

Link to your competition (2010) - franze
http://eu.techcrunch.com/2010/07/07/startups-linking-to-your-competition-will-help-you-no-really/

======
zepolen
> A website which does not get at least 70% traffic via organic search
> seriously under-performs (and for good search engine optimized sites the
> truth is more in the 90% plus area).

I really don't agree with this. If you depend on organic search to bring you
users then:

a) you're at the will of the search engine's algorithm which can change at any
time (like Google just did)

b) it means your users aren't the loyal type, and they will easily forget you

Take Reddit for example; If tommorow Google removes them from their index, I
doubt much will change in terms of visitors since they have loyal users who
know them by name.

~~~
franze
Take Stackoverflow.com as an example
[http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2011/01/trouble-in-the-
hous...](http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2011/01/trouble-in-the-house-of-
google.html) (88.2% Google referred traffic)

~~~
beaumartinez
> _88.2% Google-referred traffic_.

I don't think that's a "pure" statistic. Perhaps StackOverflow users rely on
Google returning StackOverflow answers? I know I do; for example, I often
append _stackoverflow_ to my programming queries because I know Google will
give me StackOverflow answers. Although the referral is Google, I am forcibly
limiting results to include only StackOverflow.

~~~
franze
even if they would clean it up (add every query with a brand term to a
separate segment) i would be very very very surprised if it would be below 70%

------
sagacity
+1. Great find, even though a bit dated, still valid 100% imo.

I think _every_ startup, webmaster, marketer, SEO and wannabe SEO should _at
least_ read this.

------
arkitaip
Is self linking really ok on hn? Just curious to know.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
My observation ...

If it's on topic, adds value, and isn't simply spam, then often yes, it's OK.
Many readers, perhaps most readers, don't notice whether something is self-
linked.

But if someone consistently self-links, and the lunk-to items are of marginal,
or zero, value, then people start to notice and the person in question loses
face, karma, and possibly good-will.

So, it depends.

~~~
rmc
_If it's on topic, adds value, and isn't simply spam, then often yes, it's OK.
… are of marginal, or zero, value, then people start to notice and the person
in question loses face, karma, and possibly good-will._

This is, I assume the rule of thumb with anything on HN.

"Is it OK to type a comment?" "If it adds value, yes" etc.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
Exactly, which is why "Me Too!" comments often get hammered. They add no
value, information or insight.

The question that's becoming more relevant is "Value to whom?" With the
increase in participants, the HN focus is diluting and widening. It seems to
some that the topics on the front page are no longer as niche as they once
were. It's claimed that they used to be more tightly focussed on topics of
interest to hackers more than non-hackers, and that now the emphasis on being
targetted at hackers is dying.

But still, "I can't define it but I know it when I see it." I still upvote
strongly technical, hackerish articles, or articles that I think wouldn't
appeal to a general audience, if they "add value."

------
Andrew_Quentin
Interesting. There are only two links in the whole article!

------
OoTheNigerian
is this submission a subtle dig at the Launch Conference?

