<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Ranking Penalties</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.seoco.co.uk/blog/google-ranking-penalties/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.seoco.co.uk/blog/google-ranking-penalties/</link>
	<description>Search Engine Optimisation and Marketing News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:43:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: MBT Walking Shoes</title>
		<link>http://www.seoco.co.uk/blog/google-ranking-penalties/#comment-13557</link>
		<dc:creator>MBT Walking Shoes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:34:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seoco.co.uk/blog/2007/05/19/google-ranking-penalties/#comment-13557</guid>
		<description>As for paid links, I&#039;ve got mixed feelings about that one  on one hand I see where they&#039;re coming from, as basically paid links distort the relevency of results, however on the other hand, they&#039;re penalising anyone who hasn&#039;t got a â€˜nofollow&#039; in a link to their site, which sometimes you don&#039;t have control over.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As for paid links, I&#8217;ve got mixed feelings about that one  on one hand I see where they&#8217;re coming from, as basically paid links distort the relevency of results, however on the other hand, they&#8217;re penalising anyone who hasn&#8217;t got a â€˜nofollow&#8217; in a link to their site, which sometimes you don&#8217;t have control over.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Pangburn</title>
		<link>http://www.seoco.co.uk/blog/google-ranking-penalties/#comment-18</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Pangburn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 11:03:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.seoco.co.uk/blog/2007/05/19/google-ranking-penalties/#comment-18</guid>
		<description>Hi Dave,

I certainly agree that Google devalues links if there&#039;s too high a proportion with exactly the same anchor text. As you know, if you&#039;re running a link building campaign it helps to vary the anchor text to make them look natural.

As for paid links, I&#039;ve got mixed feelings about that one - on one hand I see where they&#039;re coming from, as basically paid links distort the relevency of results, however on the other hand, they&#039;re penalising anyone who hasn&#039;t got a &#039;nofollow&#039; in a link to their site, which sometimes you don&#039;t have control over. Additionally, what is Adwords if it isn&#039;t a variation of &#039;paid links&#039;, albeit CPC.

Just my thoughts anyway..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Dave,</p>
<p>I certainly agree that Google devalues links if there&#8217;s too high a proportion with exactly the same anchor text. As you know, if you&#8217;re running a link building campaign it helps to vary the anchor text to make them look natural.</p>
<p>As for paid links, I&#8217;ve got mixed feelings about that one &#8211; on one hand I see where they&#8217;re coming from, as basically paid links distort the relevency of results, however on the other hand, they&#8217;re penalising anyone who hasn&#8217;t got a &#8216;nofollow&#8217; in a link to their site, which sometimes you don&#8217;t have control over. Additionally, what is Adwords if it isn&#8217;t a variation of &#8216;paid links&#8217;, albeit CPC.</p>
<p>Just my thoughts anyway..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

