Ah! That's were you are going astray. Most "current" SEO "advise" is merely regurgitated old "information" that is passed around as "brand new" here's one for example.
Yes, link building is a useful element in search engine promotion but NOT for the reasons everybody "assumes".
The days of SEs being fooled by huge numbers of backlinks are long gone. A few well chosen and well placed links can "beat" hundreds or thousands of junk links.
In November 2003 Google rolled out an major update (nicknamed "Florida" by Brett Tabke of WMW) that was designed to hit the "agressive 'optimisers' ". And so it did! The sites that had relied on massive link building campaigns, disappeared from the results over the space of a few days. (It also marked the end of the monthly "Google dance" but that "news" hasn't caught up with the "experts" either).
At the time I had only the one "site" that was "affected", a "site" that was set up specifically to test link building/anchor text effectiveness. Everything else I ran or maintained was unaffected or actually improved
Subsequent updates have steadily lessened the Google reliance on the anchor text of links to the point where valuable links are truly valuable and the rest are merely "also rans".
Take note of the third link in my signature and see if you can find the site anywhere for the anchor text used. 20,000+ links for a non-competitive phrase should count for something in the world of the "SEO expert", but out here in the real world .....
And forum sig links in this day and age have about the same "value" for SEs as blog comments do
__________________
Chris. ->> Links are advertising NOT optimising!! <<-
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds
Thought for today:- I SEO the only industry where all the cowboys are Indians?
|