<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fresh content versus quality backlinks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://im-fun.com/search-engine/optimization/fresh-content-versus-quality-backlinks/557/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://im-fun.com/search-engine/optimization/fresh-content-versus-quality-backlinks/557/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=fresh-content-versus-quality-backlinks</link>
	<description>Internet marketing news, reviews, tips, and tricks.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:46:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: dannybuntu</title>
		<link>http://im-fun.com/search-engine/optimization/fresh-content-versus-quality-backlinks/557/comment-page-1/#comment-368</link>
		<dc:creator>dannybuntu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 10:13:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://im-fun.com/?p=557#comment-368</guid>
		<description>I perfectly agree with David. I&#039;ve been blogging for quite some time now (2006) and I have about almost 400 posts. Some posts that I worked very hard at didn&#039;t get squat for traffic.

Like absolutely zero. 

Surprisingly, my garbage posts were the ones that got Google&#039;s attention and apparently somebody posted links, then they&#039;ve been on rank 1 on google for almost 2 years now. 

Until I decided to buy a domain where my PR dropped to 0 after reaching 4. 

My noobie mistake.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I perfectly agree with David. I&#8217;ve been blogging for quite some time now (2006) and I have about almost 400 posts. Some posts that I worked very hard at didn&#8217;t get squat for traffic.</p>
<p>Like absolutely zero. </p>
<p>Surprisingly, my garbage posts were the ones that got Google&#8217;s attention and apparently somebody posted links, then they&#8217;ve been on rank 1 on google for almost 2 years now. </p>
<p>Until I decided to buy a domain where my PR dropped to 0 after reaching 4. </p>
<p>My noobie mistake.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gareth</title>
		<link>http://im-fun.com/search-engine/optimization/fresh-content-versus-quality-backlinks/557/comment-page-1/#comment-323</link>
		<dc:creator>Gareth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2010 23:58:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://im-fun.com/?p=557#comment-323</guid>
		<description>Google only show a percentage of the backlinks for any site, the main reason for this is to stop web masters bascially knowing how many links they need to build in order to get to #1 in Google.

As for links showing in webmaster tools, the blog may not have been indexed recently, link may have been removed? comment not approved? webmaster tools just crap(most likely cause)

Back to this little test...

we can do the test on what will get you to number 1, content or links..

just Google up.. Click Here

probably not the definative test you want but gives you a good indication. PR links are not so important for SERPS.. I did tests of my own once and here is what I found..

Page content - useless you can use anchor text links on non related content sites and still improve rankings. (may change if Google decides)

Backlink PR - Good if you want to improve you Page PR but not essential in climbing the SERPS (PR = Page rank not Site rank all articles in directories are actually PR0!)

Blog commenting - effective on .edu or .gov sites still do not seem as &quot;effective&quot;

Fresh content - New pages will keep Googlebot comming back, and fresh daily content will only improve your SERPS if you link internally.. (IE if you have 1000 webpages that all point back to your home page using a nice bread crumb anchor text link you could find yourself ranking rather well there)

One thing that I am yet to truly work out is the keyword density, I managed to get a hub ranked on page one for Search Engine Optimization (broad match) for around a day but the page seems to have &quot;dissapeared&quot; although its still in the index.. I am waiting to see if it raises its head again and settle down.. One thing I do know is Keyword density seems to be playing a &quot;larger role&quot; in the ranking process it once did, however this is most likely down the the LSI Keyword and ranking according to keyword relationships... (either that or I am more of a nerd and like doing confusing things for no reason!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google only show a percentage of the backlinks for any site, the main reason for this is to stop web masters bascially knowing how many links they need to build in order to get to #1 in Google.</p>
<p>As for links showing in webmaster tools, the blog may not have been indexed recently, link may have been removed? comment not approved? webmaster tools just crap(most likely cause)</p>
<p>Back to this little test&#8230;</p>
<p>we can do the test on what will get you to number 1, content or links..</p>
<p>just Google up.. Click Here</p>
<p>probably not the definative test you want but gives you a good indication. PR links are not so important for SERPS.. I did tests of my own once and here is what I found..</p>
<p>Page content &#8211; useless you can use anchor text links on non related content sites and still improve rankings. (may change if Google decides)</p>
<p>Backlink PR &#8211; Good if you want to improve you Page PR but not essential in climbing the SERPS (PR = Page rank not Site rank all articles in directories are actually PR0!)</p>
<p>Blog commenting &#8211; effective on .edu or .gov sites still do not seem as &#8220;effective&#8221;</p>
<p>Fresh content &#8211; New pages will keep Googlebot comming back, and fresh daily content will only improve your SERPS if you link internally.. (IE if you have 1000 webpages that all point back to your home page using a nice bread crumb anchor text link you could find yourself ranking rather well there)</p>
<p>One thing that I am yet to truly work out is the keyword density, I managed to get a hub ranked on page one for Search Engine Optimization (broad match) for around a day but the page seems to have &#8220;dissapeared&#8221; although its still in the index.. I am waiting to see if it raises its head again and settle down.. One thing I do know is Keyword density seems to be playing a &#8220;larger role&#8221; in the ranking process it once did, however this is most likely down the the LSI Keyword and ranking according to keyword relationships&#8230; (either that or I am more of a nerd and like doing confusing things for no reason!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://im-fun.com/search-engine/optimization/fresh-content-versus-quality-backlinks/557/comment-page-1/#comment-186</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:09:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://im-fun.com/?p=557#comment-186</guid>
		<description>Googles Matt Cutts said google will not show all backlinks ever.  And I would honestly say that BOTH fresh content and quality backlinks are equally important.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Googles Matt Cutts said google will not show all backlinks ever.  And I would honestly say that BOTH fresh content and quality backlinks are equally important.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 1q2w3e</title>
		<link>http://im-fun.com/search-engine/optimization/fresh-content-versus-quality-backlinks/557/comment-page-1/#comment-118</link>
		<dc:creator>1q2w3e</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:53:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://im-fun.com/?p=557#comment-118</guid>
		<description>Good plan.  My vote is on fresh content (Site A).  I&#039;ve noticed that quite often doFollow high PR backlinks never show up on Google Webmaster Tools or Yahoo Site Explorer.  I have no idea why???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good plan.  My vote is on fresh content (Site A).  I&#8217;ve noticed that quite often doFollow high PR backlinks never show up on Google Webmaster Tools or Yahoo Site Explorer.  I have no idea why???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reba01231</title>
		<link>http://im-fun.com/search-engine/optimization/fresh-content-versus-quality-backlinks/557/comment-page-1/#comment-117</link>
		<dc:creator>Reba01231</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 15:23:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://im-fun.com/?p=557#comment-117</guid>
		<description>I agree!  Although I&#039;m not sure if your test is ideal...like is it fair to only post 1 backlink per day on Site B?  And how many words will you be putting into your unique posts on Site A?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree!  Although I&#8217;m not sure if your test is ideal&#8230;like is it fair to only post 1 backlink per day on Site B?  And how many words will you be putting into your unique posts on Site A?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Speedster</title>
		<link>http://im-fun.com/search-engine/optimization/fresh-content-versus-quality-backlinks/557/comment-page-1/#comment-116</link>
		<dc:creator>Speedster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 13:47:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://im-fun.com/?p=557#comment-116</guid>
		<description>Hay Kane!  I think this is a great idea.  I&#039;ve wondered the same thing myself.  Keep us posted, yo.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hay Kane!  I think this is a great idea.  I&#8217;ve wondered the same thing myself.  Keep us posted, yo.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

