Backlinking Not Required for Page 1 Ranking.

Thanks

The point I was making ref page 100, was that you will usually "rank" for a search term with no backlinks, but obviously what's important is where you'll rank - and that you can rank page one for low competition terms.

Once again - I'm not saying that backlinking isn't required at all, the post title is "Backlinking Not Required for Page 1 Ranking" and many people are replying to this without fully reading & understanding my post. What I meant by the post title is that the sweeping statements people tend to make that "if you want page one you need loads of backlinks" isn't correct - it depends on the competitiveness of the search term.

My main point, is that I believe that when people are starting with a new site, they should focus first on creating value - focus second on creating backlinks.

I speak to people all the time who come to me asking for my services, and the majority of people in the WM arena, are not promoting great sites.

I am not saying you never need to do any backlinking - I am saying that people should focus first on their websites - and second on backlinking.

Google want the cream to rise & the crap to fall, you can either fake that your site is the cream, by focusing on backlinking straight away - OR you can actually make your site the cream, by first focusing on the development of your site, content & features. And then focus on offpage second.

If you fake it - you may get results, but I'm adamant that they are usually short lived in comparison.

These are my opinions, from my experience - other opinions exist & I'm not stating that I'm right & they're wrong. I've tried both methods, and I know which I'll stick to.

Cheers

Kev

Yes that may be really poor - but you're the one who made the point!!!? :rolleyes:

I was merely clarifying the point by saying you can "rank" but it's not important THAT you rank, it's important WHERE you rank - and that you can rank on page one without backlinks.

You said in your previous post: The point I was making that the sweeping statement that you made, and that others have made, that you "Can't rank without backlinks" is completely wrong. You can rank without backlinks. Yes - of course, as I said, you're not going to rank for competitive search terms without backlinks.


What do you mean, not my ranking definition but yours?? You didn't even define ranking, you said that a site can't "rank" without backlinks, and I clarified that point by saying that you can "rank" for any term, but what is important is where you rank, i.e if you're on page 5, you are still "ranking"

So if we are talking about page one ranking (and if that's what you mean, then why not say that??) then yes, I can get a site to rank with good quality content & no features - for terms which have more than one visitor per month......

Can I get a site to rank page one for a mid to high competition term with no backlinks? No, of course not.

I'll go back to my main point once again.........

I am saying, that I think people who're getting into promoting sites via organic Google, would be better advised to start off first focusing on creating great sites, focusing on original & sticky content & features - and THEN move on to offpage.

AND - I think that people who have brand new sites, with zero site age, they would be better focussing on lesser competitive search terms within their niche initially, and move on to the more competitive terms in time.

The opposite of this is what you & some others appear to be reccomending, which is to just start a site, don't bother on building a great site - just build any old site (in fact some seem to think you can just buy an aged domain & then start backlinking) focus on the high volume terms - and wham, the money rolls in.

If only!!!!

Firstly, you were the one who was saying you can't "Rank" I was clarifying that point. If you read my op title, it says "Page one ranking" I was clear in what I was talking about - then you came along saying "you can't rank without backlinks" and I was merely clarifying the point, that you can "rank" but what matters is where you rank.

And what do you mean by "only in the sense that you now acknowledge that you need backlinks to rank (my definition not yours) in Google"?

To "RANK" means nothing unless you add a position.... I'm talking about "to rank on page one" and I have not acknowledged that you need backlinks to rank on page one - why don't you actually read a post & be sure you understand it before replying? What I said, is that you CAN get a page one ranking with no backlinks - and I ackowledge (as I did much earlier in this thread before you added to it) that you can't rank page one for competitive search terms with no backlinks.


So, you're talking about auto content, 100% dupe, (maybe with a WP plugin to try to dupe Google into believing it's original content?) ploughing the backlinks from day one, and within 4 days you're enjoying page one rankings as a result of your backlinking?

The methods you're using may well work (although I very much doubt that they're working as well as you think & as fast as you think) but the medthods you're talking about, ref creating completely duplicate content sites & starting on backlinking straioght away - will be temporary. Because, basically, it's SE spamming.

By Google's definition, if you create a site full of duplicate content, and then use the methods you've just said, you're spamming. As Mat Cutts would say "Where's the value add?"

And if you spam - you may get results, but they'll usually be temporary.

I'm not saying that your methods are wrong - merely that I prefer a different method.

You're talking about creating a site in a couple of hours & then faking it's value with backlinking.

I'm talking about ACTUALLY creating value...

They're two completely different methods. Yes, my method means more hard work initially I suppose, and in some cases I do agree that your method may bring better traffic for a temporary period of time, but it'a temporary. If I start a site, I want to benefit from it for years, not weeks or months.

Anyway - once again, what you do is completely up to you - I would still always recommend that people who're new to SEO, focus FIRST on creating a site which is actually adding value to the web, and SECOND focus on offpage.

Once again, it's not hard, they're always going on about it - they want value, they want their searchers to find the most value & the most relevent results. They DON'T want pages of 100% duplicate content & some adsense ads, which add absolutely zero value to the web & just waste space. If you've ever been to a Googe conference or spent any time on MC's blog, then you would know very well what they want.

Why would you be lying on a beach by knowing what they want? To be lying on the beach in Samoa, you would need to have found a way to GIVE Google what they want. knowing is one thing, but doing is where the results are. In a way you have found a way to give Google what they want, but it's a way to pretend that you're giving Google what they want, which will give you results temporarily. And - I have also found a way to give Google what they want but it takes time & effort, so neither of us - I fear - are going to be lying on that beach, without significant effort.

Again, I'm not saying your method is wrong, they're just different methods.

In effect, you & I are standing side by side in a plate spinning contest, I'm using bigger plates which take longer to spin but which stay spinning for longer, you're spinning plates which take you far less effort to get going but which fall off quicker.

but my point is - I can walk away from my plates after a while, and go lie down on that beach while they keep spinning, and watch you continually running about like a blue arsed fly spinning more & more plates.... and the minute you walk away from your plates - SMASH!!!