Ranking Without Links
Every so often I hear an idealist talk about ranking without links. Evidently Google has the ability to algorithmically determine what is quality content and what is not.
(I, too, believe they have that ability, I just believe they look at linkage to determine what is quality and what isn’t.)
It is disturbing, however, when I hear SEO’s talking this way. SEO’s should know better. I personally think that most SEO’s who refuse to acknowledge the dominance of links in the algorithm are refusing to acknowledge that obvious fact because they themselves are unable to build links. I look at it as a kind of wishful thinking. They wish that links weren’t the primary factor, and believe that if they say it enough, it might just become true.
Psychology aside, let me address the claim of ranking without links.
So far in my forum dwelling years, I’ve encountered several claims of ranking without linkage. Upon investigation, they all fall into three types:
The algorithm today is based on a kind of trust, or authority. That authority is established through inbound links, outbound linking and age. So links are just as vital today as they were 4 years ago. Perhaps more so.
February 26th, 2007 at 4:38 am
[...] Comment here: http://blog.v7n.com/2007/02/26/ranking-without-links/ [...]
February 27th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
I agree that sites need links to a point, I would also like to make you aware of multiple algorithms for different types of sites. Links are relative, so if you niche is one that is not based on the number of links, you are required few to rank. For example, trying to rank for “SEO” related things is hell if you do not play the linking game.
BUT you are right Scott, links are still a major part of ranking in search engines but over time engines will become smarter. This is why heavy linkig works until the sites drop off in an “update”, the sites I care about do not do this because they obtain links @ a natural organic pace.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:20 am
[...] Ranking Without Links true: If there is no competition for the term and no traffic for the term, it really isn’t called ranking, is it? [...]
February 28th, 2007 at 10:05 am
I do not believe that “heavy linking” works. Like you said, those sites drop off in an update - that update was several years ago.
Smart linking works, and it will continue to work, because it is editorially based. If Google tried to ax editorial links, they would be left with AltaVista of ten years ago.
March 18th, 2007 at 12:31 am
What about links from ‘authority’ sites like Ezinearticles and web2.0 sites like Squidoo?
I don’t think they will be ‘dropping off’ anytime soon in the forseeable future…
March 30th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Links are everything regardless of strategy. This is why older domains can sometimes
be a good idea if you can pick one
up with a ton of inbound links already.
However, MSN seems to treat newer sites
quite well as long as you have the inbounds. If you’ve got the link volume, MSN can be a
healthy traffic source.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:05 am
interesting…. can inbound links really be as powerful to rankings as outbound (meaning those linking to you)?
May 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 am
[...] As Google’s algorithm advanced, search engine optimization professionals who were stuck in 2002 found their techniques to be ineffective and even counterproductive. Some SEO’s started claiming that links didn’t matter anymore, even though all evidence is to the contrary. [...]
July 13th, 2007 at 7:17 am
[...] is a very important factor in search engine optimization. Without links, you would really get have a hard time ranking. These are tips to build links I compiled from my own experience and authority [...]
September 30th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
[...] in search engine optimization. Why? One of the major factor Google Search results work on Links. Without links, you would really get have a hard time ranking. These are tips to build links I compiled from my own experience & authority [...]