« on: May 20, 2010, 03:38:55 PM »
As an advertiser, but not with this program yet(budget blown for this quarter on other advertising streams), I think its pretty naive for anyone to believe that search engine optimization is a set and forget process. Its well known in SEO circles that new articles,website renewal or additions, press releases, blog and forum commenting, social media action etc etc must continually be updated to stay on the front page of most search engines. Internet search engine spiders crave new food. Its not enough to get a lot of food, despite that being a factor too for various keywords.
This system has so much potential to give the spiders both of what they crave - lots of food and new food too. I don't think anyone would be so bold as to represent the cash4links system as the plush 'one stop shop' for SEO, but it is certainly an impressive new weapon in an advertisers arsenal. One I will use in the very near future.
The other thing is that this system is new. There will always be teething problems with most new systems. I expect Jon, as a resepected pro in this biz, is ironing all problems out as quickly as humanly practicle. This system has too much potential to ignore.
I would like to encourage other advertisers that this system is based on established principles for fast and sustained SEO if used properly and in conjunction with other methods. It is also too cheap to ignore.
For anyone that feels their reputation for quality content is at risk with out of context article links, they should not use the system, but again I think that's pretty naive. To be totally frank, I have seen some of the most reputable company's on the planet being linked to from dubious comments on high PR .gov and .edu blogs as part of their strategy. Is commenting "I totally agree" more respectable than an out of context article linking to your site? It's a very grey area. Personally, I believe in adding quality content to the web. I instruct those involved in my SEO efforts to add some type of quality content - however brief to whatever they contribute to. I do not necessarily believe that quality content has to match a link precisely. If I or one of my team contribute a quality comment/reply on a highly respect high PR blog on health for example and have a link to my marketing website - I don't feel bad about it. Nor do most companies and businesses involved in SEO. It's how things are done. If you had a fat loss website for example, I would probably use that instead to link to on such a blog - but its not always easy to match your biz with the place you comment. The way I see it is - why should I be barred from contributing quality and sometimes expert advice because I don't have a site to match the topic. It's ridiculous. One can build up a reputation as a quality provider of information even if their business is in an unrelated field. If I am a doctor can I not comment on real estate? Think about it. Its how the web is weaved - anyone and everyone can contribute to anything.
If advertisers wish their links to be included in articles written specifically to match their backlinks, perhaps a premium service with premium rates should be charged. Go to one of the the sub-contracting websites and you will see it isn't cheap for such a personalized service. To compete in economies of scale and on the level playing field, one would be silly to ignore such a service as cash4links. Its cheap and effective - but must be sustained in the long haul (in addition to your other SEO efforts) for your website success. That's the realistic truth.