Tedster started a thread at WebmasterWorld about aged links. He said that there is a debate about if search engines, such as Google, "age" links. If they do, is aging a link a good thing or a bad thing? He came up with four possibilities of what an aged link can mean and it includes:
(1) One is that as months go by and a backlink stays in place, then it potentially gets a bit of a boost - because it's more trusted as it proves that it's stable.(2) Another possibility is that as a linking page ages and show no further life, no change, and gathering no further backlinks of its own, then the links it offers to target pages have less and less value.
(3) And yet another is that a new fresh backlink is at its most powerful when first found - part of the "freshness" obsession.
(4) And then there's still another point of view - that the patents don't mean very much and that a backlink's value will only change as the linking page's own value goes up or down, or the number of links on the page changes.
Do you agree that links age over time and if so, which route do they age in?
Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.
