Comments on: New York Times outs major US retailer for link spam

By: Rad

Rad — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 02:03:37 +0000

I think over time google will have less influence. We are already going towards a social-media influenced trend. You just wait and see… google is the next Yahoo/Lycos/Webcrawler.

By: How To Deal With Autocomplete Ruining Your Business | BenjaminRoyce.com - A Portal For New Media, Tech and Small Businesses by Benjamin Royce

Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:43:20 +0000

[...] it head on. This is more of a PR strategy than an SEO straegy, but time and time again we see that SEO and PR cross paths at the worst times. If the suggestion has a drop of truth to it, you may wish to work on the SEO for that term. Get [...]

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 16:16:30 +0000

I’m new to this SEO thing, but even I know that if anyone can buy a link on site than the link is not going to be worth much. I supposed in the case of JCP they were able to buy a very large number of links and thus get a good result but I have to wonder how much that cost them. At least with Google taking action it will give smaller companies a change to get a decent rank without needing a JCP level SEO budget.

By: Evan

Evan — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 15:53:09 +0000

That is a really interesting story. I am surprised that New York Times did not have someone on their own team with SEO knowledge to steer the ship. It shows how important it is to have someone on any business with good SEO knowledge

By: lee

lee — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:43:07 +0000

White had only is fine… if you don’t want to rank for anything competitive.

JC Penny vanished from the top 10 for a load of phrases – another link buyer just moved up from 11th to 10th to take their place so no big difference… as a purely white hat seo you’re still going to be stuck out in the wilderness where nobody sees your site anyway.

By: John McNally

John McNally — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 14:51:32 +0000

I’m glad that link spamming retailers are getting exposed. I only use white hat techniques and the sooner black hats are punished, the better.

John
Leamington Spa, England

By: lee

lee — Sun, 20 Feb 2011 11:58:04 +0000

Imre – I’d say link building is just as important as ever. Its not the only factor, but its by far the biggest one.

I don’t think you can call it 2 years of hard work to build 151 links…

If you had spent some of that time building links you would be at least tucked in behind the Wiki listings, not stranded in last place.

I don’t think you can use ranking 10th for a not very competitive phrase with not many links as proof that “link building isn’t the only seo factor”.

By: Ryo

Ryo — Sun, 20 Feb 2011 02:05:16 +0000

Probably the funniest thing I heard all day. I don’t what’s better that Jc Penny used spam links or that Google didn’t catch it sooner

By: Imre Bernath

Imre Bernath — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:48:48 +0000

I am a Pro member at SEOmoz. They have a very good way to show Domain Authority. We use it for linkbuilding also for our customers.

We are a SEO company in Holland and we are one page 1 for the vervy difficult keyword SEO with only 151 Linking Root Domains!!! build in 2 years. The links we look at are only relevant and with a high Authority shown in the Competitive Domain Analysis of SEOmoz.

Linkbuilding is not the only SEO factor!
See our result after 2 years of hard work and we have not the focus on linkbuilding!

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 21:24:17 +0000

Hi Patrick

Even today it is amazing to see how many companies, big and small, have absolutely no clue about link building and spam and black hat techniques.

even some small SEO companies think that buying links is fine and continue to do so for themselves and for their clients.

Good on NYT for outing a major player like that for doing something so stupid.