Quote:
Originally Posted by maldives
Link change is quiet useful if done properly. It is important get links from sites that are relevent to the content of your site.
It will not only serve you a backlink but, can generate well needed traffic if done wisely.
|
That is what I'm saying. IT seems futile to exchange with non relevant sites just for their
PR value.
Quote:
Originally Posted by podcast
I don't want to be a party pooper here, but aren't link exchanges spotted and devalued by Google?
|
I have heard this too, but not sure as I haven't actually read it
Quote:
Originally Posted by maldives
Not sure but, I have heard one way links are much better. However, could google stop traffic coming from selective websites??
|
Can't stop sites linking to me. That's not a problem. It's not a heavily saturated niche's at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johan007
No, even Matt Cutt's has said link exchange is and always has been an honest method of gaining links as long as you have reviewed the content you are linking too.
|
Confirms what I have been saying. Just a link is not good, just to have a link.
Doesn't the stability, and diligence of the site that you are linking to means something.
I mean, if you link to sites that don't update, or are basically, Dead sites, isn't that worse than not linking to the site at all? (I mean reciprocal links)
If none of my incoming links are website to website, but I have links from directories, articles and such, is it still good enough, or will the lack of reciprocal links to related websites be a hindrance to my efforts?