Multiple links on the page for more link juice?

11 years ago

Why would you want to do that do? I mean, a 301 where it clearly isn't needed!...

Even if you did that, the effects are not going to be that much (assuming if there is nay "extra" juice, which I highly doubt there is).

Thanks

Signature

60 Awesome Ways to Make Money Without a Job

.................................

Check out my blog Survey Satrap featuring honest reviews of paid survey sites.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7853425].message }}

dadamson

11 years ago

Permanent 301 redirects redirect traffic, backlinks, and bots. The above scenario would NOT work.

You are better off looking for quality in the links you get rather than volume.

Thanks

Signature

-- Free SEO Audits --

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7853599].message }}

ProSence

11 years ago

Redirection gives you traffic only, they won't give you much seo value..

Thanks

Signature

three great FREE tools - www.sitebeak.com, www.GAtective.com and www.impersonal.me

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7853886].message }}

sarged2

11 years ago

You'll ain't getting the point. Suppose you have multiple link placements on some websites. Eg you can place your link 3 times. (It doesn't even matter why - maybe I got a script to place 3 links.) If I place them all as exactly same destination url, they will count only once. Thus it might be great idea to place different destination, which in the end 301 to the original page. Do you get the whole idea now?

Thanks

Signature

http://brusas.net/ | DLA Naturals - Spirulina producer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7857968].message }}

LloydMS

11 years ago

Originally Posted by sarged2

Google counts only the first link

I don't think that's true.

Originally Posted by sarged2

I have read that this technique has allowed to rank it for different anchor texts, but would it actually pass it more rank or more value if we use the same anchor twice? or the keyword anchor + plain url.

Please help.

I can't see any benefit in doing a 301 redirect for backlinking purposes.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7858004].message }}

sarged2 11 years ago

Originally Posted by LloydMS

I don't think that's true.

How come? I saw a guy testing this and there was a definitive conclusion. Now you come and say that you don't think it's true - I'd love to see some explanation then.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
http://brusas.net/ | DLA Naturals - Spirulina producer
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7858090].message }}
- jinx1221 11 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by sarged2
  
  Google counts only the first link
  
  Originally Posted by sarged2
  
  I saw a guy testing this and there was a definitive conclusion.
  
  What??!?! :p I'd like to see your definitive proof!! You mean, all this time, blog commenting was doing absolutely NOTHING because only the first link on the page counted?!!?? Or backlinks via guest posts were garbage because it wasn't the first link, and no other links on the whole page even count?
  
  Whoa, mind=blown!!!
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  The Ultimate Private Network Management,
  Visualization and Automation Tool
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7860911].message }}
  
  sarged2 11 years ago
  
  Lol, where is your common sense guys? I meant the first link among these with an exact same url destination.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  http://brusas.net/ | DLA Naturals - Spirulina producer
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7861924].message }}

m100

11 years ago

Sounds similar to fox chasing her tail

. Google is smart enough to devaluate this type of tricks, so I suggest don’t put hope on it.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7860204].message }}

sarged2 11 years ago

Originally Posted by m100

Sounds similar to fox chasing her tail . Google is smart enough to devaluate this type of tricks, so I suggest don't put hope on it.

Well, I did so already. I had a subpage with a link from top menu, that was overranking my homepage. That page was also useless for the traffic. I linked to the homepage instead and now it ranked higher than the subpage. But that's about it.
- Thanks
Signature
http://brusas.net/ | DLA Naturals - Spirulina producer
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7860237].message }}

MrMonetize

11 years ago

This is load of nonsense as far as I'm aware. The PR of a page is split between the internal and external links on a page. As an example, we have a page. The PR of the page is sent out through the one external link on our page, using what ever algorithm they use. If you then add a second link, the PR is distributed equally between the two links, effectively halving the link juice each links receives. So adding two links pointing to the same page isn't going to boost anything, it should remain the same albeit split over two links rather than one. This is the reason that SEOs look for pages with low OBLs, because the more links the page has, the weaker the link juice that page will be able to give to each external link.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7863509].message }}

danparks

11 years ago

Originally Posted by MrMonetize

This is load of nonsense as far as I'm aware. The PR of a page is split between the internal and external links on a page. As an example, we have a page. The PR of the page is sent out through the one external link on our page, using what ever algorithm they use. If you then add a second link, the PR is distributed equally between the two links, effectively halving the link juice each links receives. So adding two links pointing to the same page isn't going to boost anything, it should remain the same albeit split over two links rather than one. This is the reason that SEOs look for pages with low OBLs, because the more links the page has, the weaker the link juice that page will be able to give to each external link.

^
|
|
What he said...