Link Selling - Unethical or Just Unwise?

[Feydakin]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I would just like to give you a friendly tip: Give it up before things get worse.

And now threats.. Wow..

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by Feydakin

And now threats.. Wow..

I did not threat you. I just advised you to stop provoking me, because the stress situation went far out of control.
Seems like you want it to continue that, so I can only ask WPW team to settle this.

I only want my peace.

[khurramali]

the fact of the matter is that, We need Google, We need Yahoo and we certainly need MSN. And all other search engines.

our relationship with search engines is one of love and hate. Our concept that all big corporations are evil is also not correct.

Look at this situation from Google's perspective, They just want to safeguard their source of income.
What they have done is just taken away the power of link sellers to pass page rank, which is also correct.

I also agree with Cranky and Tubby that no-follow tag should have been the end of this story.

Google should have given advance warning to the industry, a time line would be helpful, yes.

[mjtaylor]

Well, we have gotten a ways off the topic here ... but after all, if a thread makes it to page 6, it probably has to go off topic ... there is only so much that can be said about the ethics of selling links.

Personally, I learned a lot and it has enlarged my point of view. I did always believe that presenting a link as though it was a 'recommendation' when it is paid had a 'deceptive' edge to it ... but I had not even thought of the issues with disclosing the risks to clients when buying or selling links.

Just hoping to steer us back to the thread topic ... oh, and I also wanted to note that a more general thread on ethics has been started in the break room.

Perhaps we have said enough here ... if others think so, we could close it ... let me know if you want me to do that ...

MJ

[Webnauts]

MJ if you ask me, the thread may close, if others agree too.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

You know, once you´re "duly elected" you have 4 years. A company's popularity can be broken any time. The popularity of a company is more democratically determined than a government's.

Supreme court justices are appointed for life. When it comes to laws in the US, you can't get much higher than that. Not sure what "popularity" has to do with this. Comparing Googles guidelines to "breaking the laws" that are/were put in place by duly elected or appointed government agencies is a poor comparison.

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Actually, there´s nothing wrong with that. And in Google's case you can even say that it is working very well. The number of paid (PR passing) links on the internet has reduced dramatically. And more importantly, so have the prices of paid links, making paid (pr passing) link ads a lot less interesting to sell.

Broad assumption Peter.

Not sure how you can say it's working very well, since neither you, nor I, nor Google have a clue as to how many "paid" links there are on the web. If Google knew how many there were, there'd be no issue. That's the problem and why their approach is so flawed.

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Google's strategy here is working so well, goverment agencies should be jealous.

I can't believe you posted this Peter. wow

Dave

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Perhaps we have said enough here ... if others think so, we could close it ... let me know if you want me to do that ...

MJ

No reason at all to close the thread MJ.

Dave

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by khurramali

Google should have given advance warning to the industry, a time line would be helpful, yes.

Time line? Weren't almost 5 years enough?
Google was advising us not to buy/sell links since 2003. See a previous post of mine about this: Link Selling - Unethical or Just Unwise?

If people did not ignore them, the "nofollow" attribute would not have been needed now.

Many ignored Google's advise, so now their time came to pay the price.

[Tubby]

peter said
"making paid (pr passing) link ads a lot less interesting to sell.'

I think I am the only contributor to this thread that actively sells links, or has openly said so. I am also one who has recently lost tool bar ranking (I have not accepted a connection between the two)

From where I sit there has been a distinct upsurge in buying links. More value has been added to the market price for lower value pr, and topic specific PR.

One problem with 'reading the scene' is that many many forums publish webmaster views and opinions. Many of these posts are simply what the webmaster felts like saying today. or comments on what other people have done said, thought. Or just the latest bandwagon..

We are lucky in this forum. we do have several Honest webmaster that write original words, based on personal experience.

If you do not sell links, and presume that those that do, simply sell high value for big dollars, you could be a long long way from reality and that your opinion is totally formed from the "whats been said". An nothing to do with the reality of sold links.

WPW, has thousands of members. . . How come I can only find me that says... "yes I sell links'

A few outspoken prominent SEO members are not the majority . . Each of our voices is just one person. How many lurkers are there, that have been scared into 'SHHHHHHHH mode'. "Fear as a tactic for reform, is unethical'

"Punished" - who chose that word? the choice of the word in itself hints towards attitude of disdain .

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by Tubby

peter said
"making paid (pr passing) link ads a lot less interesting to sell.'

I think I am the only contributor to this thread that actively sells links, or has openly said so. I am also one who has recently lost tool bar ranking (I have not accepted a connection between the two)

From where I sit there has been a distinct upsurge in buying links. More value has been added to the market price for lower value pr, and topic specific PR.

One problem with 'reading the scene' is that many many forums publish webmaster views and opinions. Many of these posts are simply what the webmaster felts like saying today. or comments on what other people have done said, thought. Or just the latest bandwagon..

We are lucky in this forum. we do have several Honest webmaster that write original words, based on personal experience.

If you do not sell links, and presume that those that do, simply sell high value for big dollars, you could be a long long way from reality and that your opinion is totally formed from the "whats been said". An nothing to do with the reality of sold links.

WPW, has thousands of members. . . How come I can only find me that says... "yes I sell links'

A few outspoken prominent SEO members are not the majority . . Each of our voices is just one person. How many lurkers are there, that have been scared into 'SHHHHHHHH mode'. "Fear as a tactic for reform, is unethical'

"Punished" - who chose that word? the choice of the word in itself hints towards attitude of disdain .

Well, It used to be simple. You could make hundreds to thousands of dollars per page (!) by selling links. Don't look at me, as I have never rented a single link in my life. Not because I didn't want to, but because I don't have sites that are interesting enough to sell links in. I have seen in link broker sites that the prices went down. Even before Google started zeroing the ToolBar the heat on selling links was already up and prices went down.

You´re right everything is in hiding now. Most linkbroker sites don't show any information about the links they sell anymore. It's kind of funny. But I completely disagre with your "Fear as a tactic for reform" statement. It's the link seller's choice to be afraid. If he is afraid then he acknowledges he is doing something wrong... If he believes he is doing nothing wrong, then he won't be afraid.

It's not about the selling of links, it's about the selling of PR passing links, which basically means selling PR. If you place the links in non-indexable script or use a nofollow there is nothing to be afraid of.

Why people are so upset about it I don't get either. Google always has said they don't like selling links based on PR. They never did much against it because they couldn't. Now that they can, its all the sudden the big bad Google that's not being fair?

[Feydakin]

ok, one more time..

No fear, good business decision to not be as open about your own business model of selling links..

Exploiting a weakness in someone else's business model is not evil.. Or even wrong.. They either improve their business model or fail..

Selling links for PR may not be allowed by Google.. But they have throw all sold links in to the same bucket.. People who have no idea what PR is, and have sold links based on liking a product, or thinking that their users may benefit from them have also been added to the bucket to be tossed out.. The solution to stopping links from being sold based on PR is to stop showing the PR.. Not try to get millions of people to change their websites to fit your business model..

Unless, of course, the whole goal really had little to do with PR itself and more to do with controlling the text advertising market..

[Tubby]

Peter, said
"its all the sudden the big bad Google that's not being fair?"


I am not concerned about the big bad Google. . I dislike getting emails telling me I am "cheating" I dislike other people that make a living on the net telling me. . I MUST put this tag here. or I am doing something awful. or unethical, Peter that is just total crap. you just cannot throw everyone that sells a link into the same basket..

Google has never demanded a thing from me in as far as the way I run my web site. . Me and Google get along just fine. I do not have any gripe with Google,

you said "If he is afraid then he acknowledges he is doing something wrong... If he believes he is doing nothing wrong, then he won't be afraid." While you yourself become part of the campaign to enforce that acknowledgment.

I have met God fearing people. they preach Gods words on the street corners. there are now 'Google fearing' people preaching to us. .

It is fear based Peter. Some are scared someone will get more traffic than them by buying PR. so they follow - follow follow. Without taking more than a cursury glance at what it is they a doing, what this 'follow blindly' action is moulding.. yes Blindly looking at the net with one single narrow one eyed view.

Google does not worry me. . The Zealots scare me..



Its coming up to an hour before midnight here. Santa is on his way.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Well, It used to be simple. You could make hundreds to thousands of dollars per page (!) by selling links. Don't look at me, as I have never rented a single link in my life. Not because I didn't want to, but because I don't have sites that are interesting enough to sell links in. I have seen in link broker sites that the prices went down. Even before Google started zeroing the ToolBar the heat on selling links was already up and prices went down.

You´re right everything is in hiding now. Most linkbroker sites don't show any information about the links they sell anymore. It's kind of funny. But I completely disagre with your "Fear as a tactic for reform" statement. It's the link seller's choice to be afraid. If he is afraid then he acknowledges he is doing something wrong... If he believes he is doing nothing wrong, then he won't be afraid.

It's not about the selling of links, it's about the selling of PR passing links, which basically means selling PR. If you place the links in non-indexable script or use a nofollow there is nothing to be afraid of.

Why people are so upset about it I don't get either. Google always has said they don't like selling links based on PR. They never did much against it because they couldn't. Now that they can, its all the sudden the big bad Google that's not being fair?

Some prices have went down. Others have went way up.

What links don't pass PR Peter? It's about the selling of links.

And again Peter, it's far more than just the PR a link passes. A link passes value for anchor text. It passes value for the text in the URL. You don't seriously think that all Google doesn't want passed is PR do you?

Dave

[Tubby]

A link passes value for anchor text.
It needed highlighting dave. Google results would disintigrate with this tool...

[crankydave]

Some additional thoughts and a follow up Peter...

All Google has really done is push the practice further underground. Many text link brokers were being quite blantantly obvious ond open as we are well aware.

Tubby has it precisely right. It is most certainly a "fear tactic for reform".

The question you need to ask yourself is within whom the "fear" is going to be most likely instilled...

The people selling links with the intent on gaming the system, exploiting a weakness, given that they now know Google can't do it themselves.

Or...

The "average Joe" trying to make a few extra bucks selling related advertising links to what they believe are quality sites?

Dave

[Peter (IMC)]

Let's look at SEO.

You put a good title on your pages in order to get higher rankings.
You use a <h1> and not what ever your editor throws up there, in order to ge