Real Estate Forums

SEOWolf · 07-15-2006, 05:43 PM

Looks like we are in the middle of a back link and possibly a PR update.

Most of the sites I have checked have considerably fewer back links currently.

Anyone else seeing this?

~VegasMack

HHI Golf Guy · 07-18-2006, 01:03 PM

Since Google has been dropping pages from its index - especially link pages - I expect that most people will see a decrease in backlinks.

LVH · 07-19-2006, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HHI Golf Guy

Since Google has been dropping pages from its index - especially link pages - I expect that most people will see a decrease in backlinks.

Do you think this is the start of reciprocal links being majorly devalued? If reciprocal links pages are being dropped from googles index I see this causing a lot of Realtors who have homepage links and nothing but reciprocal links major issues ranking in Google.

I have no proof of this yet, but the theory seems logical with the direction everyone believes google is going in these days.

frobn · 07-19-2006, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LVH

Do you think this is the start of reciprocal links being majorly devalued? If reciprocal links pages are being dropped from googles index I see this causing a lot of Realtors who have homepage links and nothing but reciprocal links major issues ranking in Google.

I have no proof of this yet, but the theory seems logical with the direction everyone believes google is going in these days.

It's not that reciprocal links have been devalued its that the "process" of obtaining links, reciprocal or otherwise, has come into prominence. Google always valued links which they consider meaningful and will continue to do so, what is new is--well not so new--is google values links a combination of "content" and "linking process." I believe that the majority of SEOs know this intuitively but are in denial because linking is a MAJOR source of income for them and as long as agents believe linking is GOOD they (SEOs) have a vested interest in continuing.

HHI Golf Guy · 07-19-2006, 02:34 PM

OMG - I think I agree with frobn! LOL!

Google is dropping junk pages - those with little content. Links are just that. I haven't checked, but a bet a ton of Made For Adsense directories have had their pages dumped from the G index.

I'm wrapping up a new site this week, but I am working on a new link project. I'll post more soon.

frobn · 07-19-2006, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HHI Golf Guy

OMG - I think I agree with frobn! LOL!

Hmmmmmmmm
I have been saying the same thing for about a year. Whatever.

SEO is logical. There are only 3 ways or paths to a good rating. Really a combination of the three.

Good Design architecture
Good Content
Meaningful Links (The definition of "meaningful" in this context is the search engine(s)' definition which for the most part we are not privy to.)

Perhaps the most controversy and most difficult to understand is the last which I will leave for the SEO vendors.

SEOWolf · 07-23-2006, 07:07 AM

Great posts frobn!

Like HHI Golf Guy I agree about the quality of links.

If in fact this is the case I can only applaud Google for a long over due enhancement.

For far too long Google has rewarded sites that spend the time and money for engaging in linking practices that yield less than desirable links and offer absolutely no value to the site for the visitor.

I can only hope that Google is moving towards a “Quality not Quantity” policy on links however in checking the back links of several real estate websites it is easy to determine that Google still has much work to do.

I am still seeing vast amounts of high ranking sites that have engaged in buying links. It seems that Google should be able to put a filter in place to catch these sites rather easily so I am confused as to why it has not taken place yet.

If Google wants Webmasters and the SEO community to take their guidelines and policies more seriously, they will have to do a better job of policing offenders. This would include any sites that are given credit for “age” or “aged links”.

Just my 2¢ worth,

~VegasMack

SeriousPHP · 07-23-2006, 10:51 PM

Just as a by the way I have been working on some audit strategies lately. All of these call for the page the link is on to be checked for inclusion in gindex. About 2/3 of the ones that did not have a fatal flaw (frame, nofollow/noindex...) that were valid 200 code pages were not. I am told they had been. I was watching a bunch of the activity in a terminal window - who says i have no life? I looked at some of the pages. The ones in the format of (link - some text/line feed) seemed to be the most not indexed - some english. Also correlating was the number of links on the page. The "phone books" seem to be taking it on the chin.