Adam Wagner

Nov 03 2012

My Response - Ted Ives’ Link Building Chart

Hey SEO fanatics you have to check out the below link building chart. It is often very difficult to explain link building to potential or current clients that are newer to SEO. In the last six months I have been a part of several pitches to small business owners that are search marketing newbies. This is both exciting and challenging at the same time. When you have to start a pitch with “Let me start by explaining what SEO is and how it works…” you know it is going to be a long afternoon. 

With that said it is often much easier to guide a client that is new to SEO towards your recommendation. I always try and do my best to be transparent with clients, and so it helps to have tools such as the below chart to explain to them why I would recommend using certain strategies of link building over others. 

Overall there are only two strategies that I would argue should be placed in a different bucket - “Answering Q&A Questions” and “Article Marketing” should be moved. 

I would move “Answering Q&A Questions” to “Worth Considering” instead of “Highly Effective”. Most Q&A sites are full of spammy comments and bad links. Therefore, you have to be very careful with the Q&A site that is chosen because there is a high potential for this type of site to be in a bad link neighborhood. 

"Article Marketing" is now an outdated form of link building that was once highly effective, but with all of the Panda and Penguin updates it has been relegated to the tool kits of spammers. Web 2.0 article syndication sites have been devalued to the point of minimal return on the investment necessary for creating the content. I would therefore create a new bucket for this strategy labeled "Devalued".

The rest of the strategies are very appropriately labeled and described. Let me know what you think about this chart. 

Linking Strategies Taxonomy *click to enlarge*

Linking Strategies Taxonomy *click to enlarge* 

2 notes

  1. adamwagner4 posted this
Page 1 of 1