I visit most of the SEO forums at least once a week to keep up with what’s going on in the link building community. This past week was fairly quiet, but over on the HighRankings Forum, a thread on time management vs. link building efforts caught my eye. A webmaster wanted to know the best way to go about securing quality links if he only had a limited amount of time to do so. Since this is a good question and a situation many of us experience, I thought I’d add my two cents to the discussion.

How would you use your time to build links?

Here’s the gist of what the webmaster asked:

I’m currently working on a price comparison type site…We don’t have any competitors doing the same as us….I was hoping that people would be able to advise me on the best use of my time for this. If you had 2 days a week to devote to link-building for a site that you genuinely believed to be link-worthy then how would you use the time?

Here are 11 ways to build links efficiently:

1. Since this is a product comparison service, participating companies probably know their products are being showcased, but I’d make sure and contact each directly. Create marketing collateral which highlights the benefits of being included on the comparison site and send it to each company partner. Include  copy and paste “link to us” code  and encourage linking by offering an incentive to link. If you haven’t already, ask for permission to use their brand name in your advertising to avoid trademark issues down the road.

2. Find out if any of the participating companies sends a newsletter to its customers; if yes, offer to provide link embedded content and/or offer to purchase the mailing list for a promotional mailing of your own.

3. Use the content you created for the newsletter, lengthen (or shorten), embellish with additional facts and verbiage from other comparisons, distribute to the article directories.

4. Develop a list of media and blogger contacts who write about the types of products you’re comparing. Write to each, point out you have a comparison service and ask if they’d like to become a resident “expert” in their respective category. They’ll be featured on the site in return for providing “expert views” on the products you’re hosting. If they accept, issue a press release announcing their involvement, optimize it for industry keywords and the name of the journalist/blogger. Allow them to reprint the review on their blogs/sites with proper accreditation.

5. Create a Flickr stream using product images (only those you have permission for.) No link juice here, but great exposure. Issue press release when this resource is up and running.

6. Create a Facebook page for the comparison service, update through Twitter feed and daily with new comparisons. Encourage any company featured on comparison search to join.

7. Run keyword searches and brand name searches on Twitter, friend those people and engage. Create a special promotion for this group, email and ask for link. Use keywords in your Twitter bio to attract followers.

8. Invest in a tool to automatically tweet comparisons 24/7 by keyword and brand name. Use an occasional tweet to ask for a link.

9. Write content on everything you’re comparing and add it to a resource center on your site. Promote this content center through press releases, to your media database and your customers. Add “link to us” information on these pages.

And finally, the last one is a biggie, as it relates to your business and attracting high quality authority links.

10. Join and get involved in the  industry associations your products represent,  including the  benchmarking associations. Create detailed, graphic rich reports from your statistics and customer feedback. Offer the reports to the associations to use and link to in their studies, blogs and newsletters. Here’s a directory listing of associations by industry to get you started.

11. Pitch industry journalists with your detailed comparison reports, offer to write a year-end wrap up and New Year forecast based on your research. Create a text version, a video version and an audio version.

If you’re strapped for time but need links, focus on getting the attention of people and sites who can channel their credibility to your business in short order. The media and bloggers will keep your information in the public eye and provide a little link juice as well, but industry authorities such as associations will give you the long-term public and algorithmic boost you need to rank well.

Love it or hate it, the Open Directory Project (ODP or “DMOZ”) always seems to creep into the conversation when we’re discussing links and/or SEO. Check any forum, social news or answer site and you’ll see a wide variety of opinions on the 11 year old directory and how it’s managed.

When talking about the DMOZ two camps typically emerge, those who support the directory and its mission (editors) and those who support getting into the directory (SEOs). While the two sides tend to clash, I’ve found the “directory trust” SEOs seek is the same trust DMOZ editors feel they need to protect. The determination by both groups to satisfy their goals fuels the constant struggle between webmasters and directory.

Since DMOZ is not a search giant, and seemingly does little to promote itself or the core values of the directory, you have to wonder why editors and SEO’s even bother with it. But since they do, I decided to approach DMOZ for input on a number of commonly asked questions and post answers and viewpoints here at Link Week. Nothing earth shattering came out, but I did pull a number of interesting tidbits from the interview and the research I conducted to support my input.

To get things going, I asked my good friend and AOL Manager Simon Heseltine to introduce me to someone at the DMOZ. That led to a meeting with ODP Editor Myron Rosmarin, which led to a dialogue with Founders Rich Skrenta and Chris Tolles who pointed me to Bob Keating, Editor In Chief of the Open Directory Project who graciously agreed to the interview.

Debra: Tell us a little about yourself Bob, how did you get started with the Open Directory Project (ODP) and how long have you been there?

Bob: I have been working on the ODP since I joined AOL in June 1999. Initially, I was brought on to work on a directory solution for AOL Search. I joined the ODP team shortly afterward to help develop the ontology and the community self-governance model. About a year later, the ODP Founders appointed me Editor in Chief.

Over the years, I’ve worked on number of search and publishing projects at AOL. In 2004, I left full-time employment with AOL, and took a position with the Federal government to start-up a new search engine program, but I remained as a consultant on the ODP. Since 2006, I’ve worked in the strategy consulting space, helping Federal clients develop product strategies around search, social media, and web-based services.

But through all these career changes, the ODP has been a constant in my life. For the last five years, my involvement has been more focused on overseeing the community and advising the ODP team at AOL on everything from the project’s history to community interaction.

Debra: Why is the directory sometimes referred to as the ODP and other times DMOZ? Is there a difference?

Bob: The directory’s “official” name is DMOZ: The Open Directory Project. DMOZ means “Directory Mozilla” – the idea was to align the directory with the Mozilla brand, even though it was not actually part of that group. DMOZ and ODP are now used interchangeably to refer to the directory.

Debra: Most of us know that DMOZ is owned/operated by AOL, but the site still lists Netscape as “hosts and administrators”. Who ultimately makes the “big decisions” at DMOZ?

Bob: By design, it is the community that makes the “big decisions.” But in terms of the corporate entity that is ultimately responsible for DMOZ, it is AOL.

Debra: Can you explain the chain of command at DMOZ?

Bob: DMOZ is essentially a meritocracy in which editors are granted high permissions based on their interest and quality of participation. There are two general types of permissions: those that allow one to edit anywhere, and those that allow one to participate in community management. An editor with the former permission is known as an “Editall.” Editalls can edit anywhere are engaged in discussions around taxonomy and the editorial guidelines.

An editor with the latter permission is known as a “Meta Editor.” Meta Editors are community managers and are responsible for reviewing editor applications, investing and resolving abuses, and leading editor discussions. For all intents and purposes, Meta Editors and Editalls are “equal” permissions but focus on different aspects of the community.

The “Administrator” permission is the highest community management permission, and is granted to a few, trusted editors to oversee the day-to-day operations of the community. They ensure that Meta Editors and Editalls are being fair and equitable, and that the guidelines are kept current.

The ODP’s governance model is intended to be self-regulating, so there are checks and balances in place to ensure all topics and all points of view are represented, and to foster an inclusive environment in which any editor who wants to contribute is encouraged to contribute. This model doesn’t always work perfectly, but it has been very successful in creating a self-regulating environment, which actually has less to do with the model and more to do with the extraordinary group of editors who contribute to the directory’s governance.

Debra: How do you respond to the allegations some DMOZ editors accept money for submissions?

Bob:Accepting money for submissions is strictly against the community codes of conduct. In cases where we have confirmed this is happening, we revoke the editor’s account. That said, in more cases than not, the allegations are just that… allegations. Still, accepting money in exchange for submission is a consequence of an open directory operation in a closed community.

As I mentioned previously, our challenge is to create a system that allows Webmasters to contribute to the ODP, rather than feeling disconnected from it, which gives one incentive to abuse the system. This solution involves expanding the ODP’s scope, offerings and participation levels. I can’t promise the solution will rid the ODP of nefarious activity, but I think becoming more inclusive while still retaining the directory’s self-governance model will be a significant improvement.

I think it’s important to note that our editor application review process is very thorough. From a directory quality perspective, the best time to identify potential abusers is before they get a foot in the door. We ask that applicants provide a thorough listing of site affiliations and we use full disclosure (as opposed to the affiliations themselves) as a criterion for selection along with general editing quality of the sample sites they provide. While this may mean that we occasionally reject good applicants, the end result is that we keep out many potential abusers. That’s good for everyone.

We unfortunately do sometimes encounter editors who abuse their editing privileges for personal gain. We have a system of community policing to help weed out these “bad eggs.” The public, as well as other editors themselves, are able to report suspected abuse via our abuse reporting tool. When a report comes in, meta editors investigate these allegations fully and if we find that they have merit, we revoke the editor’s account. In the case that a meta editor is suspected of abuse, the case will be investigated by an admin.

We recently did a blog post about what editor abuse really is and what information we need to have in order to fully investigate it.

Debra: There are a lot of categories at DMOZ without editors. I know there is an open invitation for anyone to apply, but what is DMOZ doing to recruit people to fill the empty categories?

Bob: Even though there are lots of categories without listed editors, anyone listed in a parent category or with directory-wide editing permissions can edit these categories. So, even though an editor is not listed in a category does not mean the category is not being maintained.

We are an all-volunteer force, so recruitment is primarily through word of mouth from our current editors and through data users themselves. The editors reach out to others within their own communities and this has produced tremendous growth in some areas. We also get new editors who find us via the DMOZ data attribution badge on other sites or because they learn about us by seeing our results in Google or another search engine. DMOZ gets hundreds of applications daily, and routinely accepts those most likely to edit well and contribute more than just their own site.

Debra: Yes, I understand category editors can/do pitch in, but when I look at a major category like Real Estate and notice seven of the first nine categories are without editors and one category shows 2007 as the last date the page was updated, I have to wonder what the Directory is doing to keep its results fresh. How can a handful of people in a major category like Real Estate keep that section of the Directory current?

Bob: The date at the bottom of the page can be misleading. It’s not always an indicator of freshness. Some pages are not updated frequently simply because they are directional pages (i.e., they direct users to categories where sites are listed); or because the kind of site listed in the category is so specific that few sites are listed at that particular level. http://www.dmoz.org/Business/Real_Estate/Agents_and_Agencies/ is a good example.

The category description page explains how agency sites are listed. The lion’s share of agency sites are directed and listed in the Regional area of the site, which is where a lot of the editors in this area are spending their time and effort.

Debra: Has there been any discussion about the ODP offering a paid review program?

Bob: This issue has been raised and discussed many times. Paid review really goes against the whole idea behind the ODP. In fact, our Social Contract with the web community takes an especially firm position on this issue.

Debra: Why can’t DMOZ notify webmasters when their sites are included or rejected? Has there been any discussion on being able to pay for this feature?

Bob: Because the ODP is not designed to be a site listing service, creating a notification system has not been a priority. In the past, there was a “check my site status” thread offered via the editor-run public forums at Resource Zone (www.resource-zone.com). It was not hosted or administered by AOL. It was a good faith effort to reach out to the webmaster community.

However, the thread got quite unruly and unmanageable, so it was taken down. Moreover, some editors felt the “check status” thread conflicted with their other editing pursuits. Nonetheless, I can see us adding this as a feature in the future. As with any feature associated with DMOZ, it would be provided at no cost.

Debra: What are the top three reasons sites don’t make it into the ODP?

Bob: They are:

1. The site was submitted to the incorrect category. Editors may move these submissions to the correct category (which can significantly delay review); or delete them from the submission queue.
2. The site is incomplete, under construction, returns an HTTP error, or lacks adequate or unique content.
3. The site’s content mirrors a URL that is already listed in the directory.

Debra: Mention DMOZ to a group of webmasters or read forum posts discussing the directory, and you’ll usually find the negative comments far outweigh the positive. How is the ODP dealing with their legacy issues?

Bob: Webmaster angst stems from the fact that the ODP is not designed to be a site listing service for webmasters. Webmasters have worked very hard to make the ODP work for them, and the editors have worked equally hard against Webmaster tactics that are contrary to how the directory operates. As result, this conflict has created a cloud of distrust and negativity between both camps.

The Webmasters feel shut out of a community that was intended to be open to all types of contributions. For a while now, our challenge has been to create system that allows Webmasters to contribute to the ODP in a mutually beneficial and meaningful way, while preserving editorial quality.

The solution is not as simple as turning the ODP into a submission service or maintaining the status quo. Rather, the solution involves expanding the ODP’s scope, offerings and levels of participation. This is at the heart of what we are working on today.

Debra: It’s great to hear the ODP is working to expand its scope, offerings and participation levels, can you tell us a little more about your plans and when we can expect to see them implemented?

Bob: ODP is committed to expanding its scope, offerings and participation levels, but I can’t share any details with you at this point. When we are ready to announce more details, we will be sure to let you know.

Debra: Do you think people would be so passionate about being included in the directory if it wasn’t used by Google?

Bob: It depends if you are talking about Webmasters or editors. Clearly, webmasters would not care much about DMOZ if it weren’t for its influence on search engines. Editors, on the other hand, have a different perspective. The reasons editors participate in the ODP are as diverse as the global makeup of its participants.

Debra: There was a post on the DMOZ Blog recently where an editor (crowbar) outlined what makes content unique by ODP standards. It listed a number of points but seemed to dwell on the issue of mirror sites, or that “A site should not mirror content available on other sites”. Since this is a strong criteria for inclusion (or not) in the Directory, why does the DMOZ give away its content through the dump program? On one hand, DMOZ admits to deleting sites submitted that don’t have unique content and yet they provide mirror content to anyone who asks. Is this a case of do as I say and not as I do?

Bob: There are two separate issues here. One is content distribution and syndication, which the ODP does as do billions of other websites. Sites that include syndicated content are not considered “mirror sites” simply because they include syndicated content.

The other issue is content that an entity replicates over different branded domains. This is a common tactic in e-commerce, and is the issue the guidelines around “mirror sites” are intended to address.

The interview ended there. Here’s my tidbits and takeaways:

The tidbits

When I heard Bob make this comment:

“the lion’s share of agency sites are directed and listed in the Regional area of the site, which is where a lot of the editors in this area are spending their time and effort.”

The word “regional” caught my ear. I’ve been following Tim Armstrong since he came on board as AOL’s CEO and understand he (and now AOL) have a strong interest in Patch.com. It’s interesting to note Patch.com is a regional, community specific platform showing news and events from specific cities and towns. Seeding Patch.com with regional results from a respected directory would make a lot of sense, so if you’re bricks and mortar based, now might be a good time to submit your business to DMOZ.

The second tidbit worth noting, is the comment about the notification service. Notifying webmasters why their sites aren’t being added to the directory would go a long way in eliminating the frustration many feel about the ODP; after all, education is preferable to being ignored. I sincerely hope this project moves along much faster than the DMOZ 2.0 project they dropped hints about back in June 2008.

The last and most notable takeaway from this interview, IMO, is the response to my question on why sites don’t make it into the DMOZ. Bob’s answer is informative and also very unsettling because it speaks directly to what I feel is the core problem with the DMOZ – a lack of editors.

Here’s what he said when I asked “What are the top three reasons sites don’t make it into the DMOZ?”

“The site was submitted to the incorrect category. Editors may move these submissions to the correct category (which can significantly delay review) or delete them from the submission queue“.

I’ve spoken to many DMOZ editors who all say the same thing, they delete submissions made to incorrect categories rather than send them along. Why? I’m told it’s because so much of the directory is without editors and/or because they have the authority to do so.

Hmm. This attitude is interesting especially since the DMOZ states “fairness and objectivity prevail here” in their editor requirements. It doesn’t seem “fair” or “objective” to simply delete a submission added to the wrong category but hey, that’s the way things go at the DMOZ. Say anything and even top management is quick to point out “the ODP is not designed to be a site listing service for webmasters”. I think you’ll find a lot of webmasters support that statement and want a quality DMOZ maintained, they just don’t always get it right when they submit. Submitting your site to the wrong category should not preclude you from being added to the directory.

One of the reasons for doing this interview was to find out what the DMOZ was going to do about recruiting editors to fill its very empty ranks. While Bob reaffirmed the DMOZ’s commitment to quality editing, he didn’t address the issue of recruitment, even though I asked the question twice.

How can the directory maintain quality content with so many categories missing editors? Case in point, when I view the page dedicated to the hot topic of H1N1/Swine Flu, see no editor and note the page was last updated October 18, 2009 I wonder if the DMOZ is really a serious search source.

Add to it, I don’t see popular sites such as the Mayo Clinic, the World Health Organization, MedicineNet or FluView listed and now I’m also wondering about the ability of ODP to provide relevant information. It’s not hard to list the top health sites on the Web for the term H1N1/Swine Flu, but it’s  impossible when you don’t have a editor working the category.

Yes, yes – I know section editors can and do come in to edit but they’re obviously not doing that here, are they? For topics in the news or representing financial/health issues, every effort should be made to fill those categories with qualified editors and keep the category updated. To do anything less is a disservice to the public and the directory.

I sincerely hope DMOZ doesn’t become invisible like the Great Pumpkin, as it has been an integral part of the search industry for 11 years and deserves respect for its contributions. A hand-edited directory of 4.5 million websites is an accomplishment no one else can claim and I support the stringent admission standards they have in place. But I also hope the directory makes every effort to utilize the vast resources AOL has to recruit quality editors to its empty categories. The H1N1/Swine Flu category is a classic example of how out-of-date the directory is and how important editors are to keeping it current. I believe once editors are in place, many of the other issues will take care of themselves.

Hey AOL, this is no trick, we want DMOZ to be our favorite treat! Are you listening?

If you follow me here or on the Link Spiel, you know I am a loyal fan and staunch supporter of using directories to secure links. After reading last week’s Elephant in the Link Building Living Room, I wanted to present a different point-of-view as I don’t feel the directory industry or the link builders using them were presented in a positive light. To suggest all link builders sell useless submission services or the directories are white elephants is inaccurate and insulting. I have a much different view and would like to show how using the directories can be a smart part of your link building mix.

Before I begin…

If you’ve spent any time in/around the SEO industry, you know there are hundreds, if not thousands of small directories online; most of these sites lack editorial guidelines, were created to host AdSense and network links. I think it’s important to draw a distinction between these sites and the responsible, well run directories that I and most link builders I know, use.

What is a directory?

In short, a directory is a collection of websites categorized by subject and/or geographic location. Human reviewers determine what source will be added and also maintain the directory and it’s structure.  While there are hundreds if not thousands of general directories online, only four stand out as heavy hitters:

• The World Wide Web Virtual Library (VLIB created in 1991)
• The Yahoo! Directory (1994)
• Best of the Web (BOTW 1994) and the
• Open Directory Project (ODP/DMOZ 1998)

If we check their PageRank scores, we’ll see each of these directories sports a greater than average meter of green. Even if it’s only half right, the toolbar tells us Google thinks well of these pages.

It is difficult to get a site listed with the DMOZ and VLIB, but it’s not impossible if you have an authority resource and follow their guidelines. Even if you’re unsuccessful in getting in, these directories are excellent research sources and can be mined for link partners. For example, when I look at the links on  this page of the VLIB and click on the Gardening category, I can find no less than five niche directories listed in the first 20 links shown. If I owned a gardening site, these would be great directories to be listed in from an algorithmic and traffic standpoint.

Yahoo! and BOTW are both paid inclusion with expensive review fees, but that cost is part of what keeps the junk sites out of their indexes. Each employs human reviewers to look at the sites submitted and determine which category they should be placed in. This process of being scrutinized to determine acceptance is known as editorial review, and is why these and other directories are respected algorithmically by the search engines.

Are directories white elephants?

In my opinion, there are 15 good general directories (includes the big four) worth submitting to, and those include sites such as JoeAnt, Business, Dirjournal, MassiveLinks, RubberStamped, Illumirate, among others. Here’s what I use to qualify a directory as “good”:

• minimal/no AdSense on category pages
• no site wide links
• has full contact information available
• internal pages indexed and cached frequently

If you argue most directories display low to mid-range PageRank scores I’ll agree, but also point out while their meter of green may be low, it is more a result of their function, not their quality. Directories are hubs and hubs are one-half of the authority equation, a factor incorporated in both the PageRank and TrustRank algorithms. Keep in mind how PageRank scores are determined and the fact directories are designed to link out, not in.

Directory submission tactics as a business model

If you owned a business on Main Street and wanted to promote it to the community, it’s doubtful you’d use just one advertising method to get your message across. You’d probably begin with the basic, less expensive options such as buying ads in the Yellow Pages, your local newspaper and ValuPak mailers. Eventually you’ll move up and buy radio, television and sponsorship opportunities which will help make you a dominant presence in your community.

This scatter gun approach to building a credible reputation can be done online as well. I advocate using directory links in the first wave of linking as a way to jump start your linking program. Granted, they’re not algorithmic giants, but directory links will pass link popularity and add to your overall back link profile.

Bottom line? If you understand the editorial significance of  directory links  and the role they can play as part of your link building mix, you’ll see the positives outweigh the negatives. For as long as Google hosts DMOZ, for as long as Yahoo! and VLIB survive, for as long as BOTW provides a solid search vehicle and supports IM  charities, and especially for as long as the directories don’t contribute to the pinking of the Web, I will support them and recommend you do the same.

It’s common knowledge that certain markets are harder to build links for than others. For the most, part highly competitive industries are tough because they’ve been worked to death, but less competitive markets can also be difficult because of the demographic behind them. Such was the case for a client we took on awhile back in the financial services industry. He sold a very niche product in a very competitive industry, known to be populated by busy corporate executives. He came to us with a new website which needed back links to support ongoing SEO, build his company brand and drive traffic to the site. No small feat considering the market he was in.

After hours researching the industry and finding it filled with “good content”, I knew a standard campaign wouldn’t do. Unless I had President Obama or Alan Greenspan writing my content, no one was going to pay attention to another article or white paper in this market. I needed to create a different and unique splash to attract the attention and links I needed, so I came up with the idea of launching a contest.

My column today is a basic case study of that contest campaign. This was one of the most difficult websites I’ve worked on -not because the site was new or the market competitive, but because the people we needed to target were busy corporate executives.  I knew if I went after these decision makers, I’d probably fail so I changed my angle of entry and created a promotion that appealed not only to the executive, but to the employees of his/her company as well.

And it worked.  Here’s what we did:

The Research

When you’re building links, it’s natural to use tactics you’re comfortable with, so we started our research looking at topically relevant link bait and white papers written in the last year. The idea was to find a trendy topic, hire an industry authority to write a three part series and pimp the content from the client’s site.  It’s a good strategy and usually works, so off we went culling Digg, Delicious and industry media sites like OpenForum and SlingShot for hot topics and ideas we could use.

And boy, did we find them. There is a virtual goldmine of content in the financial service space written by celebrities, experts, academics, bloggers – you name it. Initially, I was excited to find the content and track trending terms, but after a while my excitement waned as I realized what it would take to make waves in this very crowded and very status-conscious crowd. Like I said before, unless I could convince President Obama to write my article series, it was doubtful anything we wrote would be an editorial and viral success.  So we abandoned the content angle, took note of what was not being done, our economic climate and the fact everyone loves something for free and developed the contest campaign instead.

The Process

Since we had a mountain of research data to draw from, developing the contest was fairly easy.  We outlined the contest and added a no-strings-attached giveaway to help the program go viral. From there, we focused on buying memberships into industry associations where our promotion would be targeted to a community of like-minded people.

While these people are like-minded, they are also (for the most part) my client’s competitors,  so I knew I had to approach with caution. I worried about how my client would be perceived, so I staggered the execution of the program and removed any link requirements to participate.

Yes that’s right, they didn’t have to provide the link in order to receive the giveaway or participate in the contest, linking to us was optional. Why? Because building trust with new partners is paramount for future linking opportunities. If no one trusts my brand, no one will link regardless of the incentive offered. I couldn’t afford the risk and decided our first impression was too important to screw up so I suggested they link rather than  make it a requirement to receive the freebies.

Here’s an outline of what we implemented:

• January 15 – Joined a well known industry Association with membership of 900.
• February 1 – Sent first  email  introducing company to fellow members. No sales pitch.
• March 1 – Sent second email with humorous spring season promotion, offered modest discount coupon.  No sales pitch.
• April 5 – Third email sent, this one outlined the contest, had an opt-out. In addition to showcasing the contest, the email included a substantial discount toward any product my client sold. We made it clear anyone in the company could use the discount and encouraged people to send it to friends and family. There was a six-month expiration date on the discount.
• May 1 – The contest closed, a winner was picked, prizes awarded. We issued a press release announcing the winner.

The results? 107 people used the discount, 262 people registered for the contest,  52 links from Association members showed up in our back link counts. The membership fee was $575.00 so if do you the math, you’ll see the promotion paid for itself and then some.

The Bottom Line

If you think 52 one-way inbound links isn’t a huge number, keep in mind the goals we set and what this promotion touched on:

• We secured one-way links from topically relevant sites
• The promotion went viral
• Sales were made
• My client’s brand was exposed to authority leaders in his community
• The client’s brand made a positive impression within a short time period in a very competitive niche

This contest and the principle behind it will work for any industry, as long as you target a specific group and understand what motivates them. If you’re looking for a new twist or a fresh link building idea, consider hosting a contest.  Everyone’s a winner if you do.

Doing business on the Web isn’t easy, and you need every advantage to grab attention from the masses clicking by. In order to succeed, companies need to understand how to manage the marketing information they find. This information can be used to help strategic planning, monitor competitors and provide early warning signs for new opportunities or potential issues. Knowing how, what and where your competition is marketing (to the same prospective audience) is crucial if you want to outrank and out perform them.

There are two key components to monitoring competitive activity online, analyzing back links and the development of marketing intelligence. Let’s take a look at both and how we can use them to build links.

Analyzing a competitors’ back links

When I look at a competitors back links, I’m looking for two things: the anchor text used and where it sits. Of the four components of link popularity (link quantity, quality, anchor text and relevance) they are the two strongest elements to affect rank.

Anchor text, the clickable part of the link you see, is a query ranking indicator. It tells both humans and search bots what’s coming next. From the official Google Blog::

How sites link to you has an impact on your traffic from those links, because it describes your site to potential visitors. In addition, anchor text influences the queries your site ranks for in the search results.

It’s one of the rare, clear comments made by Google on a component of link popularity outside the PageRank definition. If your competitors are ranking well for a certain phrase, look at the anchor text in their back links and ask:

• Do you see the phrase listed?
• Are the links sitting on topically relevant pages that have been indexed?
• Are those anchors sitting in content areas?

These are questions to ask and items to look for when analyzing back links. If the anchor text phrase is listed multiple times in your competitors back links, you’ll need to exceed that number to rank ahead.

Marketing intelligence

Marketing intelligence is the collection and analysis of competitive information and developments within a market. The goal of this intelligence is to assist with decision making, keep an eye on competitors, opportunities and threats. How does this work? Let me give you an example:

Competitors (and websites in general) place volumes of information on their sites as a way to add content, attract customers and the media. A popular addition is the media center which holds the company’s press releases. I set alerts to these media pages and when a change happens, I’m notified. I’ll track the press release taking note of where it was sent and to whom. If a journalist or blogger talks about the release I’m notified and take note for future linking building.

Another little tip along the same lines: Speeches. More and more companies are reprinting speeches made by their executives in their annual reports and on their websites. Take snippets of the speech, search and note who reprinted them. Once you know, contact these sites with speeches of your own.

If we rely on back links alone to provide the bulk of our competitive information, we may miss opportunities to build competitive links. Look at everything your competitor has – back links, website, job postings, blogs, advertisements etc., as an opportunity to build links.

I’ve come across some cool tools to use in your link building efforts and have a handful of discounts I wanted to share so let’s get right to it!

Groundswell profile tool

All link building tactics have one thing in common—they need relevant pages to secure the links from.  Notice I didn’t say “authority pages” or “high PageRank pages” but “relevant pages”.  Why?  Because your demographic doesn’t always hang out on high authority or high PageRank pages.  People push content, not pages so it’s important to find sites where large numbers of “your people”   visit and work hard to get links from those pages.

The key is finding those relevant pages.  Here’s where this cool tool called The Social Technology Profile Tool from Groundswell can help.

Using profiles from the popular Groundswell book by Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff, this tool creates an outline and classifies people according to how they use social media.  You provide age ranges, Country and gender and the tool will tell you what social profile they fit.

For example, I’m working with a company who’s primary demographic is young,  male and based in the USA. According to the Groundswell tool, this group reads blogs, watch videos, download podcasts, participates in forums and reads/provides customer reviews.  This is good information to have and can help guide you when creating elements for a website and also when looking for sites to secure links from.

Another little gem from the site is Forrester’s Groundswell Awards program which “recognizes excellence in accomplishing business goals with social applications.”  That’s fancy speak for how companies use real-time social media platforms to promote themselves.  What makes this awards program a gem is the list of participants.  Check out the couple hundred sites from this year and last who participated and take note of their private/public forums and communities.  Many of these never show up in searches or have visible PageRank but all are extremely relevant. These forums host brand passionista’s making them highly desirable vehicles to get involved with.    Remember… people push content, not pages.

WildVoice

You know all those articles you’ve been writing and distributing all over the Web? Use them again to secure more links by:

•  Creating a podcast of each article
•  Use a free service like WildVoice to create the podcast
• Add the new podcasts to all the podcast directories.

WildVoice members (free easy sign-up) can “create, personalize, publish and share Podcasts and other media online …without the need for complicated software or expensive sound equipment.”  Sounds good to me especially if you’ve never done a podcast or aren’t sure you want to invest the time and money into a professional set up.

In addition, you can record anything you’ve written and/or published such as blog posts, FAQ’s and tutorials.  Read the content, discuss for five minutes, include a take away and you have an informative podcast.  And said in my best Ronco announcer voice:  But wait: there’s more!

Once you have a good number of podcasts and have added them to the podcast directories you can:

• Create a new section on your site to house them
• Issue a press release announcing the new resource and your recordings
• Create an RSS feed for the page and add to RSS directories  

BackType Alerts

BackType Alerts is an alert service focused on retrieving keywords from blog comments and comments found on social media sites such as Digg, Reddit and Twitter. It has four unique features:

•  You can set the service to return (via email) comments being left by individual bloggers—you’ll see their comments and where (the URL) they were left 
•  You can search their database for a specific blogger to see where they’re commenting and what’s being said 
•  You can watch an URL and see all of the “conversation surrounding the post or article”
•  BackType searches for links on Twitter even those using URL shorteners

I love these alert services for the small gems they uncover and the edge they provide in securing links quickly and early.  I’m not a fan of comment link dropping but I am a huge supporter of joining in where it makes sense.  This type of tool is also handy in pushing time sensitive material or dropping in with special offers when the conversation touches on your products.  Sometimes, it’s just about being first.

WhosTalkin  is similar to BackType. I always run a couple tools at a time to be sure I’m finding everything out there.

Discounts!

I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of hearing about the recession, swine flu and Chrysler.  It seems we’re all sick, broke and fueling private planes. I thought it was time to hear about something fun so I went begging and got a handful of discounts on some very cool tools.  I’ll list a couple here and then point you over to my new and improved blog (Link Spiel) for the rest.  Hey sorry but I need some traffic to the new blog!

Aaron Wall of SEOBook fame is offering a 25% discount for new members off a first month membership to the SEOBook training program which includes the training program, exclusive SEO tools and the cutting-edge SEO Community Forum.  Discount URL: http://www.seobook.com/debra-mastaler-rocks Discount ends: May 31, 2009.

URLWire, owned by fellow Link Week columnist Eric Ward, is a highly regarded news service for announcing meritorious Web content to the right people.  The mission of URLwire is to help your high quality content attract high quality links from trustworthy sources, like online site reviewers, bloggers, editors, writers, vertical web guides and social linkers. Discount offered:  Second announcement at no charge  Promo code:  LSUW  Discount expires August 31, 2009.

Best Of The Web is pleased to offer all Link Week/Link Spiel readers an exclusive 15% discount on BOTW directory submissions.  SAVE 15% on All new directory submissions in the Best of the Web Directory and BOTW Blog Directory from now until May 31, 2009.  Promo code:  BOTW15  Note:  Discount code available for their UK directory as well.

RubberStamped Directory Pay for one listing in Rubberstamped.org and get a free listing in BangDrum.com. Email editors@rubberstamped.org following your submission at Rubberstamped for instuctions/code to BangDrum.  Discount expires June 31, 2009

That’s it!  Pop over to The LinkSpiel  for the rest of the directory discounts.  Until next time – happy linking!

Over the last couple of weeks I’ve come across  some great link building discussions, techniques and Twitter tools I  wanted to share here.  I also wanted to mention a foundational linking tactic we’re using and seeing great results from. Let’s start with a valuable tip I found on one of the SEO forums .

The value of outbound links

The topic of outbound links comes up frequently in the forums, people want to know if they “leak” link juice and/or should they be nofollowed.  Like most things in SEO, there is no conclusive answer but I thought this comment by user “wheel” on the Webmaster World forum was right on the money:

…”There’s two ways to look at this….One… you’re telling Google what your site is about and placing yourself in the neighborhood of those great sites you link to… 

The second, leaking, has numerous threads here indicating recently that stopping the leak helps their rankings. The first way, I’ve never seen anyone say that it’s directly impacted their rankings….”

I’m all for linking out to non-competitive, authority sites in your niche to help establish brand and keyword relevance.  Links pointing to your industry association, a testimonial or news story where your company is mentioned are good outbounds and go a long way to establish your site to both humans and bots. 

But here’s the real gem in this post and the point worth taking home: “The first way, I’ve never seen anyone say that it’s directly impacted their rankings….”

Meaning no one has come forward and attributed a change in rank to their outbound links.  I’ve never seen a change in ranking due to outbounds but like the thread goes on to say, I have seen changes when nofollows are used.  Use nofollow on non-revenue pages (like privacy policy and legal disclaimers) and be sure your navigation structure is cross-linked so  link popularity flows throughout your site.

Since we’re talking outbound links, I also wanted to point out a post by Matt Cutts on his Gadgets, Google and SEO blog.  I thought the quote below was worth highlighting since it seems to be a fairly strong statement on how many links are too many.  Matt writes:

 …”If you end up with hundreds of links on a page, Google might choose not to follow or to index all those links. At any rate, you’re dividing the PageRank of that page between hundreds of links, so each link is only going to pass along a minuscule amount of PageRank anyway. Users often dislike link-heavy pages too…”

While using the phrase “hundreds of links” seems purposely exaggerated, the point he makes is very clear: more links on a page allows less PageRank to flow. The last line about users disliking to scroll large link lists is also worth noting especially when you consider Google is very focused on the user experience. 

Stick to using link building tactics that place links in content areas and stay away from link pages when possible.

The most valuable social media sites

I’m always on the lookout for new social media or content sites, especially if they’re demographically targeted and allow link popularity to pass.   Over on the HighRankings forum, members compiled a list of social media sites after this question was asked:

“…what top ten websites out there have a general company profile. A site where a small business could put a general profile that would rank very high for SERPs for company name searches. “

People responded with the usual suspects (Linkedin, Facebook) but also listed a handful of less well-known social media sites like Shoutem, DropJack, ActiveRain, FastPitch  and CrunchBase.  Of them, only the last two allow clean links in the content/usernames.

I advocate registering your company/username at any social media site you come across. Not only does this siphon a little link juice but can go a long way to protecting your company name.  If you’re a well known brand or use common keywords in your company name, this is a good idea. 

But registering at these sites isn’t going to get you to “rank very high for SERPs for company name searches” as profile links don’t carry much link weight.  To make your efforts worthwhile, survey your customers and ask which sites they frequent and then get to work creating an active community in the same space.

A massive Twitter sites & tools directory

Twitter is everywhere—you can’t escape reading or hearing about this micro-blogging platform wherever you go. The good people at the Birdsall Blog put together one of the best lists of Twitter tools I’ve come across.  There are tons listed, all on one page and categorized for easy searching. (Love the resource but I have to admit I did get tired of scrolling through the massive list ;). 

One of the sites I found and really liked was  Twitturly.  Twitturly tracks and ranks URL’s dropped on Twitter by the number of times it was tweeted.  You can sort by any keyword or location and easily find targeted sites to use in your linking campaign.

How to pitch journalists

There is a very good thread ”Pitching to Journalists” in the membership based SEOBook Community Forum. Here are a handful of the tips shared by myself and a couple others on how to get attention from the media.

• …create high quality image libraries and story outlines on the site which are available to bona-fide press only after registration.”
• “…A large number of journalists have their own blogs or write for their publication’s blog. Commenting on their stories, adding them to your blogroll and linking to them from your blog are all great ways to “get on their radar”.
• “…When you link to a journalist, use the journalist’s name… journalists are people like everyone else. They have vanity. Most of them have set up Google Alerts for their names. So if you use their name in a blog post, they get a Google Blog Alert for their name.

Keep in mind your website and it’s promotional efforts can be magnified by being the topic of a news story.  Being mentioned in a news source can be seen as an implied endorsement as people tend to trust what they see and hear in the news.   Work the media, it can lead to increased sales and confidence in your brand.

Piggyback links

Before I close I wanted to share a foundational link building tactic we’ve been using and seeing great results with.  I refer to it as piggyback linking since the power of the tactic relies on support sites.

When we try to secure links from high ranking authority sites and run into roadblocks, we adjust the game plan and work to secure links from the sites linking to the authorities. 

Why?  Well, sites rank (for the most part) based on their inbound links.  If you secure links from the pages/sites linking to the number one, two and three sites,  you should benefit from their link strength as well. 

We start the process by using the Hub Finder  tool which queries Yahoo! to look for co-occurring backlinks. Once we have a list of sites, we develop a linking tactic and go after the links. 

Hope there’s something here you can use.  If you have a question, comment or link building idea you’d like to share, leave it here!

With the economy the way it is, we’re getting a lot of inquires from people asking for package programs. They’re willing to cut back on the number of link building techniques they contract for, but not the quality of the links secured. Because of the volume of requests we were getting, I decided to look for a way to trim a couple of tried and true link building programs without sacrificing quality or effectiveness. One of the programs we tweaked and have seen dramatic results in is our directory submission program.

More is good

Typically, when we think about directory submission programs, sites like the DMOZ, Yahoo! Directory, Best of the Web, and Ezilon come to mind. There are about 20 general directories operating and ranked within the search indexes, here’s a short list of some of them:

• Joe Ant
• Massive Links
• GoGuides
• Rubberstamped
• Greenstalk
• Business
• Aviva

Tip: Many of these directories now accept articles and/or blogs as well, so be sure to look for additional link and article distribution opportunities.

If your site is accepted, you’ll get one link (which usually points to your home page).  This 1:1 link ratio isn’t bad, but it’s not great if your goal is to increase your inbound link counts. Securing directory links is still worth it in my opinion, but you have an opportunity to do a great deal more simply by using the elements found on your site instead of your site as a whole.

Many more is better

These days, most websites come with traditional and Web 2.0 type “elements” as a way to attract attention, entertain and educate visitors. Elements can be sections of your site, departments, offers, visuals and add-ons. They’re attention-getters, used to engage visitors and make your site “sticky”.

Here’s 18 element examples commonly found on websites:

1. Affiliate programs
2. Blog
3. Video
4. Contests
5. Forums
6. ebooks
7. Newsletters
8. Wikis
9. Topical niche
10. Coupons
11. Articles
12. Free shipping offers
13. Podcasts
14. Downloads
15. Employment center
16. Photos
17. Tutorials
18. RSS

Each element has a score of directories behind them.  For example, here’s

• a  list of coupons directories (10)

• a list of blog and RSS directories (150)

• a list of podcast directories (10).

If your site is in the pet industry, there are dog directories and cat directories. There are tutorial directories and about 20 good general article directories. If we add up the directories behind the elements I provided examples for, there are over 205 niche directories to add your web pages to. Keep in mind, I only touched on six of the 18 elements here!

As a bonus, all of the niche directories allow deep linking since most of the elements listed can be found on interior pages within a site. This is golden for getting link popularity into your core pages and not just the homepage.

So how do you find all these niche directories?  You can start with a little utility searching (keyword + directory). Also, browse through the directories as you find them and search the directory categories; it’s common practice for directory owners to add their sites to other niche directories as a way to build backlinks.

When you’re building links, it’s important to look at everything as an opportunity. Every element of your site has potential to be used, shared, and linked to. By using the niche directories to promote your elements, you’ve grown your backlink profile and gotten deep links from a wide variety of sources. Now instead of having just 20 links pointing at your home page, you’ll have hundreds. I think it’s safe to say that’s a stimulus plan worth implementing!

Hey everyone, Happy New Year!  I wanted to start the year off talking about one of the most important components of link popularity – anchor text.

As far as I’m concerned, getting an anchor text link on an authority site ranks right up there with hitting the Powerball or finding out you’re having a baby. The rush is indescribable and something worth celebrating.

Most people involved in SEO knows about anchor text and its benefits; Sphinn has over 250 articles on the subject and the term “anchor text” has already been tweeted 15,000 times in 2009! With that much information flying around it’s difficult to know what to listen to when you’re building links. Let’s look at the strongest component of link popularity and do a little Q&A on the more popular questions surrounding links and anchor text.

A brief history

In 1963 Ted Nelson and Douglas Engelbart coined the term “hypertext” after conducting a research project called Hypertext Editing System, or HES. They got the ball rolling on how links work but it wasn’t until 1993 the first appearance of the term “anchor text” was used by the World Wide Web Consortium in a step-by-step guide on how to embed “hypertext links into the document text”. They also used the term “link label” but that one didn’t seem to stick.

Let’s break it down. What is a hypertext link exactly?

A hypertext link refers to the word(s) placed within an anchor tag or the text between the <a> and </a> tag. This is where the term “anchor text” comes from.  Let’s look at the link:

<a href=”runningshoes.htm”>Running Shoes</a>

The <a denotes the beginning of the anchor tag.

The href is an attribute of the anchor tag and refers to a specific location within a web page.

Running shoes is the anchor text. This is the HTML inside the hyperlink.

</a> finishes (closes) the tag and hypertext link.

We refer to the term “Running Shoes” as the anchor text but really, any verbiage between the tags is anchor text.

Is anchor text as valuable as they say? Do I really need to bother using it?

In a nutshell, yes and yes if you’re interested in ranking well. Anchor text is a query ranking indicator and considered the most powerful component of link popularity. Since link popularity is what (mostly) drives search rankings, I’d say it’s a pretty important part of your SEO program.

But don’t take my word for it. In a rare instance of black and white confirmation, Google posted a comment on their Webmaster Central Blog confirming its importance as a ranking influence. Then Googler (now my Editor:) Vanessa Fox said:

…”How sites link to you has an impact on your traffic from those links, because it describes your site to potential visitors. In addition, anchor text influences the queries your site ranks for in the search results..”

So yeah, getting sites to host your anchor text links is important from a ranking standpoint – and a usability standpoint. I know it’s not easy but you need to try a wide variety of linking tactics and keep at it.

Do internal links using my keywords carry as much weight as links from external pages?

Nope they don’t. Since webmasters control the on-page content they’ve become just that, on-page content. Internal links don’t carry a “vote” like their external counterparts and therefore don’t carry as much weight algorithmically.

Recently we’ve learned the second hyperlink on a webpage is discounted and probably not used toward your overall link popularity factor. Google Engineer Matt Cutts answered a question on this very subject, you can read the whole post (it’s short) and his comments on the Link Spiel.

I keep hearing people talk about .edu links like they’re some sort of Holy Grail. Do they carry more weight as links? Do I need to pull a Rodney Dangerfield and go back to college to snag some .edu links?

I’d highly recommend you rent the movie and save yourself some tuition dough, that whole “edu links are golden” issue really isn’t what it’s made out to be.

There are no TLDs (Top Level Domains) weighted more heavily than others. All links accrue their authority based on the number and type of links pointing at them. By their nature, edu links have higher (visible) PageRank because they’re linked to by other highly credible and authoritative webpages in the academic and business community. If you secure an anchor text link on an .edu page, the weight of the link is no different than if you secure a link on a dot com provided both had the same backlink patterns.

Frequently when we talk about securing links from .edu domains the tactic is focused on getting links from student blogs. Keep in mind student bloggers are a transient bunch, making your partnership potentially short term. We’ve found they prefer communal places like Facebook and MySpace over solitary blogging so they eventually slow down and/or stop blogging all together. If you’re interested in developing link partnerships with colleges and universities, find out what motivates them to link out. Do they have a job placement center? Do they accept discount coupon promotions? Create a link incentive and target the academic and fraternal organizations on campus over individual bloggers.

Another little item regarding colleges: most of your state funded schools require businesses register through the vendor registration office, they won’t do business (which includes hosting links or referring your company) unless you’re a registered vendor with your state or commonwealth. Look for your state portal and search on “vendor”, you’ll find the sign-up spot.

Will It work against me to accumulate a lot of links quickly?

Maybe… maybe not. We’ve launched lots of links without incident but then we’ve heard the opposite from many so we recommend you keep a balanced landscape when you’re building links. If you engage in aggressive linking tactics and accrue a large number of inbound links, chances are you’ve done something promotional to attract attention. Balance that by adding content as you build links.

Keep in mind a natural accrual of links means getting them from a wide variety of sites.  If they’re coming from a “type” of site or have the same PageRank score,  you could be missing a crucial faction of customers as well as raising flags. Keep the content coming and promote your site to your demographic without PageRank prejudice.

A link is a link is a link but links using anchor text phrases your site has been optimized for makes a link golden. Create anchors using optimized keywords and link your way to higher rankings in 2009.

The recession is more than just news fodder these days, it’s a reality many of us as service providers are feeling. At Alliance-Link we’re watching our clients cut back their on and offline advertising expenditures which makes it difficult for us to build custom linking programs. All of our programs use offline elements to drive links and without the advertising budgets, we’ve had to regroup and seriously rethink our strategies.

I’ve never been one to shrink from a challenge but even this has given me cause to pause. Our situation made me think about a quote I read a short while ago which said:

“Perception is strong and sight weak. In strategy it is important to see distant things as if they were close and to take a distanced view of close things.”

How true and smart! So smart we’ve taken the quote to heart and decided the key to our linking success in 2009 depends on our ability to look at long-term search trends and incorporate them into our linking mix as a key element now rather than an add-on or after thought later.

Contacting librarians, doing directory submissions, running contests to attract .edu links… it’s all still good but I seriously believe if you want to be great, you need to look at where the engines are going and create strategies to place you in their path.

More than just text

With the engines incorporating more and more personalized and universal search into their results, it makes sense your ranking success or failure may be tied to these elements. You may not like hearing this over-used cliche but “content is king” now more than ever and not just in written form. Video, podcasts, photos… all of these elements are in demand by both humans and search engine bots. If you want to be the one they turn to, and more importantly, link to you need these elements on your site.

What are customers looking for?

Get a jump start on your competition and start researching and developing content your customers are looking for. Start by surveying, calling, or emailing your clients and find out what they want to see and then give it to them in multiple formats. Promote your new elements through social media and traditional press releases, add an incentive so the campaign goes viral. Study the search results for your key phrases and take note of what’s there and what’s not. Link smart or die in 2009.

Before I go, a personal note. This is my last post for 2008 and I wanted take the opportunity to wish everyone a very Happy Holiday and joyous New Year. “May the road rise to meet you, may the wind be always at your back.” I wish you, your family and business much success in 2009. Debra :)