Best SEO Blog|Launch your site.

There is an interesting discussion going on over an SEO Theory article I wrote in February 2009. Secrets of How to Escape the Link Building Trap Now was a pretty popular article, probably not the least because I openly disclosed one of my link building resources (something I usually advise people not to do).

Let me emphasize that I have many link building methods and resources. I don’t rely on just one method, but in that article I talked about several methods I have used and in particular I sort of reviewed Fantomaster’s 20/10 Links A Day network.

10 Links A Day is a subscription blogging service. You pay for access to a blog network where you can post your articles. The blogs are managed by the network and your articles have to comply with a lengthy list of rules. The software reviews the articles for technical compliance but the network is monitored by people as well.

There are other networks out there, some older than 10 Links A Day, and I cannot offer any reviews of them, although I have found credible, believable “grass roots” or spontaneous reviews in several forums. For all of these networks there are both satisfied and unsatisfied customers. Apparently one of Fantomaster’s former clients is not happy with the service. That happens to most if not all businesses.

Now, if you’re curious about how many of these networks are out there, I don’t know. Here are a few names to look for but I cannot tell you how they work or whether they are a good match for your business. All of these services are mentioned in the comments of the SEO Theory article. Fantomaster specifically recommends to his clients that they not exclusively rely upon any one link building network (he says so in the comments so I don’t mind pointing that out).

• 10 Links A Day
• LinkVana
• 1 Way Links.net
• Firepow
• Backlink Solutions
• Article Underground

The idea behind these services (as well as free article distribution networks like eZineArticles, ArticlesBase, Article City, and other services) is that you contribute unique content to a central repository and in that content you are allowed (somehow) to embed one or more links.

With a subscription blog network your content is posted to 1 blog. With an article distribution service your content is posted to a repository and you extend the right of free redistribution to that service, whose guidelines people are expected to comply with when they republish the articles.

Both methods generate a lot of links for many Websites. Both methods are considered to be “white hat” because you’re publishing original content that is categorized and includes relevant links. You can add press release distribution to this mix as well.

Now, just because Web marketers believe in distributing unique content across the Web doesn’t mean someone won’t object to the practice. Search engines seem to feel this is much preferable to all the sneaky, deceptive practices that are forbidden in their guidelines. But just because a link building method is acceptable to a search engine doesn’t mean it will always work.

And here are several common reasons for why your distributed content may not produce the results you want.

• You pick a service that doesn’t pass value
• You are building links in a competitive namespace
• You use the wrong anchor text
• Your methods of measuring link value are ineffective
• Your content may not be indexed for technical reasons
• You are publishing content in a hyperproductive namespace
• You’re expecting too much from one methodology

Do all link building services pass value? I don’t know. Some services may use “rel=’nofollow’” on their links. Some services may require you to earn the privilege of embedding value-passing links. Be sure to review other people’s content before publishing with any specific service. See whether the links have “rel=’nofollow’”. Find out why they do if that is the case. Don’t just blithely assume everyone will allow your links to pass value.

Can these services be penalized? Sure, any site can be penalized. But I have seen several of these services go to extraordinary lengths (in my opinion) to deal with problem publishers who might threaten the quality of the services. They don’t want to be penalized as that hurts their credibility.

Might these services have “low quality” content? That’s an entirely subjective point of view. However, I think it’s naive to expect any one article from any one of these sites to have much value to pass through a search index’s algorithm. If you’re banking on one article to transform your search experience, you’d be better be the Stephen King of link copy writing.

Your keyword is too competitive That doesn’t mean that he who builds the most links wins, but when everyone is building links for the same keyword, he whose link building is the most effective usually wins. You’ll need a lot of low-value links to match up with a few really, really good links. Generally speaking, links from publishing services whether they are blogs, press releases, or article distributors are going to be relatively low value. That doesn’t make them bad. It just means they are wooden planks, not steel girders.

If you underestimate how intense the competition is, your link building strategy may not be ideal.

You use the wrong anchor text Of course, if you know what your keyword is, you might wonder how that could be the wrong anchor text. Ask yourself this: do all your links have the same anchor text? If so, that is a widely acknowledged signal of low quality. If you’re going to build links as opposed to attract them, you need to build some variety into your linking destinations and your anchor text and the content from which your links point.

Your methods of measuring link value are ineffective There is only one way to measure link effectiveness: when your links make a difference in the search results, you should see the change. If you’re doing this right, then you are separating your link building from on-page SEO (these should not be concurrent processes). Furthermore, if you’re really trying to measure “link value” you’re wasting your time.

All those pretty SEO tools out there that claim to provide you with insight into how valuable linking resources are — they’re worthless. You may see value in the tools but you’re fooling yourself if you think they can tell you whether a search engine sees value in a particular link.

If you’re just using the tools for estimating probable link value, then you’re taking a risk but at least it’s an informed risk. As long as you don’t believe the tool can tell you anything definite, you’re okay.

You cannot measure link value. Ever. Ignore the sales hype and taste the reality: we’re all living in the dark and that means no SEO no matter how popular he may be can tell you how valuable a link is.

Your content may not be indexed for technical reasons I have to admit to being spoiled. When I publish an article I expect to see it come up in various indexes pretty quickly. When that doesn’t happen I usually find that there is a technical glitch somewhere. If the glitch can be fixed, great. But sometimes you end up shooting a blank.

And not all blogs are the same. Some blogs just don’t get indexed as quickly as others. If you’re relying on blog links and you don’t see your blog posts in the search indexes within a day or two, you should reconsider your strategy.

You are publishing content in a hyperproductive namespace Hyperoptimized or hypercompetitive namespaces occur where the leading sites rely on extensive link building. It’s a link war, plain and simple. The search algorithm doesn’t force us into link wars. SEO greed and stupidity force us into link wars.

Hyperproductive namespaces are entirely different. That is, the rate of new content being published in the namespace is so high/fast that the clock is reset every day. I compete in these kinds of namespaces. I hate them. Your links don’t mean squat in the short term because Query Deserves Freshness and certain other algorithmic factors override SEO dependence upon links.

If you see 4-5 new articles in your namespace every day, it’s possibly a hyperproductive space. If you see 20-50 articles every day, it absolutely is a hyperproductive space. Links alone — no matter where you get them — won’t win the competition for you. It’s not all about links.

You’re expecting too much from one methodology The best method for link building is to use as many methods for link building as you can. You need value-passing, traffic-passing, long-lasting links. No one method can guarantee you that kind of consistent quality.

Some link specialists do indeed rely on one or very few link building methods. These people are specialists. They know what they are doing (hopefully) better than a generalist. I’m sure Eric Ward is very good at all sorts of SEO skills, but he’s one of the few link specialists I look up to. The guy knows what he is doing. And he uses a method that has been criticized and ridiculed many times over. He asks people for links.

But you know what? If Eric asked me for a link, I’d probably give it to him. I know he won’t just drop by any random Website, ignore the stern warning on the contact form that says “Don’t ask us for links”, and drop an irrelevant link request.

(HINT: There are ways to ask people like me for links — I’ve written about them, and so has Eric).

Not to push too much business Eric’s way, but my point is that there are people who are just better at this link building stuff than the rest of us. I’m good at link building but I’m not a specialist. And if you need a link from CNN or some big fancy site, I’m not the guy to come to.

When you cannot afford to hire a dedicated link building service that pretty much leaves you with do-it-yourself techniques. I’ve been writing about DIY link building techniques for years. What I’ve always tried to remind people, however, is that no one method or resource works for everyone.

I’m sorry when people who feel disappointed after trying a method or resource express frustration. I have known that frustration myself. But while I encourage people to share their experience with well-known popular resources and methods, I don’t want them to give up.

There is a lot going on in link building that just doesn’t fit into any one comprehensive article (although people like Dave Harry, Ann Smarty, and Wiep probably try to write such articles at least once a month). There are still some good opportunities for building links through social media, although the cost of acquisition may have increased. There are still some good opportunities for building links through forums, although the cost of acquisition may have increased. Etc., etc.

And by “cost of acquisition” I am not talking about buying links. I am talking about what it costs you to obtain value-passing links through those methods. Link building is only cheap for a spammer, and spammers are counting on volume. When you drop 10,000 links a day you can live with only .01% of them passing value. You’ll get more tomorrow — and eventually you’ll have to start over again as your domains get banned or penalized.

This article probably should have been published on SEO Theory but it’s Thanksgiving week (here in the U.S.) and I won’t be working tomorrow or Friday so I wanted to make this the second Best SEO Blog article for this week.