Relevancy of links + big daddy

[PokerMaster]

Just been reading Matt Cuts' blog entry : http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/indexing-timeline/ down at the bottom where it says "reading current feedback", and trying to figure out what it means.

specifically: "Linking to a free ringtones site, an SEO contest, and an Omega 3 fish oil site? I think I’ve found your problem. I’d think about the quality of your links if you’d prefer to have more pages crawled. As these indexing changes have rolled out, we’ve improving how we handle reciprocal link exchanges and link buying/selling."

Does this mean that unrelated links hinder your site, or sitewide links (as they are generally in the footer)?

Im thinking that the links in a footer like this are not being crawled as regularly, and not being followed as easily as before, and the hinderance would be to the site owner who has these links and not the sites they are pointing to. The hinderance to the site owner being, that their site is not being crawled as frequently and thoroughly.

Whats your take on this?

[PPP]

I wouldn't worry about the footer. The example is three wildly unrelated links. It doesn't matter where they are.

[scrawnybob]

hi

sorry Im still trying to figure SEO and the changes on links with google has me more confused -

I appreciate doing any kind of link exchange with iffy sites is dumb and to be avoided

also that straight repciprical linking is downgraded even between good sites

but

everyone seems to now be saying 3 way links are bad - even between 2(3) decent and related sites but also buying links is bad too

what I dont understand is in a business like poker how anyone will get decent amount and quality one way IBL for free - and also how would buying them actually shows up any different

was Matt / google talking about mass buying of random links ? and poor quality and relavance or will we all be penalized for genuince efforts at building valuable links for visitors and for progress on SERPS

It sounded like it wasnt worth having any links at all - but then saying they were vital all the same.

does any of it have value anymore and what to do now / future ?

keep / delete genuine reciprical links (they always seemed fair to me and honest) despite the abusers (who seem to benefit anyway)

change to a 3 way link exchange - generating a one way IBL for each party - also fair but google say no good ?

buying one way IBL's - they say no good yet everyone is suddenly doing this alot more ??

get one way links ie from visitors voting for site - but these which google says are good / natural are going to be from across the whole spectrum - which google say is bad

what Im trying to figure is - is this a quality of the sites linking to / from you rather than a how they / you do it issue ???

ie. 3 way link exchange has value if its with good sites but not with bad ?

cheers scrawnybob

[PokerMaster]

"buying links is bad"
Well yeh, There have been a couple of PR10 sites caught selling links, now these links are worth nothing on the google PR calculator, also some PR9 sites. There are not too many PR10 sites or PR9 for that matter out there, so its easy for google to manually track that.
Yes buying links is bad from googles point of view, as it is an unnatural way to boost your ranking and Googles aim is to produce "natural" results.
I highly doubt that you would be penalised for buying links on a PR6 or lower site, unless the links were entitled sponsored or something.

[Kyle]

who cares if they are selling links, google sells links all the time and encourages to put googles links all over the web with adsense, like they didn't know there would be a million adsense spammers.

[PokerMaster]

Thats totally different though, adwords and other ppc doesnt count in your link count

[SunPoker.com]

If Google does in fact lessen the value of purchased links, I don't understand their theory. Webmasters and businesses have a interest in being visible on as many related sites as possible. I see purchasing links as a viable online marketing strategy.

2 questions I have are..

1. How does Google know a link is purchased or not?
2. Does Google really devalue a purchased link? (my belief is No, although I have no time to research this)

Mark

[Nick]

That's the whole thing Mark, they can't tell what a paid link is or not, and they know it. All they can do is start devaluing externals in things that are not-inside content such as in footers and/or devalue links near words like 'Sponsors' 'Advertisements' etc.

[SunPoker.com]

I can see them devaluing links under headings such as "advertisements" and "sponsors", but I don't think that is necessarily a "bad" link from an overall marketing standpoint.

In regards to your SEO goals, I can see Google devauling that, but I would still purchase one of those links on a high traffic site if it brought me a number of visitors to justify the price.

Mark