Sitewide Backlinks

dcristo · 08-02-2004, 09:16 PM

I would be interested to hear everyone's thoughts in getting sitwide backlinks. Is this seen as obvious manipulation of the SEs? If so, even if it was a related site?

Shawn · 08-02-2004, 10:15 PM

I don't think site-wide links are bad, but I think if the price dramitically increases for site-wide vs 1 page, I would rather invest the extra money in getting single links from different sites.

dcristo · 08-02-2004, 10:30 PM

From a SEO point of view, would it be more beneficial obtaining sitewide backlinks with a homepage PR6 and 100 subpages PR5 OR 2 PR6 pages from two different domains?

Shawn · 08-02-2004, 10:33 PM

My personal opinion would be that as long as those different domains are "different" in that they are associated with completely different networks, you would be better off with the seperate links from the different domains. Think of it this way, getting a link from each "network" will then include your site in both networks, instead of one.

dcristo · 08-02-2004, 10:36 PM

Cheers mate. That's what I was thinking. With sitewide links, even though you may have your link on numerous subpages - the actualy weight of the link must be minimal coming from the same domain.

Shawn · 08-02-2004, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcristo

Cheers mate. That's what I was thinking. With sitewide links, even though you may have your link on numerous subpages - the actualy weight of the link must be minimal coming from the same domain.

Agreed

MacroChap · 08-03-2004, 03:40 AM

I agree with everything suggested, and my instinct and reading would tell me to do the same. I would just add that in almost all of my experience (not as comprehensive as some on this site!!!) Sitewide links have been CONSIDERABLY more effective than single links, greater perhaps than a factor of 2. Therefore my science would lead me to plump for a sitewide if it was more than double the cost, though I can't put a price on the proportionate value.

awall19 · 08-03-2004, 04:42 AM

I usually find sitewide links do not cost that much more than single links from the best page

stuff like home page = 150
whole site = 200

home page = 75
whole site = 100

I usually opt for the whole site because even if Google discounts them a good bit other search engines may not do it as much.

Yahoo! seems pretty easy to rank well in if just throw a bunch of keyword rich links at your pages

I, Brian · 08-03-2004, 08:17 AM

Google may be seen to devalue repeated links from the same domain - even /24 IP block - but the links in number will still count for something. 100 links from a site will almost certainly have more impact than a single link from the same site.

The main issue with sitewide links, so far as I can tell, is that they must be seen as legitmate advertising links - if there is any suggestion that you are actually purchasing Google PageRank then you are looking at an operation begging to be devalued, and your money wasted.

Shawn · 08-03-2004, 10:29 AM

Obviously site-wide links are of more benefit than single links, but I think that if the price of site-wide links increases enough where you could buy another single link from a different network, I would rather do that

Like Arron said, most times the difference is not that much, but I've seen it in some instances where it was over twice as much.

brickred · 08-05-2004, 03:07 AM

What About MSN

I, Brian · 08-05-2004, 04:10 AM

Inktomi engines apparently much prefer links on static pages, rather than dynamically driven ones.