Uncategorized

Interview with Link-Building Expert Higel Emmanuel from Ereferer

Last year, Google astounded the SEO world with the bulletin of implementing brand-new each type of SEO links.

I am referring, of course, to the patronized ties-in and UGC that have come to join the existing nofollow and dofollow dimensions to expand( or stop) an already reforming SEO landscape.

To explore this topic, I spoke with an expert in the field.

Who is Higel Emmanuel?

As Google’s top SEO-related patent expert, Higel Emmanuel has over 13 years of experience and is undoubtedly one of the largest part people in his discipline. His work includes partnerships with Fortune 500 firebrands and some of the world’s largest websites. Today he is Co-Founder and Director of Ereferer, a link-building marketplace. We had the opportunity to speak with Higel and ask him what it means to do SEO today and what the future of link-building will be.

What types of SEO links are currently the best for a project?

If we refer to link attributes, definitely the best ones are still those that are not recognized with any dimension, that is, the ones we generally announce dofollow.

Which is not to say that nofollow, UGC, or patronized are useless. They likewise have their sit and their give, which I’ll explain in the following answer.

If we look at other relation qualities, such as the sheet where the link is located or its secure textbook, in that case the ideal links are those we place on a sheet to a domain that is relevant to our website, provided that the particular page and associate have some authority.

It’s important to specify the latter because a sheet with little dominion and that also has a large number of outgoing joins- for example, 100- is almost certainly not conveying “link juice” to the linked pages( since according to the PageRank algorithm the authority that a sheet can move is divided by the total number of outbound connects it contains, be they dofollow or nofollow ).

In the same way, the authority that matters is that of the specific page where the link is situated, and not so much better that of the domain( which is an aggregate of all its pages ).

If a land has a lot of authority, but the URL that associates us to it is numerous clicks away from the home page or, worse, orphaned and it doesn’t have backlinks from other arenas, that URL will have little authority to transfer.

This is something that, in my opinion, numerous parties reject. They are extremely guided by domain authority metrics such as DA, which are not bad as a general approximation but which don’t tell you anything about the specific URL where the link is located.

And all this, without going into the fact that Google today likely consumes a more advanced variety of PageRank, with a structure of seed sheets and a reduced link graph, according to which simply the links with the shortest lengths from these grains count to convey authority.

Regarding the fasten, I opt the firebrand fix textbook, or at least that then there natural and diverse. I do not think it advisable to abuse the anchor text of the “money keyword”, since this may be a sign we’re trying to manipulate the positions for that keyword.

What is the ideal link profile in your opinion? Do you think there is the Nofollow: Dofollow ratio, or is it a superstition?

I think the percentage of dofollow vs. nofollow tie-ups is a sign of the health of a site’s relation profile.

That is, if “youve had” 10,000 dofollow connects and 0 nofollow links, this sends Google a signal of little naturalness. Hence, Google can ascribe a red “flag” or associate little credibility to your site.

But I think there is no “ideal” percentage of nofollow and dofollow joins that will rank your area more highly.

It is rather a negative trap you were able to shall be divided into if you procreate the mistake of having few or no nofollow links within your backlink profile.

Regarding other characteristics that the ideal link profile could have, again, it’s easier to define how it shouldn’t be than how it should be.

For example, it doesn’t seem natural to me to have a profile that doesn’t include joins from websites on the same subject, and instead simply links from websites in different niches or general websites that cover a wide variety of topics.

We often fall into this trap, first, because these types of links are usually easy to buy, and second because the authority of the domain is usually evaluated more than the thematic attraction of the page and the domain that associations us.

In my model profile, I would include more connections from related thematic websites and less from definitive areas with general themes.

Can you tell us how the scenery is in terms of link-building with the brand-new UGC and sponsored dimensions?

Regarding link-building, I sincerely believe that the vistum will change a little bit.

Anyone who is creating or acquiring links to improve their ranks in Google will continue to use dofollow relations whenever they can.

That is, in general, it will not be tagged as sponsored, UGC, or nofollow. Nonetheless, the most experienced link-builders will use each of these 3 attributes to give variety and naturalness to their link profile, precisely for the above reasons I held in the previous answer.

Google has not made clear what its positioning is against these brand-new attributes.

Why do you think Google made different types of associates?

Well, for now, we can only speculate, but in my view, the fact that dofollow and nofollow were” all or nothing” was weakening Google’s ability to know and rank the web based on links.

This happened because numerous websites( including big media such as Forbes or the Huffington Post) had decided to recognize all their outgoing relates as nofollow and Google couldn’t ” identify” or continue crawling from those nofollow links.

The reason for labelling 100% of their ties-in as nofollow was clear: to avoid the temptation for their novelists to sell links to third parties.

In short, my opinion is that this change benefits Google. If it didn’t, it would not have been introduced.

With these latest changes from Google in the attributes, what will happen to the link-buying programmes?

These stages will continue to exist.

If they did it before, they will continue to do it now.

Basically , good-for-nothing happens. Google can decide the rules for the operation of its search engine, but it is not the police or the Internet government.

What the link-building platform or marketplaces do is not illegal. They are simply connecting purchasers with sellers.

Conclusion

My main conclusion is that we should not do vigorous and careless link- building, but instead try to build a natural join sketch that becomes hand-in-hand with material worthy of those links.Google has always glowered upon the excessive manipulation of higher-rankings through links.

Its latest incentive has been the introduction of the UGC and sponsored peculiarities and the possibility that both these associates, and the nofollow, can be taken into account for ranking roles if Google deems it necessary. We still don’t know enough about how the algorithm is programmed to see and weigh these different types of links. Google has not disclosed it.

But it is a way for Google to ensure it has more assure when using backlinks as a signal to rank web pages.

Read more: feedproxy.google.com