More on the Topic of Paid Links

Here is a great post from SEO Blackhat titled Don’t Buy Links – Buy the Whole Site. It offers some good and practical advice about paid links. Here is a great summary quote from the post:

Generally, the sites you can still buy links from that can pass link juice (help you site rank in the SERPs) will be small to medium sites with a single owner or decision maker.

This confirms what I have been saying for a long time – that getting paid links from authoritative sites that will pass you PageRank (i.e. bigger sites with a big reputation) is not something you should expect that you are going to be able to do.

To underscore this the theme of the post is that you might spend a few thousand a year to buy a link for the year, but you might also be able to buy the whole site for $10K to $15K. This in, in fact, a very practical suggestion. I don’t think that Google will soon go after people who expand their business by initating a series of acquisitions. Seriously, I would suggest that people consider acquiring sites as a part of their strategy.

However, you will probably accept my suggestion that you are not acquiring an authoritative site for $15K.

Google’s recent aggressive steps against the paid links biz have been noticed. Unfortunately, there will probably be some innocent roadkill along the way, but any single algorithm change made by a search engine has this affect.

As I noted before, I was surprised that Google broadly included sites that do in fact clearly label their sites as “Sponsored” or “Advertisers”. It surprised me because there are lots of innocents out there who do not know what “nofollow” is.

To me, this is a signal regarding how bad the paid links problem was becoming for Google. Too many people who did not have appropriate content quality were getting rich. They must have seen no other way to combat it other than taking strong action.

So what’s next for Google on this front? It seems to me that the next step would be the ability to take action on individual sites in faster response to Paid Link Spam complaints through Webmaster Central. Google already guarantees that someone will look at each authenticated report made through Webmaster Central (this is a report you make through your WMT account, which means they know who sent it in).

The next step is a simple one. Provide the person reviewing the complaint with some verification tools and procedures that they can use to be absolutely sure that they can identify paid links that are passing PageRank. Then let them set a flag and move on.

Obviously, they would need to be absolutely sure that the links are being paid for, and not take any action unless it is clear and obvious. Ambiguous situations would be reported to others for further review.

Google may not take this step because it is not algorithmic in nature. But if they want to get people to stop looking for links that pass PageRank, this would be another simple thing they could do in that battle, and the incremental human resource drain would be minimal.

Always keep in mind the strategic objectives of the search engines, and align your site strategies with those objectives. It’s the most secure place to be. Their strategic objectives change far less frequently than their algorithms. It’s the only way to develop an authoritative web site of your own.

Latest Interview: Microsoft’s Grad Conn

This week’s interview is with Grad Conn of Microsoft. We spoke about Microsoft’s unique new health search product, and how they have integrated that into the core experience of Live Search. Read the interview for the details of how and why Microsoft put it together, and comment below if you want to discuss it.

Custom Search Business Edition

This past Wednesday my latest “By The Numbers” column went up on Search Engine Watch. This article reviews the Custom Search Business Edition, for those webmasters that need to do a bit more with their Custom Search Engine than the free version allows. One of the nicest things about CSBEs is that you don’t need to have any ads presented together with the results.

Foosball at SES Chicago!

SES Chicago will begin tomorrow, and STC will be there. We are holding a special event on behalf of Search Engine Watch, an open foosball challenge. This takes place on Wednesday at lunch (12:30 to 2:00) at booth #100 in the Exhibition Hall. The first doubles team to beat the team of Eric Enge and John Biundo will win a pair of iPod nanos. The first four runners up in the foosball challenge will also receive Stone Temple T-Shirts.

In addition, Tuesday during the lunch break we will hold a mini foosball tournament. The winner of the tournament gets bragging rights, plus high quality Stone Temple Consulting shirts. The other finalist and the semifinalists in the tournament will also receive Stone Temple T-Shirts. Note that John and Eric will not be participating in the tournament.

Come by and see us and we can talk foosball for a break from the conference!

Stone Temple Consulting: Pretty damn good at foosball … unbeatable at Search Engine Optimization.

Complex Site Hierarchies

Large sites have a variety of problems. They are inherently more complex than smaller sites to manage from many perspectives. Some of the major ones include:

  1. Content management is a major challenge
  2. Providing users a quality user experience (e.g. an easy to understand navigation system) may be difficult
  3. And, yes, SEO can be a challenge too

One of the most common SEO problems relates to managing complex site hierarchies. An example of this is when you try to implement a site with a local aspect. For example, let’s say you sell widgets, and like pizzas, it matters where you sell them. Let’s also say that you sell widgets in 200 different cities and towns. So far it’s not too bad.

Now let’s complicate things a bit further and imaging that there are 45 different types of widgets (e.g. you sell auto parts, and there are hundred of different types of parts), but there is still a reason to be concerned about where you sell these widgets – perhaps there is a service aspect to it, or some reason why the customer wants to be able to look at the actual product first.

Now you decide you want to offer your users the navigation of their choice. Want to search on the product type first? Go ahead! Pick widgets, then blue widgets, then pick the city where you want to shop for it. Your breadcrumb bar might look like this: Widgets > Blue Widgets > CityName. Pretty straight forward.

Want to search on the city name first? You probably want your user to be able to do that too. After that you let them pick their product category and specific product. The resulting breadcrumb bar might be something like: CityName > Widgets > CityName.

The problem is pretty easy to detect: Widgets > Blue Widgets > CityName and CityName > Widgets > CityName have the exact same content. This makes them duplicate content. This is not a good thing. Let’s review some options for dealing with it:

  1. One possible solution is simply to not offer both navigation paths. For many sites, this is pretty viable. Unless you offer a lot of very specialized content completely unrelated to your products that you are selling, you aren’t likely to rank for a city name anyway. Unless there is a compelling reason to offer both methods of navigation, just don’t do it.
  2. You could also allow someone to pick their city first, and then when they pick a product, send them over to the other copy of the page. Basically, what you are doing here is sending someone from City > Widgets to Widgets > City. This is a pretty good solution for eliminating the duplicate content, but it can have a high usability cost. The nature of the cost is that your breadcrumb will be confusing to the user.The problem is that they selected a City first, and then a product, but the breadcrumb indicates the opposite. You can build the breadcrumb dynamically on the page, but from an SEO perspective, the breadcrumb bar is something that you want to use to reinforce the link hierarchy of your site.
  3. Next up, you can offer the complete path, but NoFollow one path entirely. This provides a valid path for a user to follow, without any of the search engine issues outlined above. This is a pretty good option for managing the link juice flow too. Now the search engine only sees one “City Blue Widgets” page, and more of your link juice flows to that one version of the page.I don’t see any major down side to this option.

Related to all this is the issue of developing content. In what we have outlined above (hundreds of products and hundreds of cities) you are likely to have tens of thousands of pages. How are you going to get content for all those pages?

While that’s not today’s topic, knowing the answer to that is important in tackling these types of hierarchy questions. You are not doing anyone, including yourself, any good by publishing thousands of low content pages. You just up end up with loads of pages in the supplemental index of Google and provide lots of low quality signals to all the search engines.

You would be better off having a smaller site where the pages are all of high quality, and then grow the site over time as you develop more content. Even in this scenario though, it’s a good idea to know what direction you are headed in with before you design your initial architecture.

Widget Case Study

Earlier today I release my latest “By The Numbers” column on Search Engine Watch. This is a Widget Case Study that includes never before released data from Offermatica, Otto Digital, and StepChange. The case study outlines the success story of a widget called CLIQ, and discusses the basic underlying reasons as to why it worked.