Comments on: Google vs. Paid Links – how will it end ? Lessons from Mother Nature

By: An Interview of Branko Rihtman (AKA: SEO Scientist)

An Interview of Branko Rihtman (AKA: SEO Scientist) — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 09:43:49 +0000

[...] and ecological sciences are full of very important lessons that can be applied to the world of SEO. I have written on my blog in the past how some evolutionary theories can be applied to understand and foresee the relationship between [...]

By: seo tips

seo tips — Wed, 27 May 2009 21:57:10 +0000

Paid links are still a good method for ranking in SERPS if you know how to do it.

By: reka

reka — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 13:25:35 +0000

Hello,

I’ve just found this post, I find it very interesting. It was fun to read.
I’d like to read more about this so I’d really appreciate if you could send me the Nature article you mentioned in your post.

By: Bill Ross

Bill Ross — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:42:59 +0000

Great article. Love the analogies, they were more fun to read than just the same old blah blah that everyone says.

By: Security Guy

Security Guy — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:43:34 +0000

One of my websites got penalized for getting links from dubious sources once I used a link-exchange directory. I strongly advise not to use such sources for link building.

By: Neyne

Neyne — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 08:44:20 +0000

Hi ceblogger, thanks for stopping by.

This is certainly how the penalty started – Google penalized only the seller. But recently there were some updates and this seems not to be the case anymore, since Google started to penalize people doing automated link acquirement. Until now the common belief was that your incoming links cannot hurt you, in the worst case they will not count towards your ranking, since they are not something you control. However, recent Matt’s comments on Webmaster Central help group put a bit of a dent into that. You can check it out here: http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Webmaster_Help-Indexing/msg/32db3e8e1fbf54e8

By: ceblogger

ceblogger — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 11:50:12 +0000

I got two blogs (PR4 and PR3) penalized the other day. But when I google some keywords, my site is still on top or in the first few pages. Reading your informative post, can we theorize that the penalty has no effect on the SERP of the seller but only for the buyer?

By: Sam

Sam — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:46:02 +0000

Excellent Info! I’ve used http://www.Boostviews.com ….they seem to do a decent job.

By: Dito

Dito — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 03:21:19 +0000

paid links are cheating. google says if you cheat you are out of the game. 1+2=3. am i right?

honestly, great article, good blog.

By: Neyne

Neyne — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 19:19:16 +0000

Hey Mark,

I am glad you have enjoyed it. Regarding your remark about an assumption that Google uses only PR for ranking, I wasn’t saying that at all. I even wrote:

“Let’s be simplistic and for the purpose of this comparison assume that the only way to achieve top locations is by purchasing links. Google on the other hand is trying to prevent SEOs from artificially influencing the SERPs and, again taking a simplistic approach, they will fight back by PR reduction and by abolishing link-juice-transfer-powers.”

In addition, Google’s penalty to link selling sites was not a decrease in ranking – doing that would be shooting themselves in the foot since a lot of those sites are relevant and deserve to rank where they rank. since their monetizing plan is based on the toolbar PR and their ability to pass link love, Google penalized them by hurting those two components, nothing else.

Regarding the purpose of the Google purging campaign, I am still unconvinced regarding the theory both you and Robert McEwan are presenting here in comments. I don’t think that the amount of money link salesman are making can even tickle Google’s profit margin. I think that it is the SERP relevancy they are protecting here.