difficult for their algo to actually PUNISH website owners for anything that takes place OFFPAGE. It just can't happen. People would be runnin amok blasting all their competitions' websites with garbage xrumer links.

            It isn't the links or blasts that hurt the websites, I can have someone blast out 2 million links for me... what is going to hurt me is when the links become devalued, and no link building happens afterwards.

            All they can do is continue to adjust the value of a particular backlinking strategy down to "0", rendering it completely useless. The thing is, even if they are only valued a MINUSCULE amount, it will always be way easier to get tens of thousands of these type of automated crappy links in order to outrank the guy who spends time once a month manually commenting on relevant blogs. So, IMO, that is the ultimate dilemma Google faces with their linking algo issues. There is no way around the foundation of the algo itself, as it is inherently flawed in this respect. (people can sabotage their competitors if you punish webmasters for offpage linking methods)

            I have to disagree... you can get 10,000 ****ty links, and I can spend 5 minutes and get 2-3 that will outweigh those links.



            I didn't think we were really discussing garbage links in the OP though, but high authority directory citation websites. How would pinging these "hurt" you? These aren't "xxxxxxviagraxxxx.cialisssxxxx.ze/members/obio111.html" links were talking about. I agree that could potentially "not help" though.

            How about you test this out, I already have and you know my stance on this. I am not speculating here, do thorough testing and tell me you disagree with what I'm saying.

            I'd have to disagree a bit with you on this one. Links need to be crawled before they are indexed, correct? We know some links aren't going to get indexed at all regardless, and Google is ensuring that this happens more often as us marketers get more creative with our "crappy linking" strategies. Personally, I don't believe it "helps" that much to ping anymore, but I certainly don't believe it is a complete waste of time to ping high-quality authority pages that you want Googlebot to visit asap at this point in time. I'm sure I'll change my opinion down the road. As mentioned, I personally wouldn't do it for indexing MASSIVE amounts of low quality links again (Google dancing occurs like CRAZY when pinging TONS of these crappy links, and I'm a control freak.), but IMO running directory websites like these through something like pingdevice COULD in fact make your citations go live sooner, knowing the nature of general SEO strategies.

            I'm kind of irritated that I even acknowledged your post THIS much... experience means more than speculation. The logic in this, is flawed. What you just said, is that you don't believe it is a complete waste of time to ping high quality, authority pages.... First off, you don't ping high authority pages. Secondly, google is already at high authority sites non stop. Pinging links, sites, etc, reduces value of the page that is pinged, meaning that you're getting less link juice. It is factored into their algorithm. And no... pinging is not going to make your citation go live sooner... your citation will always be indexed, well maybe not always, but you can ping a citation and backlink to it, without applying it to your places listing. They are two separate algorithms, and you're right about them somewhat tying together, but it is different. The reason it takes a while for citations to apply, is because of the data centers. Sometimes you get lucky, but other times you are going to have to wait. Nothing you can do about that.

            Do you code at all? You should check out some of the development tools provided by google... I entered code jam for the 2nd time this year. It really opens your eyes into how things are really calculated and factored into the algo. It also helps put things into perspective, on how updates effect rankings and how to eliminate possibilities of penalties.
            Answers in bold... tired, don't take offense like so many do.
            Signature
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3917892].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dhira
      Originally Posted by iAmNameLess View Post

      pinging your actual sites, will do good. Pinging you backlinks or citations, will hurt you over time.
      Absolute rubbish.

      Pinging citations makes them rank and rank quickly.
      I know what I'm talking about since I do it for my Google Places clients...
      Seeing their citations on the first page along with their sites AND along with GPlaces tells me I'm doing something right.
      Signature

      CPA SECRET$: • C.L.A.$.$. = FREE ADS For CPA! or • "Clean up" CPA OFFERS WITH 'S.O.A.P'!
      PAY PER CALL: • Backlink Domination For Pay-Per-Call!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3923696].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
        Originally Posted by Dhira View Post

        Absolute rubbish.

        Pinging citations makes them rank and rank quickly.
        I know what I'm talking about since I do it for my Google Places clients...
        Seeing their citations on the first page along with their sites AND along with GPlaces tells me I'm doing something right.
        AGGH... do you know what pinging is, and what it is for? Do you know that pinging using google's API, is only for BLOG SEARCH!?!? Using any other form of pinging is, A.) not going to even be crawled, or B.) the decay rate is going to increase.

        I know what I'm talking about as well, I have more #1 rankings than both our post counts combined LOL... still means nothing though, everything you and I know or don't know, can change instantly.

        You SHOULD be seeing citations on the first page no matter what if you do it right, LOL... Pinging anything, NEVER has made it more powerful... pinging USE TO BE useful, but not in the form of positioning, LMAO.

        Citations will rank, because they are authority sites. They are crawled almost instantly, without even needing to ping them. Would you ping the home page of cnn.com? The second it is up there, it is getting crawled. Did you ping this thread here on the warrior forum? Don't think so... and this thread is already ranking for certain keywords.. Know why? Because of the authority this site has, and how often google is here crawling.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3923717].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cchipster
    The debate has started!
    Signature
    No signature, I'm sure you will be ok.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3916513].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mreese601@gmail.com
    Pinging should be done anytime you have new content, all pinging does is alert the search engines of new content. As a result of me pinging all of my new content I get more traffic to my websites. Which brings me more sales.
    Signature
    Fastest Way To Making Sales On The Internet
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3916527].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
      Originally Posted by Mreese601@gmail.com View Post

      Pinging should be done anytime you have new content, all pinging does is alert the search engines of new content. As a result of me pinging all of my new content I get more traffic to my websites. Which brings me more sales.
      Really? Please explain to me, what YOU believe the process of pinging is.

      If you respond, saying blah blah blah, go to this site, enter the URL, hit submit... then save yourself the embarrassment.

      You're at least right about traffic bringing more sales... Wanna know how I get traffic? I do SEO... I build links, send press releases, do article marketing, social media marketing, etc. And that makes me sales. Pinging doesn't make you a sale.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3916760].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tara
    Hi guys... Thanx! for the great input. I have a lot to consider. Will definetly do my own testing!

    Tara
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3917384].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jsherloc
    I don't know, my opinion and experience seems to line up with the majority of other people's experiences (people actively competing for competitive terms) that are in this line of work, leading me to believe it is not just speculation, but more like group-tested theory as to what is CURRENTLY working. The Backlinksforum provides for some interesting insights from those well-versed in SEO.

    If you are actively doing SEO, you are actively adding all kinds of diversified links. Massive amounts of crappy links CAN and WILL help you in my own experience, provided you are using a variety of link sources and not JUST the crappy links. Also provided you continue to build links. But who here is doing SEO work and then abruptly stopping? I hope not too many of us...

    Everything I am discussing here is based on my years of experiences and testing, not just random speculation like you seem to be suggesting. My point is, really, BOTH OF US ARE SPECULATING based on our own results. I've confirmed that a lot of my own experiences and results are the same things other people are witnessing on most of the major SEO forums, I'm sure you've done the same.

    Yes, you can certainly ping any URL out there you'd like to, including high authority pages. This is a fact regardless of whether you think it is a good idea? You can ping ANY URL. I don't agree that it "reduces the value", at least not in smaller doses in regards to the authority sites as we're discussing here. If you are building ongoing diversified links like you should be doing, adding a ton of crappy links to the pile is more than likely not going to make your rankings drop, but pinging them all at once might make you dance for a long while as I suggested and experienced.

    If they become devalued in the future...so what...you're actively building all types of links anyways..both quality and quantity? You should have a ton of link diversity as a foundation regardless, and most smart SEOs do. If you stop building links completely and all your links get devalued a few months later, of course you're going to see a rankings drop.

    As much as Google doesn't want to admit it, if two websites are identical in every way in terms of a well-rounded diversified backlink portfolio, onpage, etc... a site that gets a few thousand crappy links on a consistent basis is more than likely going to end up outranking the website with JUST the diversified linking portfolio. Quantity (when used responsibly obviously) can and will put you over the top, all other things considered equal IMO and in my own experiences.

    Pinging links, sites, etc, reduces value of the page that is pinged, meaning that you're getting less link juice. It is factored into their algorithm.
    Do you have an official source for this?

    As far as making citations go live sooner, I am referring to when new reviews get posted on these types of websites. If my client gets 5 new Yelp reviews tomorrow, and I ping the URL where these reviews are located, you're saying it will reduce the value of the Yelp website/listing? So it actively takes the "link juice" away every time the URL is pinged?

    - Jim

    edit: Also, I see the same "OHHH NO MY RANKINGS DROPPED MY SITE IS GONE FROM GOOGLE!!" "MY WEBSITE DISAPPEARED FROM GOOGLE OHHH NOOO" posts you're referring to allll the time as well. In my experiences, when some of these people actually give up their website info and let other people dig around to discover what could have caused their rankings drop/deindexed, etc...it usually ends up being something blatantly wrong or they were screwing up something major, violating guidelines, or they're blasting 100,000 xrumer links at their website they just put up yesterday. I doubt very much that pinging, or "overpinging", as you are suggesting in this thread, is the reason that MOST people actively doing SEO work are experiencing "negative" results.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3918365].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
    You can disagree all you want, but when you have clients paying you a few thousand a month, you learn to not do things that will hurt. You believe it doesn't hurt, thats fine with me, and I don't really care. Most SMART SEOs don't ping authority pages, because there is no need to. I can't believe you're trying to claim that unnatural activity isn't going to hurt you. In my opinion, and the top authorities on SEO in general agree that google finding links, citations, reviews, etc, NATURALLY is more powerful.

    This reminds me of when my best client hired me. They are a national corporation, and they had 200 first page rankings... they hired me as a consultant to go back and forth with the SEO company they hired. The SEO company was pinging backlinks, like crazy. Needless to say, when they lost 100 first page spots the company was fired, and I took over. Now, the client has 13,000 keywords on page one... 8,000ish are ranked #1. 16 months for those results, and not pinging a single link out of the 500,000ish links they have.

    I would rather do what works, than what the majority of people think won't hurt. Fact is, majority of people never had a client for SEO.. they have never had even mediocre competition, and they just don't know what it takes when it comes to a lot of work.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3921257].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jsherloc
      Originally Posted by iAmNameLess View Post

      You can disagree all you want, but when you have clients paying you a few thousand a month, you learn to not do things that will hurt. You believe it doesn't hurt, thats fine with me, and I don't really care. Most SMART SEOs don't ping authority pages, because there is no need to. I can't believe you're trying to claim that unnatural activity isn't going to hurt you. In my opinion, and the top authorities on SEO in general agree that google finding links, citations, reviews, etc, NATURALLY is more powerful.
      I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that I said pinging is "more powerful" than letting Google discover the high authority citation websites. Neither of us will ever really know the truth to that anyways, yet you seem to be suggesting that your personal experience should lead EVERYONE to the same conclusion as you, all based on how much a particular client is paying you? Your opinion is that there is no need ping these sites. I'd agree with you, but ADDING TO THAT, I don't see how something not being "necessary" automatically leads to "unnatural activity" that could harm you in THIS SPECIFIC SCENARIO that we're discussing. We are talking about pinging some citation websites after you get new reviews and what not here, nothing else.

      So you define pinging a few citation websites after getting new reviews/posts as unnatural activity?

      I don't know, in my experience the whole "unnatural activity" thing is kind of like the boogeyman that everyone is always scared of, so they do exactly whatever matt cutts tells them to do. You just can't be an idiot about it.

      How exactly do YOU define "unnatural activity"? How is that REALLY picked up. I'm not talking about blatant BH stuff here, I'm talking about there realistically being ZERO discernible differences in the ways that people get links these days. Remember how blog "spam" was THE unnatural activity that could get your site wiped off the face of the earth a few years ago? Funny thing is, blog spam STILL works effectively to this day, when done right. IMO Google is just gradually devaluing their power as more automation tools and strategies continue to flood the web. Same thing they're busy doing now with profile links....

      I understand that you believe that the links are more powerful when Google finds them naturally in this case of citation sites. I don't understand how you can definitively say that pinging a few of these websites a few times a month will "hurt" people. If something doesn't help you, it doesn't automatically hurt you (aside from wasted time of course). There doesn't seem to be any credible evidence out there (through testing done around the globe) that suggests pinging a few URLs a few times a month is going to "hurt" your rankings.

      To me, when linking on the internet, it seems like it is pretty difficult for a robot to know what the linkbuilder's mindset and intentions are, ie "unnatural activity" for their own gain, or simulating "natural activity" for their own gain. If ALL the webmaster does is "unnatural activity" ie "1,000,000 xrumer blasts", than yes they leave massive footprints and will plummet. But when you've got a diversified portfolio and are actively building links all over the place (both quality and quantity), well it is ALL UNNATURAL. I don't think many of the top performing websites in their niches got their strictly through "natural activity" in the purest sense of the word, and any SEO will tell you the same thing.

      Natural activity is great, but often it is simply not enough when competing in industries WORTH competing in. I'm pretty sure at this point that Google knows this as well, as their algo consistently rewards us marketers with great rankings every year, despite the fact that the very nature of what we do could be described as the epitome of "unnatural activity".

      - Jim
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3921821].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rbrShorty
    Originally Posted by Tara View Post

    Hi guys!
    Have anyone pinged their client's or their own GP listing? I heard that this could be done but am not sure how to do it or if it works. Someone also told me that citations can be pinged, why would you want to ping citations?

    Still learning about GP...
    Tara, pinging your Google Places page doesn't help. Creating backlinks to your Places page doesn't help in long term as well. Building citations do help in long term.

    Citations can be pinged and you can see the discussion going on. However, you must know that this does not help Google associate the citations with your Place page. Pinging them might help Google index them, although I don't see the point pinging pages which are being crawled hundreds of times each month, like the listings on Yelp, City Search, Yahoo, Merchant Circle, etc. However, the association with your Place page happens over time and not spontaneously, but when Google is updating their Google Places database, which is happening 1 time per 20 days on average (you can guess when this happens when there are major changes in the GP rankings and new citations appearing in the More about this place section). Furthermore, some websites send their whole cluster of business information at once, so that's when the citations get associated. And believe me - you can ping them thousands of times and it will not help. Note that I don't say it will do harm as well. Let me give you a simple example - whoever was doing citations on Angieslist for all their clients saw the citations being associated to ALL the Place page around the beginning of April. This event happens once every 4-5 months (regarding Angieslist specifically).

    Conclusion - don't waste your time with unnecessary things like pinging citations. As some of the guys said - backlinking to the citations would do much better work, although I have no idea how you could create genuine backlinks for business directory listing pages, but I'll leave that to the experts to explain
    Signature
    Local Search Marketing by NGS Marketing

    Citation Building Service by NGS Marketing

    Phone (US): 347-535-4535 | Skype: NGS.Marketing
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3922433].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
    I don't even know what to say to you, except that it shows that you don't do this often. What do you have, maybe 5 clients? If you grow, you will obviously start learning. I don't understand why you keep saying just because something won't help, doesn't mean it hurts you... I don't get that, I'm not saying that it just isn't going to help, I'm saying that it is going to hurt. You're probably one of those people that think PR of a site really matters too... Pinging hurts because ultimately it links to discredited links, or limits the actual juice. Leaving it alone would be good, but pinging can't do anything EXCEPT hurt. Like I have been saying, you need to understand what pinging actually does. Its funny, most self proclaimed "SEO's" can't explain how pinging works, and what it actually does.

    It is important to know how the algorithm works.. I assure you, there are many things that are not speculation. Just because you hear people debate about certain things, doesn't mean there really is a debate.

    Do you know what the googlebot gathers, not only when they crawl a site, but when it is indexed? There is a lot of information that it gathers, not just content, but how it gets to the site, by what, overall OBL&PR% with trust rank. So many factors are involved, and it really comes down to math, not guessing.
    I don't think many of the top performing websites in their niches got their strictly through "natural activity" in the purest sense of the word, and any SEO will tell you the same thing.
    LOL... I can only laugh at that... nothing to really say.


    Natural activity is great, but often it is simply not enough when competing in industries WORTH competing in. I'm pretty sure at this point that Google knows this as well, as their algo consistently rewards us marketers with great rankings every year, despite the fact that the very nature of what we do could be described as the epitome of "unnatural activity".
    Shows your "knowledge" behind this... you are 100% wrong. Google is constantly punishing marketers for unnatural activity. I think that is evident in the SEO forum, and the webmaster board at google.


    Words mean nothing to me... lets go out and prove this... we both buy domains and target a specific keyword... you do your thing, and I'll do mine, same niche, same keyword... keep note of EVERYTHING done on the site, and see who comes out on top? You ping your heart away, and I'll do everything the way I do it.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3922984].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jsherloc
    Why are you still going on about pinging everything and suggesting that WE are suggesting to "ping you heart away"? We are discussing pinging a few authority citation websites and how it doesn't make any sense that it "hurts" you, like you clearly seem to be suggesting here in this thread. Everything else you have posted is just ego-boosting nonsense IMO. We'll agree to disagree on the matter. Keep doing your thing and I wish you the best of luck. Apparently you don't need it though as you must have a direct pipeline to the googlebot juice itself, perhaps that would explain your indepth knowledge that must go right over us "common folk's" heads here on the warrior forum.

    No thanks on the challenge. No need, I'm very happy with my results and don't feel I have anything to prove in this matter.

    When you do ANY SEO work, you are simulating natural linking activity...correct? That is my point, the very ESSENCE of being an internet marketer/doing SEO work is "unnatural" in the purest sense.

    "Natural" is building a site waiting for links to come to YOU. When you do anything else, in my mind, you are engaging in "unnatural" activity. YOU, as the marketer, are interfering with the NATURE of the google algo when you do work for your clients. Promoting websites that we own, or that our client's own, is done by simulating natural activity. Simulating natural activity is unnatural activity. That is fact that I just don't see how you can argue with. But I'm sure you can, so once again, we'll agree to disagree on the matter at hand.

    - Jim
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3923094].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
    Well, don't think of it as a challenge, think of it as a way to help and contribute to the community. I'll even feature it on my SEO news site.

    I don't think letting a site go, waiting for it to gain popularity is necessarily natural, but I believe promoting a site, doing natural activities one would do in forms of promotion, is perfectly fine. True SEOs, don't just get traffic from the search engine even though that is the origin. When I have a client, I want to protect them from possible future changes from search engines... I build up traffic using a wide variety of methods, that doesn't depend on google. You'll notice people in the SEO forum, lose their rankings and they lose 90% of their business. My clients don't need to worry about that.

    Anyway, with each post you make on here, you make less and less sense. You clearly have nothing else to say on the subject, just trying to rip every post of mine apart. I guess I should feel honored? You can continue on if you wish, it only helps me make more sales with my WSO... LOL.

    Back to the issue though, you're not making any points. You're avoiding any kind of "challenge" I throw your way, and you refuse to answer my question on what you believe pinging is? And how it works?

    Drip feeding is the only form of "pinging" that may not harm you...

    1. What do you think pinging is and to your knowledge, explain the process, please.
    2. Why would any knowledgeable SEO, ping an authority site?
    3. So you're admitting you're simulating unnatural activity, not actually doing anything natural for your clients? It is natural to send out press releases, it is natural to have a social media presence, it is natural to link to your clients websites to people who would genuinely be interested. It is unnatural to ping an authority website, it is unnatural to build thousands of profile links with no posts on those accounts, it is natural to be syndicated. It is unnatural to be syndicated as a means of pinging.

    If you want to do link pushing, and pinging your lower tiers, go right ahead, that might save some time. Whether that hurts or not, doesn't even matter.

    I suppose I should have been clear before, it really depends on what you are doing to ping your sites... automated pinging using their API is okay... All in all though, if you're pinging citations, you're losing weight. That hurts you, because if you were receiving full wait from that citation, then pinging it when the only thing originally meant for pinging is blogs, only effected in BLOG SEARCHES, and they crawl the site realizing it isn't a blog set up you're losing weight. So when your citation gets pinged, a brand new link that would have been applied, is now already decaying. Lets say a new page, pr n/a, link gets pinged, factor is X1...decay rate starts -.5 at that time..

    To break it down how it works in the algorithm. It is basically all math... a new link X1, high OBL will X0+1-1. Lets say it is a normal link, no OBL really.. X1+1 naturally... pinging X1-1+decay of -.5.... if the site was naturally crawled(authority sites get crawled in a matter of minutes), then you're looking at a possible flag, but a higher decay rate of -.75 to -1.5, and that HURTS you. If you are doing what you should be, building links from a variety of sources then it is possible the good is outweighing the bad.

    That is a very very very small example of how the algorithm really works.. Think of it like that, magnified by 30,000.

    Its crazy how offtopic we are...

    I think we can all agree that pinging your google places listing, regardless of it hurting or not, is useless, and no it doesn't work. Nobody should want to ping their citations, because it won't do anything to help. The original question asking if it works, the answer is no.

    Sorry for hijacking your thread Tara.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3923698].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tara
      @iAmNameLess
      You did not hijack my thread. I have learned a lot from the discussion here. You as well as the other warriors on this thread are very passionate about what you believe backed by proof from your experience. We all have to test for ourselves and find out what work's best and from there be open-minded enough to adjust our business accordingly. I am starting to think that as offline markerters we are putting too much pressure on ourselves to rank clients 1, none of us know when google is going to switch up. So as rank does play a huge part in our clients being found first, I am also going to focus on plenty of good content that can be found in all forms throught out the net (not just Google) which carry my clients business name. We all know Google change their algorithm but they will never stop loving good continuous content, if we find a way to convey this to our offline clients I think that may be we can relieve ourselves of the pressure of rank.

      (Just Me adjusting my offline Approach)

      Tara
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3924436].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dhira
    Here's two words for you:
    Blog AND ping.

    Think about that carefully, then re-read your own post.
    Then think of applying that to citations.

    Then think of the following once you get through that...
    RSS AND Ping.
    Then think of applying that to citations.

    You either get it ... or you don't.
    Signature

    CPA SECRET$: • C.L.A.$.$. = FREE ADS For CPA! or • "Clean up" CPA OFFERS WITH 'S.O.A.P'!
    PAY PER CALL: • Backlink Domination For Pay-Per-Call!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3923815].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
      Originally Posted by iAmNameLess View Post

      Well, don't think of it as a challenge, think of it as a way to help and contribute to the community. I'll even feature it on my SEO news site.

      I don't think letting a site go, waiting for it to gain popularity is necessarily natural, but I believe promoting a site, doing natural activities one would do in forms of promotion, is perfectly fine. True SEOs, don't just get traffic from the search engine even though that is the origin. When I have a client, I want to protect them from possible future changes from search engines... I build up traffic using a wide variety of methods, that doesn't depend on google. You'll notice people in the SEO forum, lose their rankings and they lose 90% of their business. My clients don't need to worry about that.

      Anyway, with each post you make on here, you make less and less sense. You clearly have nothing else to say on the subject, just trying to rip every post of mine apart. I guess I should feel honored? You can continue on if you wish, it only helps me make more sales with my WSO... LOL.

      Back to the issue though, you're not making any points. You're avoiding any kind of "challenge" I throw your way, and you refuse to answer my question on what you believe pinging is? And how it works?

      Drip feeding is the only form of "pinging" that may not harm you...

      1. What do you think pinging is and to your knowledge, explain the process, please.
      2. Why would any knowledgeable SEO, ping an authority site?
      3. So you're admitting you're simulating unnatural activity, not actually doing anything natural for your clients? It is natural to send out press releases, it is natural to have a social media presence, it is natural to link to your clients websites to people who would genuinely be interested. It is unnatural to ping an authority website, it is unnatural to build thousands of profile links with no posts on those accounts, it is natural to be syndicated. It is unnatural to be syndicated as a means of pinging.

      If you want to do link pushing, and pinging your lower tiers, go right ahead, that might save some time. Whether that hurts or not, doesn't even matter.

      I suppose I should have been clear before, it really depends on what you are doing to ping your sites... automated pinging using their API is okay... All in all though, if you're pinging citations, you're losing weight. That hurts you, because if you were receiving full wait from that citation, then pinging it when the only thing originally meant for pinging is blogs, only effected in BLOG SEARCHES, and they crawl the site realizing it isn't a blog set up you're losing weight. So when your citation gets pinged, a brand new link that would have been applied, is now already decaying. Lets say a new page, pr n/a, link gets pinged, factor is X1...decay rate starts -.5 at that time..

      To break it down how it works in the algorithm. It is basically all math... a new link X1, high OBL will X0+1-1. Lets say it is a normal link, no OBL really.. X1+1 naturally... pinging X1-1+decay of -.5.... if the site was naturally crawled(authority sites get crawled in a matter of minutes), then you're looking at a possible flag, but a higher decay rate of -.75 to -1.5, and that HURTS you. If you are doing what you should be, building links from a variety of sources then it is possible the good is outweighing the bad.

      That is a very very very small example of how the algorithm really works.. Think of it like that, magnified by 30,000.

      Its crazy how offtopic we are...

      I think we can all agree that pinging your google places listing, regardless of it hurting or not, is useless, and no it doesn't work. Nobody should want to ping their citations, because it won't do anything to help. The original question asking if it works, the answer is no.

      Sorry for hijacking your thread Tara.
      Originally Posted by Dhira View Post

      Here's two words for you:
      Blog AND ping.

      Think about that carefully, then re-read your own post.
      Then think of applying that to citations.

      Then think of the following once you get through that...
      RSS AND Ping.
      Then think of applying that to citations.

      You either get it ... or you don't.

      I'm assuming you don't?
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3923968].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dhira
        Originally Posted by iAmNameLess View Post

        I'm assuming you don't?
        I'm assuming you're being a smartass.
        Perhaps stop spreading false information about pinging since obviously my last post was way over your head.
        Signature

        CPA SECRET$: • C.L.A.$.$. = FREE ADS For CPA! or • "Clean up" CPA OFFERS WITH 'S.O.A.P'!
        PAY PER CALL: • Backlink Domination For Pay-Per-Call!

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3924675].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
          Originally Posted by Dhira View Post

          I'm assuming you're being a smartass.
          Perhaps stop spreading false information about pinging since obviously my last post was way over your head.
          Better to be a smartass then a dumbass?

          Nothing went over my head, LOL... I fully understand the concept of pinging, I understand RSS mashing & pinging... do you? I don't think you do, or else you wouldn't even suggest pinging citations. Like I have said before, I used to be with you guys on this, but testing has made me believe I was wrong. False information? Really? LOL. There is so much false information spread throughout this forum it is ridiculous, Google starts a lot of it! Anyway though, its not false information, it is truth backed up by strings of the algorithm and the way it works. Do you understand how programming works? If not, I suggest any SEO start learning because the insight gained is priceless.
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3926419].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jsherloc
    iAmNameLess,

    Out of pure curiosity and for others to learn, could you please show us some examples of websites that are ranking number 1 for their term in competitive industries, that you personally believe are ranking where they are 100% due to "natural activity"? That way we can check out their backlink portfolio, as I know I'm always interested in, and I'm sure fellow warriors are as well, at promoting our websites in the most "natural" ways possible.

    **edit: I'm talking about personally owned "commercially-driven" affiliate/adsense based websites (what MOST WF members would be doing outside of local work) here in finance, law, etc., So not the wikipedia's and cnn.com's

    Also, we can take these "natural activity" backlinking examples and then discuss why and how they are considered "natural" and how using ONLY certain types of these methods actively protects your clients. You admitted yourself in this thread that the game could change tomorrow. What happens if google says "Hey, no more spamming press release and article directories and social networks? Will YOUR clients be protected then?

    And to address your "high and mighty" attempt at some type of accusation, I am stating that YOU are simulating natural activity whenever you PROMOTE your clients. It is your job description for crying out loud. Think about it: "Search Engine Optimization". I really don't consider manual optimization a NATURAL thing, you do? How you seem to believe that you are "above" other SEOs in this regard is dumbfounding to me. So you send out 100 press releases or 100 articles or have social media profiles where you post links back to your client's websites, etc and John Doe at SEO Corporation down the street comments on 100 blogs and links back to his site, why is what you are doing considered "natural activity" and NOT "SIMULATING NATURAL ACTIVITY"? John Doe would be simulating natural activity to increase his web presence/ranking and/or ultimately get a link. I'm talking about basic MANUAL linkbuilding strategies here, so no need for the extreme examples of xrumer and other blatant BH stuff. I just think you are a bit "high on the horse" here towards other warriors, when in reality, you aren't doing anything different. You are just calling it something different and claiming that YOUR way is the ONLY way to go.

    And now I'm reminded why I don't post here that often, because of people that believe they are some Google-god that knows all. Pretty sure most SEOs understand it is math buddy (i mean really? that is supposed to be "gifted" knowledge you're bestowing on us?), but we also are smart enough to KNOW that WE won't know 100%...and we don't act like we do. You on the other hand....I think the folks at Mountainview could use someone with your precise knowledge of how THEIR algo works.

    And also, for THE LAST TIME, I don't think anyone here is suggesting that pinging high authority citation websites is some kind of powerful thing that smart SEOs do, or that it necessarily "helps". We're stating that pinging a few of these websites over the course of the month is just not going to "hurt" you if you are actively building a diversified link portfolio. Using your math, I understand what you are suggesting in terms of "lost"...but the bottom line is that pinging these websites just becomes "useless" for most, not necessarily "harmful" in the grand scheme of all things "linkbuilding". I'd hope that most SEOs aren't out there building some directory citations, pinging them every single day, and just hoping for the best..

    - Jim

    "So you're admitting you're simulating unnatural activity, not actually doing anything natural for your clients? It is natural to send out press releases, it is natural to have a social media presence, it is natural to link to your clients websites to people who would genuinely be interested. It is unnatural to ping an authority website, it is unnatural to build thousands of profile links with no posts on those accounts, it is natural to be syndicated. It is unnatural to be syndicated as a means of pinging."
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3928383].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JNFerree
      I was checking out WP Stats on my blog this AM and noticed 5x hits via the longtail KW phrase how to ping your maps listing to your places page and noticed this WF was ranked on page 1 of Google Organic.

      A couple weeks ago I bought a killer WSO from Russell Hayes that really helped me amp up my skill-set with Google Places. This 79 pager is one of the best GP manifests I've ever come across and well worth a closer look.

      Check out the "GP Zen Master" WSO and you'll quickly see why this is must have knowledge if you're going to sell GP optimization services to your offline clients or if you want your own GP listing to rank in the 7-Pack.
      Signature
      Social Shares is the Future of SEO • Social Content Marketing is the Fastest Technique to Generate Significant Social Shares and My DIY Content Marketing System works like a Charm so long as you properly Manage Your Social Media Presence
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4985075].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author iAmNameLess
    Since an old thread came back up, I would just like to confirm I still stand by what I said, and since this thread was popular interesting developments have come in to play

    Linklicious, no longer uses rss feeds... the reasoning, because they said it was useless. Pinging, is RSS feeds, not sure if you guys realize that or not. Google stays ahead of the game, it would be naive to think that tricks which worked years ago would still work.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4986028].message }}

Trending Topics