- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
JohnV wrote:i.e. is it better to have no lines from a site than a sitewide link.
No. There is no negative penatly for sitewide links – although perhaps it’s true that the SEO rating benefit deminishes with each additional link from the same site – it never goes negative.Also remember that links are potential traffic magnets.
Every link has a chance of driving traffic to you.
:popcorn:So is this a load of rubbish then http://www.casinoaffiliateprograms.com/bb/google-bowling-how-most-of-us-are-getting-screwed-over-by-dirty-webmasters.8236.html? as it implies that sites with sitewide links to them are actively penalised against or even filtered out of results?
John : I think that it is not true.
Google and other search engine can penalize you if and only if you are the guilty. ( If google understand that you are guilty with a other website you are banned …………. )
webin wrote:John : I think that it is not true.Google and other search engine can penalize you if and only if you are the guilty. ( If google understand that you are guilty with a other website you are banned …………. )
What exactly do you mean by this?
I asked this exact question to Google, Yahoo, MSN and Ask last week at the SES conference and the answer was the same with all of them. There isn’t much difference between a sitewide link and a single link coming to you from a site. Their exact words were that there were “diminishing returns” to sitewide links. They further explained that they basically take the best link from a site and give you that credit. Normally this would be the home page, but not always, say a news story got picked up on an internal page and was stronger than the home page.
The bottom line is this, don’t be afraid of sitewide links, especially as Gooner said, they help more with traffic since you are providing many more chances for a user to come to your site.
