Matt Cutts: "Only the links Google trusts count."
 

Q. Everyone says I need more links. How do links improve the quality of the site? I don’t want to play this game and I don’t want to do this.

A: What matters is bottom line. Links are a part of search – they represent online reputation. Although there are many tools that report links, none of the tools can tell you which links are trusted by Google (not even Google’s tools).

http://www.searchenginejournal.com/q...singhal/36025/

OMG genius :Oh crap:Oh crap

Yeah imagine that. No one's gonna buy your piece of shit links anymore.

pls tell us something we don't know already.
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

so you will dont know does google trust or not trust your link buys, and it was from beginning :D

There is no way Matt Cutts (whose salary is paid by Google) might possibly spread misinformation about SEO to prevent some people from trying to game their system.



/sarcasm

maybe now but some time ago link farms were the way to go..

Indeed. You might as well listen to 'advice' from your dog.

see sig for serve yourself links that google likes just fine.

ABT - Always Be Testing

~Ray

/deluded paranoia

Here are the academic credentials of key players on the Google search team.

Vice President and Google Fellow - Ph.D. in computer science from UC Berkeley
Director of Product Management, Search - Bachelor's and master's degrees in aerospace engineering from MIT and an MBA from Harvard Business School.
Engineering Director - PhD in computer science from the University of Michigan, undergrad at Carnegie Mellon University
Google Fellow - Undergraduate degree in India from IIT, Roorkee, a MS from the University of Minnesota and a Ph.D. from Cornell University, all in Computer Science. At Cornell, he studied Information Retrieval with the late Gerard Salton, one of the founders of the field. Has co-authored more than thirty scientific papers and numerous patents.
Matt Cutts - Prior to joining Google in 2000, Matt worked on his Ph.D. in computer graphics at University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. He has a master?s degree from UNC-Chapel Hill, and bachelor?s degrees in both mathematics and computer science from the University of Kentucky.

http://www.google.com/insidesearch/press.html

Keep in mind that those are just the key players. The entire team is made up of people with advanced degrees in fields such as computer science, computer engineering, and math from schools like MIT, Caltech, University Of Texas, Stanford, and other Ivy League caliber institutions who anticipate that there will inevitably always be people trying to 'game their system' regardless of what they publicly disclose and they therefore have absolutely no reason whatsoever to lie or mislead anyone. Especially when they can just re-adjust the system. Everything I've ever heard Matt Cutts say has been 100% on the money.

:1orglaugh

Conspiracy theorize much? :1orglaugh

Google doesn't have to spread misinformation; they have a delete button.

I've done well on a number of sites doing pretty much the opposite of what Matt Cutts says works or doesn't work. If following his 'advice' is making you money I am surprised to hear it, but also glad you are doing well.

thread over head. reply with another wall of text.

:thumbsup
WHAT HE SAID

First of all, if disinformation would obviously be effective, what makes you think a team of bright people would not think of the effective methodology?

Secondly, while I'm sure Matt Cutts is very bright, I had no idea that UNC is now considered Ivy League caliber. Go Tarheels. Ditto University of Texas. Those schools graduate some fine students, but it is as silly to equate them with MIT, Stanford, and "other Ivy League caliber institutions" as to suggest that smart people would not do the smart thing because they are smart.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

yeah sure seems like they are being honest and not evading anything with this answer.

When we search for appliances, why do we only get Sears and other major stores?

Cutts: The web is one of the only places where the small business can move faster than the big guys. The big companies are often big for reason and as a result they can outrank other pages. However, the search engine does give the small business a chance Google Webmaster Tools is somewhat of an equalizer though and small businesses should use this ? i.e. big businesses are more likely to use text in images/flash and small businesses will know better. Also, small businesses should concentrate on the small niche.

Can you back up what you said with links to these sites?

You are selling SEO in your sig, so if I apply your logic of "Matt Cutts and misinformation"
to your sig then...........????

...

If what you just said made any sense to me, I'd be really scared.

:1orglaugh

why would he out his sites and techniques?

no wonder you can't even get hired at labor ready.

Fuck labor ready, you can't get hired on this board.

:1orglaugh

PS : As if anybody looking for SEO secrects can't see who comes up first on google and then view the source.

Laugh away but if you sell links Google already knows about it. Link buying is pretty fucking worthless aside from the direct traffic. :2 cents:

I think naming it 'webmaster tools' is an inside joke.

yeah that's why the sites that dominate all the top porn keywords buy shitloads of links every day.

Google "black monster cock".

Maybe I get different results than you.

They just ignore the bullshit links. Those same top sites also have a pile of legitimate links pointing to them naturally. Also, if you buy popups on PornHub it's not like there is a website advertising that PornHub is selling popups. Google knows exactly what most people are doing and adjusts accordingly. You don't think there are obvious signs that someone is selling links? Google has all the data they need to discount your shit and not let you know a damn thing.

clueless as usual ....

Yes porno jew, your ignorant ass is smarter than Google. They have no interest in who links to a website or why and are complete noobs on the topic. :1orglaugh

broad 60.5k per month
exact 3.6k per month

Hardly a top porn keyphrase.

Anyway, 6 tubes in the first 10 results.

black monster cock: 720 local monthly searches a month.

top adult keyword example fail.

think you should stick to your dollar a referral website. you seem better at that.

I'm good at everything I do, thanks for noticing.

Who came up in the number one spot for you?

you i assume, but no one searches for that phrase so thus no one spends much effort, if any all, to try and rank for that.

blackmonsters.com

Yep, with no backlinks and PR0.


Maybe if I buy a lot of back links I will come up number -1.

:1orglaugh

painful. Anyway, I assume you have an inkling why you are ranking top though, and if it's making you money, then good luck to you, that's the aim of the game :thumbsup

What are you confused by and what are you scared of?

he is ranking because of the keywords in the domain and because it is a zero competition and search volume phrase.

The only inkling I have is that I spent 10 years NOT "toying" with google's results and I
think that is what Matt Cutts is referring to.

That's why I argue that SEO people should do what he says because this is what they
are going to look at when they decide to push someone down in results.

I don't think I moved up in rank, I think other people moved themselves down!

Google : "black monster"

Search :
About 45,300,000 results (0.14 seconds)

45 million results and there is no competition?

http://ooaz.com/gfy/niggaplease40.jpg

The only thing holding my site back is that I don't steal content.

If I had $50k to buy content my site would explode with traffic.

try and find a seo tutorial on how to use a keyword tool and interpret results. maybe there is one on youtube.

Aged site, 208k internal pages isn't hurting either, add in the fact that as you say people aren't going all out to nail it with that search volume and yup.

who cares if there is a 100 billion pages that turn up for a search. no one looks for those phrases and why no site / seo bothers targeting and building links for them.

that is why you rank with no backlinks. (well you have a couple).

matt cutts talks shit when not behind closed doors, and spreads disinformation like a master. I wouldn't exactly say do the opposite of what he says, but more like pay no attention to what he puts out there.

You rank for the reasons stated, the number of results returned doesn't mean people are competing for that phrase, so it's 'easier' (please note the easier, not 'easy') to get there for that particular phrase.

I'm not knocking you for it, far from it, you still need to put the work in, but seriously, ignore matt cutts. Do your own testing, and go with what works for you.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

What service do you use to estimate search numbers?

Unless you buy in to the conspiracy kook crap, I don't think disinformation should be considered as an effective strategy because there are no benefits to doing so.

Regarding the colleges, I think that Harvard, Yale, and Princeton (along with non-Ivy League Stanford) are pretty much in their own league. Same with MIT. After that I think you have to factor in specific programs.

Here are some University Of Texas national rankings.

#9 in Computer Engineering
#6 in Overall Business Undergrad
#1 in Accounting
#9 in Entrepreneurship
#6 in Finance
#6 in Management
#4 in MIS

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandre...kings/business
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandre...gs/engineering

Th undergraduate advertising program, which is what I did, is also widely regarded to be the best in the country.

http://advertising.utexas.edu/about

I'd take any of the above Texas degrees over pretty much any degree from a lesser Ivy League school like Brown. Big public schools get slammed in the overall rankings because they usually have a large # of students in less competitive liberal arts programs with poor student/teacher ratios and the fact that state imposed mandatory admissions laws generally lead to a high dropout rate. I think the short list of top tier public schools would include Texas, Michigan, Illinois, Berkeley, and UNC. I don't know what the high ranking programs are at any of them aside from Texas, but along with non-Ivy League private schools like NYU, University Of Chicago, Duke, Northwestern, and a few others, I think certain programs at each could be seen as the equivalent or better than a general liberal arts degree at Brown. Easily.