Crappy Link Pages

[VRI]

On my next site I'm planning to include several crappy link pages and didn't know if you guys did similar. That way I can accept the vast majority that I pass on now.

One directory linked site wide the other just from home. In both directories include pages with 100+ links and some 3/4 clicks from home etc. When someone requests a link I wouldn't have to turn them down because I didn't have a page bad enough, they'd get exactly what they offer.

I'm not being sarcastic, I just wondered if anyone had considered or is doing similar.

[sward]

I'm not sure there is a benefit from it. I really think the time will come when the SE's are going to clamp down on this link exchange thing. And I'm not sure if they would penalize pages like that or not. I guess if it has no or little PR it wouldn't matter but why take the time to put up worthless links. You'd still be stealing a little PR from your good pages just by including the link to the "junk" pages. Especially if they are not related to your industry.

I don't know there seems to be so many "linking just for PR out there" I still say "CONTENT IS KING!" I do not have the fluctuations that many complain about on this forum. my PR did drop back to 4 on the last update but I think that was because many of these "linking just for PR " sites have dropped their links to me. Which I have since culled from my sites. It did not effect my SERPS though as I keep climbing for more and more keywords. Heck I'm even having problems of coming up with more Keywords to optimize for.

Well that's my opinion anyway!
"CONTENT IS KING!" Let us know how it works for you.
sward

[VRI]

I will, but my feeling is that content is great, PR is cool but... Anchor Text is the king. Having the crappy link pages will allow me to grab hundreds of text links... because the pages will be supported poorly any PR drop would be inconsequential.

[sward]

Anchor Text is the king. Having the crappy link pages will allow me to grab hundreds of text links

....humm I see what you mean....

well again I'm not an expert but from trail and error, perhaps someone else can chime in, I suppose you are talking about incoming anchor text?

If they are sites not passing the links how would it help? Or are you just thinking about those link pages with 100's of outbound links? After you combine all the anchor text of a page like that wouldn't the weight be a wash anyway?

Where are all you number cruchers on this one?

I still think..... bad idea ..... but what do I know?

[VRI]

If they are sites not passing the links how would it help? Or are you just thinking about those link pages with 100's of outbound links? After you combine all the anchor text of a page like that wouldn't the weight be a wash anyway?

I turn down links that are from a directory supported from only one link from home and those that have over 50 links per page. I know that these links get spidered and the anchor text counts, though I hold the very strong opinion they're of considerably less value than mine (directory linked from all main pages and between 2-50 internal PR3-5's pointed at each specific link page depending on the site).

I'm gonna try it for the next one. Lay out the links so I have pages with links of varying quality. That way I can approve the one link to the directory and the 100 links per page sites.

What the heck, I'm still pimping the links on these... I'll set up new directories tonight.

[kensmith]

I turn down links that are from a directory supported from only one link from home and those that have over 50 links per page.

I find that interesting as I don't think all of your site wide linking adds any value to a link page. If a directory has a PR3 link page that is supported only by a home page link why would that be any different then a directory that is a PR3 and "supported" by a link from each page??? Don't see any difference here.

Most link for PR and anchor text and will get the same value from both sites IMO. Traffic will also be the same, next to zero.

[VRI]

The objective is to have your link crawled regularly. The more links to the page the greater the frequency of bot hits and the more your link gets crawled. In looking at log files I see the single exception being a link one click closer to home.

If you're saying that you see no difference between a directory linked site-wide and one only linked from home then I have to ask how long you've been watching cache dates and do you track spiders on your sites?

You are right about traffic though.

[sward]

I'm interested in what you find out. Keep us posted! Sward

[kensmith]

If the site is crawled on a regular basis the links page will be also. And it really doesn't matter if it is crawled once a day or once a week except that it might take a week longer for the backlink to show up. PR is PR and a backlink is a backlink no matter how often the page is crawled. A direct link from the home page is more than enough to keep a page crawled and indexed IMO.

[VRI]

"And it really doesn't matter if it is crawled once a day or once a week ... a backlink is a backlink no matter how often the page is crawled"
We certainly disagree here!

"A direct link from the home page is more than enough to keep a page crawled and indexed"
More than enough.