Discussion in 'SEO Search Engine Optimisation' started by julian, Aug 29, 2013.
Content or Backlinks
I've gone for content. Good quality content will gain natural backlinks.
People will share good content via social media which again is part of the master plan.
The answer of what is more important is undeniably links.
You can get links by promoting good content - but links are more important. You can force links to crap content and you'll rank. You can't rank good content with no links.
Long term content is easily more important.
Quality content (with the right promotion) will attract links and returning visitors + social shares yada yada etc etc
You need links to rank, but you need good links to keep ranking long term.
The life time span in which you can game google and rank a site with dodgy links has gotten shorter and shorter.
Content begets links, but links are (currently) more important for ranking - and therefore for any business.
However, content is better than bad links - the game there is now too short.
So all the ingredients I need to rank number one for car insurance is:
- buy a generic domain
- build the most super fast, uber responsive html5 website money can buy
- add 1000 pages of professionally written content
- marinade in serps
- let the natural links roll in
wait... I just realised theres about 50 people who started doing this 10 years ago...?
You were obviously asking just so you could post this great way to waste peoples time.
Car insurance is pretty specific, you didn't ask a specific question. You asked a general question
If you were tying to rank for car insurance, buying an existing ranking site would probably be the best option.
I think anyone who says content is more important than links, is either deluded or hasn't read the question properly.
Yes content is important - but only as a means to an end. Good content will help you earn links. It will also help you avoid being penalised. But links are the undeniable king - you can rank with good links and bad content. You can't rank with bad links and good content.
The crucial part is "long term". If you want to rank and keep ranking long term, you're going to need tip-top content.
If we're talking weeks or months on the other hand then, sad a commentary on Google's ability to tell good stuff from spam as it is, Monkey's right.
You don’t need to do any of that you can reg crap name, use a site designed and developed by a horse, few pages filled with pics of fields and hay, drown it in serps, Cain it with all the black hat tricks under the sun, find a fool to buy it and skip off into the sunset,,, Oh hang on there’s been loads been doing that since 98...
What utter bullshit. But at least you're consistent.
Although the question is found in the SEO forum, I'd like to think that the whole point of ranking well in SERPS is to actually sell/make money - and you ain't gonna do that with shit content and a fuck load of inbound links.
Your content does (or at least should do) the selling of your service(s) or product(s).
If you've got nothing sensible and realistic to add to a conversation, piss off. You're wasting everybody's time and skewing good decision making of people genuinely looking to learn.
I don't know you or care to do but comments like this are not the best way to debate a subject matter. He has an opinion and is entitled to air his views without being verbally assaulted like you have.
You must be great fun to be around.
More important for what?
Building a brand?
Ranking well (short term? long term?)?
Outdoing your business competitors?
Developing a reputation?
Creating a good website?
Having a valuable website?
List goes on...
Without knowing the goal - you can't make the choice
If the goal is to make fast money (rather than building a business) then I'd go for links. Spam the damn hell out of the thing, take as much commission as you can and leave til runs out.
If the goal is to build a business and a brand then without content you don't have a business or brand - so content has to come first.
I think the goal is to have a sustainable position in serps based on a 'good' site. The sad thing is you play by the rules - nice content, nice links (no schemes), update regular basis etc. And yet my research shows G still gives plenty of weight and allows link trickery on super thin sites with an EMD.
So you continue doing it all 'white hat' waiting for naughty thin site to get bombed out in next G update, but it never happens...
then you see all the magiK link juice flowing to it and think..... maybe links are better than content for pure ranking and I want in
If you don't rank no one will read your content now matter how good it is (a la Monkey), and I'm sceptical about people bothering to backlink to good content anyway these days as it's time consuming (those days ended 10 years ago where people did the backlink thing, people lazy, less time now) .
Yep, because google is the only promotional option you have..
not mutually exclusive
You can create both "good content" and "quality backlinks"
and they are not mutually exclusive.
Actually google is not the only promotional option I have, am already using other options and anyway, how would you possibly know what options I have or do not have??
As you're so full of knowledge, make me eat humble pie and show me a site you personally own (not something from the agency you work for), and have built from ground up that ranks in a very competitive market - then I can see if you know what your talking about
Separate names with a comma.