Ranking without links

[John Scott]

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:
1. A single web page on a domain ranking without any external links. The conveniently overlooked factor is that the domain itself has hundreds or thousands of inbound links, and those links are the foundation of the rankings. Put the same web page on another domain without the links, and it will lose all ranking.

2. A web page ranking for a search term such as “Seattle Professional SEO Consultant“. If there is no competition for the term and no traffic for the term, it really isn’t called ranking, is it?

3. A web page on a domain without its own links, ranking based on 301′d links. To be a dullard and state the obvious, rankings based on 301′d link are still rankings based on links.

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.

http://blog.v7n.com/2007/02/26/ranking-without-links/

[dcristo]

Yep you summed it up well. Internal pages are ranking on authority domains due to internal linkage. Terms with no competition are easy to rank for and on page seo maybe sufficient.

[sponge06]

I had a site that ranked for almost any article I published. I have since struggled to re-create that, but I am certain it was the internal linking that achieved it.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by sponge06

I had a site that ranked for almost any article I published. I have since struggled to re-create that, but I am certain it was the internal linking that achieved it.

If you do that you be sure to let me know.

[sponge06]

haha, thanks John. I will certainly let you know.

[bcombs]

I had an e-comm client with a strong base of links, solid forumla-based on-page, and well lubed internal linking. When new products were placed on the site, they were usually first or second page within a week. They typically climbed above the fold in a few weeks.

One of those cases where I wish I owned the site...

[manageyourlinks]

Originally Posted by bcombs

I had an e-comm client with a strong base of links, solid forumla-based on-page, and well lubed internal linking. When new products were placed on the site, they were usually first or second page within a week. They typically climbed above the fold in a few weeks.

One of those cases where I wish I owned the site...

an example of the power of an authority site.

the ecommerce site I manage has the same ability. Not as much in yahoo, msn but if google has categorized you as an authority on that subject then it takes next to nothing to instantly rank for non competitive terms.

[TheBrain]

Originally Posted by sponge06

I had a site that ranked for almost any article I published. I have since struggled to re-create that, but I am certain it was the internal linking that achieved it.

I've seen that happening yet not for every article. Just for some "exclusive" terms. With what terms were you ranking?

[sniperhiga]

I belive that you can get ranking without links only when your content on the same level as can write professor of "Massachusetts Institute of Technology".
It should be something like w3 content.
Also, if you own store which sell electronic / computers with 1000s names with bunch numbers, technic words, rich description... you can get 1000s daily unique visitors from Google having 10-20 backlinks. Millions around the world type something like "Affordable Dell Laptop Keyboard 81415 black colour easy to use" or "Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi / 400D 10.1 Megapixel Digital SLR Camera Body Silver cheap price easy to use" etc....

[John Scott]

I belive that you can get ranking without links only when your content on the same level as can write professor of "Massachusetts Institute of Technology".

You think Google can tell the difference?

Affordable Dell Laptop Keyboard 81415 black colour easy to use

To quote myself:

Originally Posted by John Scott

A web page ranking for a search term such as “Seattle Professional SEO Consultant“. If there is no competition for the term and no traffic for the term, it really isn’t called ranking, is it?

[sniperhiga]

Google.... they smart kids. They can smell smart content mile away. They really love technology websites.
I bet if you write 500 words description for Sony Vaio laptop, and on another site MIT professor write 500 words for the same item.... Place backlinks for this description in the same places.... Google will rank professor description better when you type "Sony Vaio description"

[John Scott]

They can smell smart content mile away.

They use links to smell quality content.

I bet if you write 500 words description for Sony Vaio laptop, and on another site MIT professor write 500 words for the same item.... Place backlinks for this description in the same places.... Google will rank professor description better when you type "Sony Vaio description"

Google's branding at work. They aren't that smart, but people give them credit anyway.

[sniperhiga]

Anyway... i heard from Google guy that they rank websites who provide 100% their own service better than websites who work to get money from affiliate programs.
Also, if you do something wrong... they will penalise site with affiliate links faster than website which belong to person or company who sell his own service / merchandise. Google don't like to kill someone small business.

[John Scott]

Anyway... i heard from Google guy that they rank websites who provide 100% their own service better than websites who work to get money from affiliate programs.

I've been saying that forever, it is just a simple matter of detecting duplicate content. Affiliates tend to use duplicate content.

[! Ask !]

After reading so much crapy articles lately on SEO I found this is to be a really interesting original article, one thing that comes to my mind is “what is your theory how outbound links influence ranking?” if a page as good inbounds and bad outbounds this will influence deeply the ranking? Any examples of this?

[sniperhiga]

You can make 100% of money from affiliate programs and have good rankings but it should be absolutely innocent.
For example: You have a website about popular music and you write about bands, shows, events. After each post about band you can place affiliate links such as:
"Find more on Amazon"
"Buy CD on E-Bay"
"Get t-shirt on Buy"
"Browse site with Mozilla" etc...
In this case your site absolutely innocent with unique content and many visitors from search engines.
Google doesn't like stuff when whole store based to sell items from other stores. Basicly, when people pick product, add to cart, ready to pay... and you redirect them to another site homepage or cart. With site like this you can be lucky for month or two... but every time Google drop you with new changes... Also, be ready to spend money for more links every 2-3 monthes.

[ninjashoes]

How can we be sure that Google wont rank a site with adsense ads higher than one without?

[sniperhiga]

Originally Posted by ninjashoes

How can we be sure that Google wont rank a site with adsense ads higher than one without?

They rank sites with AdSence the same way like without. They penalise sites which created for AdSense only.

[tdd1984]

Originally Posted by John Scott

http://blog.v7n.com/2007/02/26/ranking-without-links/

LOL remember what I told you yesterday john about that large company, and they was in the top 10 for website design, and he couldn't figure out what he was doing wrong, and was surprised cause I made it up on the 5-6 page for website design in 2 months, and its still shooting up, it was because of link quality, and good techniques.

But check this out, like I was saying he had 80k links right, well then guy in 1st place for website design he said he was trying to out ranked only had 40k links, but he didn't seem to understand it was the link quality that this higher ranked site, and I tried exp laing that to him, and I think he took it the wrong way

hehe just goes to show you better links out weight , then a bunch of low quality links

anyways I just seem this post, and it reminded me of that.

[infonote]

Definitely quality is better than quantity. However for a new site quality might be difficult to achieve.

An established site should only focus on quality.