Until then, Google, you can shut up about paid links and learn how to be a search engine again.

What is the difference between someone paying me to get links from free directories (which still works in part), and paying someone specifically for a certain link? Should I (or an employee/contractor-oh dear, they have to work for free) be wandering around the web getting links for people for free, and not paying for those links either?

Do websites rank solely because of their onpage/onsite SEO with no help regards links? Certainly not. Unfortunately we need to get inbound links somehow. It is suddenly becoming very risky to even link out to someone.

According to the new Google formula there must be a large amount of collateral damage. Are signature links in forums defined as “paid links”, are dofollows on blog posts considered “paid”…? Is it when there are links where snippet text around them is not unique between any two websites???

Actually Google have raised the price of “payment for getting links”, because we have to be so much more careful about how we do a linking strategy for clients.

I consider that all links have a cost! All links are “paid links”. That Google is singling out its version of “paid” is abhorrent.

Why can’t links therefore SERP’s be another auction system like Adwords. Where the price continually goes up till the business at the top is the one able to afford the price since they are the one converting traffic for the highest profit.

As numerous marketing pros have pointed out in articles I’ve read online, if a company builds a business with just one vehicle for advertising, especially free advertising, then it’s bound to get in trouble when that vehicle changes the rules, raises the price, or goes out of business.

Google controls the supply (SERPs) that everyone’s demanding because they can and, in their estimation, because gaming the system leads to less than quality, relevant results for searchers.

There are alternatives: other search engines, directories, direct mail, email, radio, television, guerilla marketing/word of mouth, billboards, wireless/text messaging, skywriting (well maybe only at the beach). The problem for small business is…they all cost money. SEO for organic SERPs is a bargain, almost free even, if a business does it in house as part of an employee’s job responsibilities.

Everyone’s free to buy and sell links. Other search engines might not care about the practice at this point, but Google doesn’t want to play the game that way for whatever reason. It’s their business, they have the clout, and we simply have to decide if we’re going to play their way or not. Fair? Not really. Is Google doing it to sell more Adwords packages? Probably. Complain? Sure. Maybe Google will have a change of heart. But meanwhile get creative and find a way around Google, including spending a few bucks to market our businesses. Free is worth as much as it costs.

Pedantic P.S. for Loren: In the second graph, I believe you meant to type “alluded” instead of “eluded.” Got a chuckle from that, imagining Mr. Sulllivan bobbing and weaving and then running away from the question about links.

You pay pehaps BIG money to advertise and get no link juice. And your ads might not even supply break-even traffic or sales for your ads cost. Advertisers should NOT advertise on sites that give no follow tags. Sorry to say this but it sucks!

The advertiser should normally be interested in the place of his banner on a certain site, not to fool search engines of being a popular site by purchased links.

Yes, Google should have at least given a warning before cracking down on everyone. I guess it’s a reality check!