<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Text links and PageRank</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/</link>
	<description>neat fun stuff</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:35:07 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Steve Ball</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-400164</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Ball</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 21:45:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-400164</guid>
		<description>12 years ago when google didnt really bother about whether a site had paid links or not webmasters were able gain high page ranking for sites that today have top page ranking, these sites are now kept at the top of the ranking due to their popularity, how can google now say that the rules have changed, without the 1,000s of inbound paid links that these sites had to buy to get to the top to gain the popularity, how are webmasters of today expected to get high page rankings with new sites without using the same means that webmasters used 12 years ago, is google going to drop every site and start from a clean slate giving everyone the same chance to get to the top without paid links just good content ?
i think not, so paid links it has to be !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>12 years ago when google didnt really bother about whether a site had paid links or not webmasters were able gain high page ranking for sites that today have top page ranking, these sites are now kept at the top of the ranking due to their popularity, how can google now say that the rules have changed, without the 1,000s of inbound paid links that these sites had to buy to get to the top to gain the popularity, how are webmasters of today expected to get high page rankings with new sites without using the same means that webmasters used 12 years ago, is google going to drop every site and start from a clean slate giving everyone the same chance to get to the top without paid links just good content ?<br />
i think not, so paid links it has to be !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-398707</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:12:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-398707</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m no SEO expert, for sure.  But I&#039;ve dabbled in it, lightly dabbled over the past, wow, 13 years.  And it seems like that if one focuses on building an excellent business, with an excellent site and promotes that site as one would promote a business with all sorts of advertising, announcements, media and interactions with customers in areas where they hang out - reaching out to customers on terms related to your product or service the SEO comes, and builds over time as your excellent business&#039; popularity grows.  

Of course creating descriptive content that focuses on a keyword to reach out to people who are searching via keyword, a related keyword makes a lot of sense too.  That should be done for sure.    

Over all this time, with all the SEO gimmicks and tricks, it seems like the old school basics, the same stuff I thought about with my own common sense 10 years ago has worked best and still works.  It seems like chasing the latest and greatest SEO trick and gimmick is equivalent to a dog chasing its tail... a &#039;wild goose chase&#039; that just drives me nuts.   But hey what to i know... i&#039;m just a dabbler who hasn&#039;t even taken advantage of my own observations very well at all.   Anyways...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m no SEO expert, for sure.  But I&#8217;ve dabbled in it, lightly dabbled over the past, wow, 13 years.  And it seems like that if one focuses on building an excellent business, with an excellent site and promotes that site as one would promote a business with all sorts of advertising, announcements, media and interactions with customers in areas where they hang out &#8211; reaching out to customers on terms related to your product or service the SEO comes, and builds over time as your excellent business&#8217; popularity grows.  </p>
<p>Of course creating descriptive content that focuses on a keyword to reach out to people who are searching via keyword, a related keyword makes a lot of sense too.  That should be done for sure.    </p>
<p>Over all this time, with all the SEO gimmicks and tricks, it seems like the old school basics, the same stuff I thought about with my own common sense 10 years ago has worked best and still works.  It seems like chasing the latest and greatest SEO trick and gimmick is equivalent to a dog chasing its tail&#8230; a &#8216;wild goose chase&#8217; that just drives me nuts.   But hey what to i know&#8230; i&#8217;m just a dabbler who hasn&#8217;t even taken advantage of my own observations very well at all.   Anyways&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vincentg</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-355010</link>
		<dc:creator>vincentg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:05:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-355010</guid>
		<description>When is Google going to clean up it&#039;s act on spam?

You go after webmasters / website owners for trying to buy page rank and call it spam yet I see thousands upon thousands of Google Adsense Targeted Web Sites with 3 or 4 adsense ads, little to no usefull content and what is Google telling site owners?
Maybe you don&#039;t have enough adsense ads on your website.

Really!

Do as I say but don&#039;t do as I do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When is Google going to clean up it&#8217;s act on spam?</p>
<p>You go after webmasters / website owners for trying to buy page rank and call it spam yet I see thousands upon thousands of Google Adsense Targeted Web Sites with 3 or 4 adsense ads, little to no usefull content and what is Google telling site owners?<br />
Maybe you don&#8217;t have enough adsense ads on your website.</p>
<p>Really!</p>
<p>Do as I say but don&#8217;t do as I do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-347889</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:16:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-347889</guid>
		<description>sorry, i don&#039;t believe what matt said

he is merely trying to mislead people into believing paid links no longer work... so that Google algorithm will not be messed up

if you do some simple search on credit cards related term(an ultra competitive niche), every sites found at the top of serp are buying tons of links

aside from that, the so-called low hanging fruit niche also infested with paid links

so matt, i would like to hear from you on the latest development on this issue

it seems google still cannot rectify the paid links issue</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>sorry, i don&#8217;t believe what matt said</p>
<p>he is merely trying to mislead people into believing paid links no longer work&#8230; so that Google algorithm will not be messed up</p>
<p>if you do some simple search on credit cards related term(an ultra competitive niche), every sites found at the top of serp are buying tons of links</p>
<p>aside from that, the so-called low hanging fruit niche also infested with paid links</p>
<p>so matt, i would like to hear from you on the latest development on this issue</p>
<p>it seems google still cannot rectify the paid links issue</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ash</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-340911</link>
		<dc:creator>Ash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:41:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-340911</guid>
		<description>Hi,
My site has a number of affiliate links as it is a prepaid aggregator site to compare prepaid cards and I was advised that I should set up google friendly redirects as Google would penalise my site otherwise and not sure this is the reason but after a lot of hard work, my page rank dropped from 1 to ...err ....zero.  

So what is google&#039;s stance on affilate links - should they have a no follow tag?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,<br />
My site has a number of affiliate links as it is a prepaid aggregator site to compare prepaid cards and I was advised that I should set up google friendly redirects as Google would penalise my site otherwise and not sure this is the reason but after a lot of hard work, my page rank dropped from 1 to &#8230;err &#8230;.zero.  </p>
<p>So what is google&#8217;s stance on affilate links &#8211; should they have a no follow tag?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rajesh</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-339774</link>
		<dc:creator>Rajesh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 06:24:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-339774</guid>
		<description>Consider a situation where in I myself own 100 websites and give links in all these websites for a new site. How will it be treated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Consider a situation where in I myself own 100 websites and give links in all these websites for a new site. How will it be treated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amiya Sarkar</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-337682</link>
		<dc:creator>Amiya Sarkar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 18:58:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-337682</guid>
		<description>Hi Matt,
You did not mention what happens when a website &quot;sells&quot; (and not buys) Text link ads which are relevant to the anchor text and the content. Would you please elaborate on it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Matt,<br />
You did not mention what happens when a website &#8220;sells&#8221; (and not buys) Text link ads which are relevant to the anchor text and the content. Would you please elaborate on it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KernelPanic</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-330232</link>
		<dc:creator>KernelPanic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 19:25:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-330232</guid>
		<description>You guys make my brain bleed. Have you ever read Google&#039;s quality guidelines? I&#039;ll translate :)
1) Create clean-coded, information rich websites that are silly with original relevant content.
2) Create a solid internal linking structure throughout the site.
3) Don&#039;t try and artificially manipulate the SERPS.
4) Once done, encourage quality links from high PR, related websites where you can. 
5) Chant &quot;We&#039;re #1, We&#039;re #1!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You guys make my brain bleed. Have you ever read Google&#8217;s quality guidelines? I&#8217;ll translate <img src='http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
1) Create clean-coded, information rich websites that are silly with original relevant content.<br />
2) Create a solid internal linking structure throughout the site.<br />
3) Don&#8217;t try and artificially manipulate the SERPS.<br />
4) Once done, encourage quality links from high PR, related websites where you can.<br />
5) Chant &#8220;We&#8217;re #1, We&#8217;re #1!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christopher</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-301594</link>
		<dc:creator>Christopher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 17:07:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-301594</guid>
		<description>How can Google (without doing it manualy) work out, who is paying, and who isn&#039;t?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How can Google (without doing it manualy) work out, who is paying, and who isn&#8217;t?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bibokz</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/#comment-301184</link>
		<dc:creator>Bibokz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:52:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=33#comment-301184</guid>
		<description>&quot;This is an old entry which keeps coming up in the SERPs for good reason, its one of the most controversial topics in SEO.&quot;

I agree.. just a Q matt, how could Google know if its paid or not?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;This is an old entry which keeps coming up in the SERPs for good reason, its one of the most controversial topics in SEO.&#8221;</p>
<p>I agree.. just a Q matt, how could Google know if its paid or not?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
