(5)
The results are in, and SEOs voted on which link they would prefer.
65% of SEOs said they would prefer an old and aged link over a fresh and new link. 35% said they want the newer fresh links over the older links.
We polled our readers back in late January and with 113 responses today, I think the verdict is in. At least we have a overwhelming majority opting one way as opposed to being undecided.
Our last poll results showed SEO's cant agree on the value of an image link, but I think, for the most part, SEOs can agree on this question.
Continued forum discussion at SitePoint Forums.
Comments:
No Name
03/11/2008 01:31 pm
Good news ,I'll study it..
John
03/11/2008 03:22 pm
Why or why! If people are mainly interested in older sites what about the new ones that are just coming up. Are they to be squeezed out of the market. We should all remember that every "aged" website was once "young". This is nothing short of reverse-ageism on the internet.
Michael Martinez
03/11/2008 04:02 pm
Any link that passes value is a good link regardless of its age. An aged link, however, may have passed some trust tests (assuming search engines conduct such tests).
Janusz
03/11/2008 05:07 pm
Does it mean that the page is old or link is old? how can you acquire old link? I guess its not possible :). If you want to check the age of the page then you can use one-click age check using Link diagnosis Firefox plugin.
No Name
07/23/2008 04:40 pm
I can certainly see the point of preferring older links. They are more likely to be high PR than newer ones, and, while the trust issue is debatable it is certainly the way to bet. My focus however, is to first insure that the page I'm linking to ALREADY HAS PageRank. Whether old or not the structure of many blogs and forums prevents most pages from attaining high PR. Why should an SEO link to a page which offers no current benefit to his client? Dennis Foreman