7 SEO Techniques That Google Smashed in 2007

Great post here, I'll definitely be linking to it from at least one of my sites. This is what we call "link bait." Write great stuff (with some controversy) and you'll get gobs of natural one-way links to your site/ blog whatever.

Now, I'm off to try to find out more about the reciprocal link debate. While I won't stop linking to great stuff within my niche, is it really time to kill my "link partners" page and, to be fair to them, it would be a lot of work to inform them that I'll be junking their links and why.

As always, the SEO plot thickens.

On a brighter note, just look how easy it is to get tons of high ranking one-way links to your site with "Web 2.0" type mediums. Awesome.

Sheree Motiska

This article can be a great guide for babies in the Seo industry.

Great post!

I take it that the writer of this article does not do any active testing at all of his own and relies on what people post on forums and their ilk.

Most of the 7 things he gives are all related to one thing, the devaluation of paid links, affecting other sites in the downstream. Most, if not all, of the 7 things this article states have changed, have not changed at all. They all still work perfectly well if done in a topical and intelligent manner. As for subdomains, the push fr subdomains for many of us was never to get more listings on the front page, that was just a benefit. The main benefit was that google treated subdomains as different websites and thus gave more power to the anchor text links from them to the main domain and our link partners websites.

@Mark Argentino,

Definitely go for a few recips. Just don't make it a main pillar of your SEO strategy, like some Realtors used to....

Great post and even better links! I read the article "Realtors who relied heavily on reciprocal links" and found some useful information. I am a realtor who's site has dropped one google PR in the middle of this year. I was using one inactive auto link software program and one active auto-link software program. I wrote both companies and solicited their thoughts on the reciprocal links penalty debate and both vehemently denied any claims that reciprocal links would hurt my site.

I found a great tool that checks for reciprocal links that may be somewhat questionable. I removed any links to sites that are considered bad neighbourhoods. The tool only searches 40 pages at a time, so it took me about 8 hours to check all my links after splitting up pages into 40 link sub pages, but it worked nicely. You will like the tool if you want to check out other sites. The tools is called bad neighbourhood checker and can be found here: http://www.bad-neighborhood.com/text-link-tool....>

My sites contains a fair amount of html pages, over 1500, and this may be why my links pages are considered somewhat ok with google. I've kept the one program active on my site and have watched new incoming links very closely and begun to scrutinize them for legitimacy.

I still believe, (right or wrong and in the face of Matt Cutts comments about reciprocal links), that trading links is still fair and good for business. I've had a few referrals come directly from other realtor websites in the US and Canada that I otherwise would not have received were it not for the reciprocal links on fellow website pages. Thus, I still believe in reciprocal links as they do serve a real purpose for prospective buyers moving long distance or for realtors to find other realtors for referrals.

I will continue to trade reciprocal links and hope that google concludes that trading links with relevant sites is a good idea for real estate sites.

Thanks and all the best in 2008!
Mark

Trying to figure out what Google wants is like archery practice in a hurricane.

My cynical side makes me wonder if Google really wants to say: "If you want traffic, buy Google Ads."

Thanks for the update. I had heard that some of these had gone by the wayside but the directory links was some what news to me.

@Michael Andrew,

I hear you. I definitely encourage clients to get a few natural reciprocal links but I think that using them as major part of your SEO strategy and making a "partner_links.html" page is a fossil. Just avoid those made-for-webmasters directories that requires payments and have an automated program to check for a reciprocal link before you are allowed in - where no one has responded to the e-mail for the past 7 years ;)

"Reciprocal links." This is over stating things. Google warned realtors to stop linking to each other but Matt Cutts also recently stated at Pubcon that link exchange happpens naturally and that there is nothing wrong with it when you maintain relevancy. So to state "reciprocal links" is adding more misinformation to the link building fire.

Instead, you should clarify this as "Irrelevant Reciprocal Links". there is a huge difference!

I own a website that sells graphics for car racing. I link up with all of the other car racing websites that dont compete with my own. I have over 600 link exchanges with quality relevant sites to my own and my rankings are more solid than ever. Reciprocal Linking is alive and well - there are some reciprocal linking tactics that are no longer useful such as realtor to realtor links. You disservice the public when you call out Reciprocal Linking as "smashed" when you should have stated "Realtor to Realtor Irrelevant Reciprocal Linking".

Excellent overview, Brett.

I'm pretty sure Universal Search (unified search, 3D search, blended search... whatever the new buzzword or buzzbrand will be) will help make items 1,3,4 and 5 a moot point by mid year.

We've always had the philosophy, regardless of how well a site performs for us, that "the traffic is not on your site"... so we've always played, with integrity, by contributing to other people's sites.

Thanks to social media, those sites now include video, audio, images, articles, PR and the lot.

Search page real estate is the big mastery now. It's not how and where to drive a single listing. It's how to gain more of Google's Page One results.

And that's an exciting game worth playing.

Thanks again for the great wrapup, and cheers to you in '08.

Mark Alan Effinger
RichContent.tv

I always love the reciprocal link debate. This has been "Dead" for 5 years, yet I still see sites ranking beautifully with ONLY reciprocal linking. Its not dead, but if done incorrectly and poorly, it won't work. With any linking campaign, you need to stagger your linking approach and use every method you know how to provide a 'natural' backlink structure that isn't traceable by an "algorithm".

@Nick,

Thanks for this excellent tip and link about the current state of subdomains in the SERPs. I noticed that some people still had multiple subdomains ranking well, despite the initial reports.

@Marios,

By "10 identical search results" I meant that the days of only having 10 blue links (of uniform appearance) to compete with are over. Now video content, local maps, news, blog search results, and audio... plus Knol... are going to be taking up more screen real estate and getting more priority.
It is going to be harder for blog posts, product pages, affiliate and MFA stuff to compete with content hosted on properties owned and operated by the search engines (YouTube, Knol, Yahoo Answers!)

I totally agree that reciprocal links still have value and are part of a natural, health link profile for a popular site. But the tactic of relying heavily on reciprocal links programs and automatic systems is pretty much rusting in the SEO graveyard.

I'm not sure I get what you're trying to say with item 7. In particular, what do you mean by "10 identical search results"?

There are some who would disagree with item 1. They would argue that reciprocal links can still work when done "correctly" e.g. where the sites are related. I think what hit the real estate folks (and others) was the indiscriminate use of reciprocal links between sites regardless of topic.

Hi Brett,

There was actually some mis-reporting over Google changes to subdomains. Matt corrected it, as saying that you could get more than 2 results but it would be harder with each additional result.

http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/015631.html