Are moz analytics now redundant ?

[blocker0408]

Whilst there have been quite a few q & a's and one or two posts on the blog about the google onslaught on "unnatural" links, with over 1 million sites impacted I'm surprised Moz hasn't said more about this.

With google now muddying the waters even further about what is natural or not (with due respect to Moz, if you're not a brand like Moz, the vast majority of seo's buy some links one way or the other) with all the uncertainty, how is it now possible to trust any metrics about links ?

In essence, does Domain Rank and Domain Trust now mean anything in the new google world and can they be relied upon ?

No doubt someone will come back and say that a lot don't buy any links. Fair enough but the reality is that most do some kind of deals for links, writing in niches like law it is very difficult to get people to share content. Simply a fact.

The Serps are in a mess. Google has replaced many decent sites who played the game to one degree or another, with a lot of sites that are worthless, not bothering with links or content,, so rising by default ! Directory sites seem to be doing better again, because, you guessed it, they are brands like yell.

[Mcarle]

The internet is huge, gigantic, enormous...It can't be measured accurately.

Even the gods at Google Analyicitcs say themselves they can't measure the entire internet.

Link  reports are more of a guideline then a rule. Yes it is very frustrating to learn that after reports and more reports from differing places you are trying to measure something that just can't be measured...Might as well measure how many flies are in your back yard right now....

With links the tracking tools give us an idea of where we are and a goal for where we want to be....

We "know" if we start with 21 domains and 82 links we can see those "measured" links.

That information tells us a little about where to go.

A blogger friend we forgot we can call up and do another round of posts for.

A new blog we did not know about that is now linking to us. (we call get more links through guest posts)

A clients blog that loved us so much we should call them up and get more orders.

An older forum we had forgotten about, time to get back to posting about our favorite subject.

Old out of date websites, time to call up your code monkey buddies & chat with them about updating their content...& thus your links...

So we do all these things and we run more reports, after a while the links add up, the information and industry contact ads up even faster....

[blocker0408]

Thanks for answering but not sure what your point is ....

The point I am making is that as google decides what's natural and what's not, what's trustworthy and what's not, and has decided that over a million websites so far are now not trustworthy, do the Moz analyitics or other link in this new landscape mean anything ?

You may say that google is cleaning house (or maybe simply pushing ppc ? by making seo uncertain and more expensive), but this has turned seo on it's head for the vast majority of non-brand sites, and those in niches where links are hard to come by, no matter how much effort is put in.

[Mcarle]

SEO has NEVER been certain, it has also never been static.

Google has made changes in the algo for years, they will continue to make changes.

As Google changes SEO changes right along with it.

5 years ago we used meta tags that we stuffed with keywords, now those tags have been devalued so much that they are no longer used.

4 years ago we used to make changes in our sites then sit on your hands and wait, now we make a title tag change and it is indexed by afternoon tea.

3  years ago we used to tweak our content, tags, titles, then we had to wait for the "Google Dance"  that only happened once a quarter or so....THAT would shift all the SERPS up down and sideways...now, SERPS happen overnight...

Now we have image search,  php sites are searchable, videos....

In the grand scheme of things SEO has always shifted, and thus what the ALGO values or devalues is also shifting. So yes links values have also shifted as they always have.

Understanding SEO is understanding an entire concept, not just bits and pieces....

The broad concept is that Google is fighting is SEO for SEO's sake & not for peoples sake. The people & SEO companies who understand that will always be ahead of the pack, those that don't will be left behind in the SERPS.

[randfish]

Couple thoughts:

• Google's always done this, they've just been more aggressive recently. Moz metrics should still be useful to help separate the wheat from the chaff, but any non-editorially-acquired links will always be risky.

• We are working on a MozSpam score. Starting some data collection for a training model next week actually. I'd expect 4-6 months before it rolls out, but hopefully will be useful for exactly this kind of thing.

[blocker0408]

Thanks Rand, how do you define "non-editorially" acquired - some forums are saying that guest blogging is now spam. Google needs to make it much clearer, are reciprocal links allowed, if so, what proportion etc etc. No doubt they won't and you would say go white hat only, but many seo's are faced with the dilemma and that's they don't want to be black hat, but what is safe anymore. Apart from sites like your fantastic one, many face a huge dilemma, clients want results, and results means rankings ......

[randfish]

Some reciprocal links are fine - those that are given without the intent to manipulate Google. However, when SEOs talk about reciprocals, we usually mean a link that is only in existence because both parties are trying to manipulate Google's rankings. Those won't generally fly.

Guest posting is almost always 100% white hat, unless the quality of the sites is extremely low, the links are terribly obvious spam or you're engaging in "article spinning" and not true guest authoring on real, quality sites with editorial standards.

There are literally thousands of awesome ways to get great editorial links, and I disagree that most sites must buy/spam to acquire. If you need to get started on some ideas, I'd check out http://www.seomoz.org/blog/category/4

[blocker0408]

Yeah, I'll have a look, thanks. The problem is this, I manage over 100 sites, 2 have received the dreaded warning - they have a small amount of spam I admit, others have more. None of the sites I manage have even 30% links spam. Simply impossible to know what google considers spam. I guess that means it has to be 100% white hat, but we all know that many will continue to test the boundaries, and do it successfully> Point is, the rules of the game have never been clear,  and personally, i think there's a big ppc agenda at google.