Hi

according to matt cutts , google will catch the paid links in future.

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-report-paid-links/
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/hidden-links/

what do you think about this?

Can google understand the paid links?

Thanks

Three words: ABOUT **** TIME.

I think they'll be able to understand most, but not all, paid links. There are a lot of common patterns link buyers tend to follow, and all of the common patterns tend to leave a footprint (example: id=, affid=, ad.php?redirect=site, etc.)

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

Three words: ABOUT **** TIME.

I agree. If they move forward on this, it will make the web a better place all around. Sites will be able to compete a little more on merit, and people who can't afford to go on link-buying campaigns will get a chance for their day in the sun.

Originally Posted by trichnosis

Can google understand the paid links?

I imagine they'll be using the paid link reports as research data to help them find ways to identify paid links - not primarily to deal with the sites that have bought those links.

Originally Posted by gringo

I imagine they'll be using the paid link reports as research data to help them find ways to identify paid links - not primarily to deal with the sites that have bought those links.

but if G only use that form, that means another report war will start

if a site competitive to your site, report it with this form

And then people at Google will look at the reported site and assess that site to glean any information about paid links (if there are any). This is an information gathering exercise, not a find and punish one.

it's just a joke.

if that was the case TLA and other adspace sites would go out of business.

if that was the case TLA and other adspace sites would go out of business.

If TLA went out of business, that's a positive. Those scumnuts have been milking this situation for years.

Originally Posted by trichnosis

but if G only use that form, that means another report war will start

if a site competitive to your site, report it with this form

Then they'll look your site over, and if you're not selling links, they'll probably come to realize that.

I can call the police and report my competitors for murder, drug dealing, and conspiracy, but that doesn't mean they actually did any of what I could say. Which is why they're not just going to lock people up on my word. Google is a lot like the police of the web...

If a site/SEO/webmaster is paying for links for the right reasons, there is no need for any of this wild flapping.

Only the ones who buy simply for the search engine benefit will be affected when the site selling the links lose their link pop value.

Now anyone who is advertising links and pricing them on the imaginary PR value should be concerned!

So, links for traffic are good, links for PR are bad? That's really weird, as in the end links for improving PR alos generate traffic.
It seems to be just a new stage of development in the search marketing, I'm sure each Google's move in the direction will bring about new services.

Links simply for PR are useless

Have a read of this post by Michael Martinez in the equivalent thread at HR.

Originally Posted by zappanet

So, links for traffic are good, links for PR are bad? That's really weird, as in the end links for improving PR alos generate traffic.
It seems to be just a new stage of development in the search marketing, I'm sure each Google's move in the direction will bring about new services.

Not necessarily. PageRank is quite often artificially generated and is not a reflection of the other factors related to the optimization of a website. Not only that, people who gather links strictly for PageRank purposes quite often exchange links and do other things to effectively net their traffic gain to...0.

I think in-bound links will become less of an issue, and content itsself will be more of a factor, also users of the google tool bar send google info about what sites they visit, how long they stay and how many pages they view, this is the type of info google will use to rank sites as user behaviour
is the ultimate judge of sites value. In-bound links are good for traffic though, and if its good quality traffic - ie applicable then the user will stay on your site a while -> SERP goes up, so when paying for links, only pay for good ones, not for PR purposes but for quality traffic

Originally Posted by zappanet

So, links for traffic are good, links for PR are bad?

No. Links are not supposed to be about traffic. They should be about relevance. Think for a moment about the user of a search engine. They don't give a squat about yours, mine, or anybody else's traffic. They care about finding useful information.
For example, Chris' response above.

Originally Posted by chrishirst

Links simply for PR are useless

Have a read of this post by Michael Martinez in the equivalent thread at HR.

That link isn't about directing traffic to that site. It is there to provide useful information. The link is in context.
So, if I were searching for information about how google treats links (which this thread is about), that link is relevant in a set of results.

Hi,

This would have happened sooner or later. Google might detect paid links depending on some criteria. Suppose a website is new and is getting a bunch of high quality links, this might raise a flag like this site is buying links. But that as well, it can be getting good links due to article submission.

Whatever happen in the future concerning paid links, I believe if you have to do it, do so such that you are getting targeted traffic from those links alone. This alone can justify your investment. If there is good return on investment, why bother about the search engine ranking benefits. I don't think there is anything wrong if you purchase links on relevant and related sites for the purpose of advertising but if you have to do it solely for link popularity, you might be affected if Google detects paid links in the future and devalues them. Just my two cents.

I don't think you get penalized but they are equal to the nofollow code. I think this will actually help. if a link is good and brings traffic that has value anyway. I get 10% of my traffic from links. I was shocked to find that myself. I also think this will give webmasters a chance to compete.