Link Velocity And Its Importance

[acwebguru]

Link velocity is the speed at which new links are being formed to a website. One should remain aware of it. Generating fast inbound links is often treated as a black hat seo technique. But i am not sure about. What other members think about it?

[Logan]

I think there are many misconceptions (i.e. sandbox, etc). My opinion is that google uses a time/date stamp with many variables within its algorithm. I believe that the time/date is a signal google uses, in conjunction with many other variables. So if I find life on another planet, and receive a lot of publicity tomorrow with articles across the new york times (i.e. popular, quality, trusted sites) with 100,000s of back links those links will carry weight based on all of the variables involved. In this case, maybe the velocity is a plus in the algorithm. For a contrary example, if I get tons of backlinks from pages that have low quality signals (popularity, quality, trusted, etc) then the time/date variable may be a signal that is a negative.

I'm not saying that is how the actual algorithm works, obviously none of us know, but that is how I look at it. Also consider, does the page/content (and all other variables google uses within its algorithm) also have time/date stamp that are cross associated between each other. I think something along those lines happens under the hood.

[torka]

Since you have no control over who chooses to link to you (or when they choose to put those links in place), and when Google finds and indexes those links may be some time (perhaps considerable time) after the links are actually placed...

It really doesn't make sense for Google to penalize a site because of the apparent quantity of inbound links indexed at any given time.

If you really could specify what links you get and prevent "undesirable" places from linking to you... if you really could specify not only when links were placed, but when Google would come around to index those links... then things might be different.

But because you have no control whatsoever over either of those things, I honestly don't think you have much to worry about in this regard.

My

--Torka

[Logan]

I agree with your logic Diane.

I shouldn't have said a negative above, but instead it may be neutral/not helpful. I do think a variable along the lines of time is a signal google uses.

[Debra]

I believe this is one of those situations where there is no stock answer.

We've generated a lot of links to webpages in short order and seen no ill effect and yet we've also seen the opposite. So many variables make up how the filters operate you can't say yes or no and have it apply across the landscape.

From experience I can say this with confidence:

• The older your website/pages the less negative change you'll see when you attract a large number of inbound links.
  
• Large numbers of links from a wide variety of websites help. It's the variety factor here, not the quantity that's key.
  
• Using repetitive anchors isn't good and is a sign to the engines. Natural linking uses anchors, URL's and "click here", not the same keyword phrase over and over.
  
• If your site has a sudden rash of inbound links, it should also have increased search requests via the engines. That won't happen if you throw a lot of links at a page. Balance traffic and inbound links.
  
• More competitive niches need more links and a bigger buzz to see a change in ranking from inbounds. That can work for or against you depending on your goal. If you want to jump in the serps, it's gonna take a lot of work. But if you want to add links and not be as noticed, this will work here as well. Over time you'll see upward movement but it will take longer and many more links.

Marketing online is no different than marketing off. If you decide to open a car dearlership on a road already populated with many dealerships, you're going to have to do three times the amount of advertising and promotional stunts to be noticed. The concept is the same online when it comes to ranking and links.

From my perspective - I don't believe there is a "sandbox" and I don't think acquiring a large number of links is considered "black hat seo". If you link thoughtfully and add content as you go, you should have no issues even if you aquire large numbers of links in short order.

[acwebguru]

Yes Torka this is a fact that we can not do anything if people starting linkling to our website. This is termed as link baiting but the content of our website needs to be awesome for cajoling people to do link to us and if Google can senses that our website is not getting satisfactory amount of visitors as it appears from the inn bound links, it can penalize us. So better to remain aware of it.

[torka]

Originally Posted by acwebguru

if Google can senses that our website is not getting satisfactory amount of visitors as it appears from the inn bound links, it can penalize us.

I'm sorry, no offense intended but this simply makes no sense, for several reasons:

ONE: How does Google know how many visitors a website gets? Without access to the web server logs for every website they have indexed (NOTE: they do not have this access) they have no way of knowing how many visitors each page gets, nor can they tell which visits were generated by any links outside of links from Google itself.

Certainly, they can see some visitor stats for those sites that have chosen to install Google Analytics. But those stats do not include all site visitors (for instance, they exclude visitors who do not have JavaScript active), and the Analytics user base only encompass the minority of websites that have chosen to install Analytics. Most websites do not run Analytics.

It would be stupid and counterproductive for Google to penalize the minority of sites that have Analytics installed for supposedly not having "enough traffic" in relationship to their inbound links, but to let the majority of sites for which they can't track the traffic off the hook.

The people at Google aren't stupid. They aren't going to penalize sites for no good reason. Simply getting a lot of links -- when the links pointing to you are totally out of your control -- is the very definition of "no good reason" for a penalty.

TWO: What would constitute a "satisfactory about of visitors" in relation to a certain number of inbound links? And why would the simple number of visitors even matter to Google (or the webmaster, for that matter) in the first place?

A link from a low-traffic page is probably going to send fewer visitors than a link from a higher-traffic page. But if the lower-traffic site caters to a specific group of people who are highly interested in what I have to offer, that traffic might actually turn out to be more valuable to me in terms of sales and revenue than the large number of visitors from a higher-traffic (but less specifically focused) site.

Frankly, I'd rather get 100 highly-targeted visitors if all 100 of them buy something from me than to get 100,000 casual web surfers who just drop in from somewhere for a few seconds and leave.

Google is not the business of judging the quality of my site traffic. They cannot be. They have no way of knowing my conversion ratio or the number of sales I make on visitors from any given source.

It would be stupid and nonsensical for Google to penalize a site that gets only a few (very high-quality) visitors, or to reward a site just because it gets a lot of (low-quality) traffic, regardless of how many inbound links either of the sites have.

Again, the folks at Google are not stupid.

THREE: I reiterate -- the people at Google are not stupid. Under the proposed scenario, it would be trivial for an unscrupulous competitor to scuttle my website, simply by spending an afternoon submitting my site to a whole bunch of free directories.

My inbound link count would skyrocket, while (assuming I have Analytics installed) Google could see my traffic didn't get any greater (because in my experience those free directories seldom send any visitors). According to this scenario, they'd penalize me for having "too many links" and "not enough traffic," leaving my competitor a free field in the search results.

I have a very hard time believing the smart folks at Google would be so dumb as to leave a loophole like that wide open and ready for exploitation.

Are there scenarios where a site might be penalized for nefarious link-building activity? I'm sure there may be -- one that springs to mind is that of setting up a phony network of "feeder" sites all linking to your main site to try to trick Google into thinking your main site is more popular than it is.

Google may penalize you for stupid or deceptive stuff you do. They will not penalize you for stuff other people do. Links pointing to your pages from other unrelated sites (over which you have no control) is the very definition of "stuff other people do."

Under any normal circumstances that could reasonably apply to a legitimate small business, you simply will not be penalized simply for getting "too many" inbound (non-paid) links, regardless of what the traffic to your site might or might not be.

(Now, whether those low-quality "free directory" links count in your favor is another question. But "not helping" is quite different from "causing a penalty." )

--Torka

[AlexTampa]

It does not matter how fast you get links. BUT the anchor is what can throw you into a phrase based penalty. If abchors are the same, you are sure to get thrown back 100 spots if you get a lot of links too fast

[AlexTampa]

Originally Posted by torka

I'm sorry, no offense intended but this simply makes no sense, for several reasons:

ONE: How does Google know how many visitors a website gets? Without access to the web server logs for every website they have indexed (NOTE: they do not have this access) they have no way of knowing how many visitors each page gets, nor can they tell which visits were generated by any links outside of links from Google itself.

Certainly, they can see some visitor stats for those sites that have chosen to install Google Analytics. But those stats do not include all site visitors (for instance, they exclude visitors who do not have JavaScript active), and the Analytics user base only encompass the minority of websites that have chosen to install Analytics. Most websites do not run Analytics.


Google is not the business of judging the quality of my site traffic. They cannot be. They have no way of knowing my conversion ratio or the number of sales I make on visitors from any given source.

Google is 70% of the market. So they know 70% of traffic from search engines.
Search engines use java links in serp results to track visits.

They also place a cookie when you use google. Just watch the cookie parameters change after you have searched, and visted 1 site, and then another competitor.

Take the google toolbar, and analytics on many sites and google can find what most people do.

I used to be a SEO guy for a major online retailer, and we had google reps. The reps started calling once we spent over 250K a year in adwords. We had a long conference call with them one day, and we asked about the possibility of competitors clicking our ads.

They gave many ways they could track a user


Google does monitor user behavior of of people who use their engine. User behavior is one of the major factors in serps.

[ktaylor310]

I used to be a SEO guy for a major online retailer, and we had google reps. The reps started calling once we spent over 250K a year in adwords. We had a long conference call with them one day, and we asked about the possibility of competitors clicking our ads. They gave many ways they could track a user Google does monitor user behavior of of people who use their engine.

The Google rep was referring to measures Google has in place to prevent click fraud. They obviously have to have a way to monitor traffic brought in through their paid advertising or no one would buy it. Torka is talking about natural traffic.

I wish I had a Google rep