Comments on: Linkbuilding nirvana – taking the pain out of one-way links

By: Patrick Denzi

Patrick Denzi — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 17:22:22 +0000

Dramatic notice about search engines. I’m honestly dumbfounded that this has not been alleged before.

By: ndixon

ndixon — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 07:13:56 +0000

In theory, yes, after all Google can do whatever they want, particularly with those sites it considers have broken its terms and conditions of use.

By: dofollow

dofollow — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 10:45:29 +0000

What happens when google does find out about this service ? can it black-list all websites using it ?

By: ndixon

ndixon — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:51:25 +0000

I agree that Google may be able to see linking patterns and so reduce the value of links coming out of a particular set of blogs.
But the Linkvana guys are keeping one step ahead by constantly introducing more blogs to the distribution network, they never publicize the locations of the blogs, and, most importantly for traceability, they do not interconnect them (link farms tend to interlink to maximise the short shelf lives of the links and properties), making it very tricky to spot which blogs are part of the network.

Time will tell, however, and purely for interest, I’m keeping an eye on a handful of their properties to see how their helth maintains, or otherwise, within the Google index.

By: Phil McThomas

Phil McThomas — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:07:46 +0000

My take: It it looks like a link farm, and it smells like a link farm, it’s only a matter of time before Google starts treating it as a link farm.

By: ndixon

ndixon — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 20:48:10 +0000

It could be described as grey-hat. Link farms are very different. A link farm will have thousands of properties into which your link is placed thousands of times. With Linkvana, your link has to have unique content surrounding it – each link has its own piece of content, created by you as a blog post. To get 100 links, you have to write 100, relevant blog posts. The links therefore each have context, are valid within the text in which they sit, and, when you boil it down, are little different to guest-posting on another person’s blog, including your link within that post. Plenty of blogs and sites exist purely for the purpose of linking to other relevant content.
Where this crosses the grey line is that fact you pay for the service therefore, you are effectively buying links, which is against Google’s T&C.

By: Phil McThomas

Phil McThomas — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 19:56:00 +0000

I’m puzzled. Why isn’t this considered “black hat”? It’s a deliberate attempt to influence SE rankings without delivering any value to the end-user.

It may not fit the dictionary definition of a link farm, but as far as the end user is concerned, you might as well use a link farm.

By: ndixon

ndixon — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 07:36:07 +0000

By “not exclusive” I wanted to highlight that link building must include a number of techniques and never be focused around a single activity. So Linkvana can be combined with other link building quite effectively.

By: scott

scott — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 02:48:07 +0000

he results were not spectacular, but no exclusive, narrowly focused link building campaign will rocket a site to the top of the SERPs.

I dont understand when you said “but no exclusive”. Also do you mean add more links narrowly focuse on the keywords and get high rankings?

By: ndixon

ndixon — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 07:23:27 +0000

It is, I agree, if you are marketing a single website. But if you are link building for multiple sites, since you can have many projects per account, the cost per link is very small when compared to the effort to establish a similar quality link through other means.