(Close Window)
Topic: Backlinks
Message: Posted by: magic4children (May 29, 2011 05:12AM)
Does anyone have a list of quality magic sites that offer one-way backlinks?
Here are a few I have found to start the list off.
Message: Posted by: Davit Sicseek (May 29, 2011 05:51AM)
Rather a contradiction in terms. The mere fact a site openly offers one-way-links indicates its lack of quality. Why don't you write 10 articles for quality magic sites/blog in return for including your link in the article.
Message: Posted by: DWRackley (May 29, 2011 09:18PM)
Davit, could you please explain your thinking here? I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t fully comprehend all the nuances of using the internet effectively as a marketing tool. As I look around the first site, I see other Café members already listed. While of course the advice to write ten quality articles is excellent, why wouldn’t someone also want to be listed in a directory?
Message: Posted by: Davit Sicseek (May 29, 2011 10:41PM)
I was perhaps a bit harsh. I'd not bothered to look at the quality of the sites linked to.

In principle there isn't anything wrong with being listed in a directory site. The search engine benifits are only going to be significant if two things are present:

1. The site that provides the link must have 'power' in googles eyes.
2. Related somewhat - the site must be of sufficient editorial quality to be able to pass some of that power on.

Many directories have none of number 1. Often they are set up by people looking to make a quick buck. They knock together an OK looking site, cold call a bunch of (normally non-internet savvy) businesses and offer them a place in their directory. Whats more, for a small fee they will offer a 'featured' place in the directory. What do you mean you don't have a website to go in the directory? These scammers can help with that too! In short, the directory exists only to sell featured spots and other services to those that make up the directory. It is of questionable value to regular internet users - therefore nobody really had reason to ever link to it. Since 'power' is some secret formula of links, age, general trustworthyness - these types of sites typically rank low.

If however number 1 was satisfied. There is still the question of whether the page is able to effecivly pass a decent amount of power to the sites it links to. First of all, google may have 'switched off' its ability to pass power because it has deemed that the site isn't exercising true editorial control. They will list anything. If money is involved even worse. (Hence why I said one way links often indicate low quality). If the site has been hand checked by google or its algorithm is clever enough to figure out that the listing are without editorial control then the directory is useles. If this isn't the case, there is still the fact that you likely to be competing against 100s of other links all on the same page. If the site had the arbitary number power "10" - it is far better to be the only link on the page than one of 200. There is only so much power to go around.

As for the sites linked - in the world of directories they aren't too bad. Maybe they do pass a little link juice and are worth being listed on. I'm almost sure they aren't worth much mind.

Personally I think its much better to work on getting quality links from quality sites that people actually read. You could spend hours searching out nasty little web directories (or pay someone $15 to get submitted to a thousand of them) and you'd only get limited benifit. If you are in this for the long term, nothing beats quality link building to get links from (in goolges eyes) aged, authoritive, popular and trustworthy sites. Doing that requires a bit of work, perhaps a bit of mutual back scratching and often a little hustle. When you think of it in those terms, getting links (and in turn a boost in the seach engines) is much more like getting in the local paper. Give them a newsworthy press release, write them an article, create some controversy, a publicity stunt etc etc.

Facebook is something worth looking at too...
Message: Posted by: DWRackley (May 30, 2011 11:52AM)
Appreciate the walk-through. I actually hadn't considered the aspect of editorial control. There are so many “ring” sites out there, it makes sense that Google (and others) would need to place value on something more than the number of links.

And Thanks for what sounds like very good advice!
Message: Posted by: MikeClay (May 30, 2011 03:27PM)
Use Web 2.0 properties.. Google has been devaluing them some but still the best way to get easy backlinks.. just don't be spammy