no.:- +91 9929531089

We provides:-

Seo

Web promotion

Web development

Web promotion

Link building

Paid links

Designing

and Anylisis for your site

Contact if u want anything of them.

i’m waiting your reply…….

Sohan

Hint: Aways a software engineer keeps bugs like this by that they will cont his/her job…. ;)

Yeah it does. On-page factors are too easy to game. It’s like if I say I’m Donald Trump, you have to take my word for it. Then what stops 1,000 people from claiming they’re all Donald Trump?

Google evolved to a link-based algo because it had no other choice:

http://www.seo4fun.com/blog/2006/12/13/why-google-will-not-move-away-from-pagerank.html

“Why Google will not move away from PageRank”

Anyway, at this stage in the game, I think its more productive for people to stop worrying about what Google is going to do and instead focus on buying smarter links.

good that we discuss this issue at multiple posts :)

Regarding figuring out relevance. It does not require AI to do that. The SE know today already what related words are for your page and rank you for them, even if they don’t show anywhere on the page or are in any anchor text of a link that points to it.

I also did propose ways to determine or specify things like the intend and others at Matts blog. Some might make sense to provide to webmasters themselves, that they can state what they mean.

Combine that with mechanisms to compare the provided info with what Google figured out by themselves already (and use the info from the webmaster only for validation or in border line cases) and with some trust factors that develop over time (trust in how accurate and honest the webmaster is with the specification of those properties) and you might got something that could work without requiring A.I. nor to force webmasters to lie or Google to devalue any paid link that is relevant for the user.

The side effect of this is that Google will get the means to match the webmasters intention with the users. If it is a sales page, link to it and say, yes, that pages purpose is to buy XYZ and if users express the intent to buy XYZ, please rank me higher than if the intent of the user is different.

Marketers that still want to get the untargeted traffic that converts horrible have not much choice but don’t provide any attributes that express intent and can try to blur stuff as much as possible to rank for the various searches with different user intents. Unless they suck, natural links will probably follow which have the correct attribution and the SE does not have to care about the ones by the Marketer himself without it.

Does this make sense?

Was it GoodKarma (Greg Niland) who said the following? Can’t remember. It was actually directed to SE spammers and not SEs, but you can revert it and address the SEs.

If people search for “disney land”, show them Disney Land related content.

If people search for “buy porn”, show them porn that is available to buy.

Responses to what appeared to be an upfront disclosure and an honest solicitation of industry-input have quickly developed into a slew of Matt-Cutts-bashings. I’ve never met the man but, folks, he simply doesn’t deserve that from us.

That said, I do find horrendous problems for Matt Cutts in finding ways to define, to identify and to monitor paid links. I’ll just give you three examples here.

1. Define What is a Paid Link

At law, compensation doesn’t just mean cash. It also means goods, services and even love. What is a paid link? If I write a 750 word article and allow it to be posted on a Web site in exchange for a link, do you not realize that I have just paid between $220 and $750 in time and talent for that single link even though no money traded hands?

If a philanthropist donates $20,000 to a nonprofit and that nonprofit posts a thank you for the sponsorship on its Web site and provides a courtesy link to the donor’s Web site, is that not a paid link? If it isn’t, than all link farm sites can become nonprofits and give away links for a “donation.”

2. How Will Google Know For Certain How to Identify a Paid Link?

I just finished a backlink campaign for a client yesterday. I submitted 100 links. Not one was a paid link and not one was given a reciprocal link or a “no follow.” If my record holds, 90% of these links will be accepted. But here’s a problem. Five of these links were to directory sites (PR 6 or greater) that also post paid links and links that are paid for by reciprocal links. No one but the sites’ Webmasters and I know for certain which category of link I applied for. I’m certain that the Webmasters of these sites would not want to volunteer how many of their posted links are given for free. Like all of us, they have mouths to feed.

3. How Will Google Monitor and Mediate?

If a competitor of my client’s Website “reports” to Google that I have paid for links, will Google notify me so that I may initiate a slander or libel lawsuit? Will Google mediate so that I have an opportunity to refute the accusation? (How many new employees will Google have to hire to monitor and mediate the accusations and complaints?) Or, are we to be presumed guilty with no opportunity to prove innocence?

So Matt Cutts asked for a discussion, so let’s discuss. I am seriously pleased that he gave us this opportunity to participate. And for all the panicking Web site owners, may I just point out that it is possible to garner a Google Page Rank 7, place #4 on a Google search out of 256,000,000 Results for a 2 word Keyphrase, with a Home page that does NOT contain the Keyphrase and a Web site which has only 20 inbound links. If your SEO expert doesn’t know how this is possible, check http://www.WebSyndications.com next month.