Is link building dead after Panda 3.3?

[ignitionmedia]

So, with Panda 3.3 up and running, and most of my clients websites dropping drasticly in positioning due to backlinks, is link building a thing of the past?

I read some people saying it still works if the links are from quality sites, same theme, PR2+ but you know what, I only ever exchanged with these sites and got stinged big time.

Im not sure what to do with my SEO clients in terms of their current contracts/campaigns... Do i continue doing link building or stop doing this all together and hope that natural links are created by increased blog posts/contents?

Can anyone advise -- please.
thanks

[StanDaMan]

I defer the the true experts here, but I thought Panda (from what I've read) is about low quality junk content, and not about links.
But I've also read that google is devaluing links in general and especially junk links (I hope so) but that's different from Panda, I think.
I've always thought, if you building junk links, you're wasting your time. If you're creating great content, maybe karma will shine on you (some day). But perhaps I am naive.

[ignitionmedia]

Yeah Im at a bit of my loss, content and quality link building has always been my main priority in SEO with my clients - 2-3 unique blogs posts of 400 words added to the site weekly (on relevant topics) and link building for websites that are not link farms, can offer a link from a page (usualy a links page) with a PR2+ that doesnt have over 100 links on it.. i thought i was doing the best thing. but most sites have been smashed.

Panda 3.3 turns the focus moreso on content, but i'd say thats cos they are devaluing manulaly created links.. I think they are smart enough to distinguish the different between a natural and a manual made link and natural are now what will get your site ranking (along with content of course)

Looking for advise on what direction to take.

[williamc]

direction to take: stop caring what the search engines do and just build for your users.....

[Sujan]

I think this link will help you - insidesearch.blogspot.in/2012/02/search-quality-highlights-40-changes.html

[Jonathon76643]

I am building up my site with content and trackbacks alone, and it is slow-going. I recommend continuing with link-building, with the understanding that it is simply not as effective as it used to be. If you find that some link sources aren't generating any improvements, you might consider re-directing your time formerly spent on those sources to a completely different activity (content building, guest-writing, optimization), while maintaining link-building on the sources that are still generating improvements in rank.

[merlot105]

direction to take: stop caring what the search engines do and just build for your users.....

Actually, this is is really the best strategy. Even link-building Guru Eric Ward suggests that the best way to move forward generally with your site is to worry about your business (aka your customers) and then the rest will follow. Google changes too quickly - be it Panda 3.3 or the next release, and it's impossible to know where the future of link building will be. At the end of the day you will be rewarded by providing a truly meaningful user experience. And I mean "rewarded" in a general sense - you'll get people talking about you, linking about you, buying things from you, etc.

[chrisJumbo]

The fact that Google de-indexed a well known link network should tell you link building isn't dead. Google still counts links. Google wants quality content. Quality links are one aspect they look at to help determine that.

And of course William is correct. Do what is right for your visitors, not what is right for Google.

[Milo]

I have 2 sites that I'm basing this on that are very similar. On one site (site A) I have had for 10 years and have a lot of back links with some that are decent quality, not great, PR3, but this site has never done any better or worse with ANY addition of links. I have over the years spent many hours trying to gather back links. Can't say link building has not helped, but it really has not appeared to make much difference to my generic ranking that I can obviously see. I have hovered from #10-4 for my major keyword for probably 5 years now.

Other site (site B) I have done ZERO link building. This site ranks #1 for my major keyword and has done for 2 years now.

Both sites are extremely similar, the major difference is that one is wholesale and one is retail, but the products are nearly identical (same code, same name etc). I have changed the description minutely to avoid duplicate content. Also worth mentioning both site keywords return over 5 Million results, so its not just a matter of one keyword being greatly less competitive.

So, my opinion is that back links are not as important as they were years ago and my time is better spent adding products and building a better site for my visitors than worrying about "begging" for back links.

[claybutler]

Link building is doing just fine. What's changed over time is the weight that's put on each link. But Google has no choice but to weigh links heavily as it's the core of their algorithm which is based on citation. That's why they spend so much money and expertise try to stop people from gaming the results with linking strategies.

People use Google because it fetches very good results. They then sell this user base to advertisers which makes them tens of billions of dollars per year. But those those good results are based up their citation based algorithm.

So Google's stuck. They rely on links to shape their quality results which generates 90% of their income This in turn has trained all the webmasters and SEO people to focus on links and gaming the results with links. But Google can't abandon links as the foundation of their algorithm. So they go ape shit 24/7 trying to stay one step ahead of the SEO pros, which left unchecked, will destroy their business model.