I've put up a 7 minute preview video showcasing the ease and power of my newly available tool, WebComp Analyst. This tool is simply the most powerful, simplest link analyzer on the web. It will help you get a snapshot of exactly what it will take to rank for any set of keywords in Google — in only a few seconds.

Check it out and let me know what you think in a comment:

Click here to watch the preview video.

To answer a few commenters' questions:

What do the numbers returned by WebComp Analyst mean?

See the first question under the Frequently Asked Questions on the Help and Documentation page of webcompanalyst.com for a complete answer to that question.

How much will it cost?

It will be $67 (but only $47 for the first two days, thus the "launch discount") one time. This is not a subscription service.

Is it Mac compatible?

It is not Mac compatible, though you might be able to run it if you have Mono installed.

If one already has SEO Elite, would your software be necessary?

My understanding is that SEO Elite does not have a tool that lets you check the backlinks in the top 10/20/30 results for a set of keywords. It only lets you analyze an individual site's links — no snapshot functionality like WebComp Analyst (which is what makes WCA so much better than the competition).

I've read over and over again on the forums of 3WayLinks.net and 1WayLinks.net questions regarding how to go about performing link analysis for Google. That is, how to know how difficult it
will be to rank for a given set of keywords, and how many links you'll need to be able to rank for those keywords.

So I put together a brief, 8 minute video on how I do link analysis. A quick warning: I recorded the video a bit too loud, so you might want to turn your volume down first!

Click here to watch the video.

The two tools I reference in the video are:

1. AdWords Keyword Tool
2. Yahoo Site Explorer

I've got a tool that I use which automates most of the processes shown in the video. I've only used it for myself, in-house, but I've decided to make it available to the public soon. Look for more details on that in the next couple of days, but what I can tell you right now is:

1. It's faster, and works better for top 10/20/30 link analysis, than everything out there.
2. It will be less than half the price of one of its competitors, and one third the price of another.

Please post your thoughts and comments below.

Most of the financial news regarding the economy has been pretty dismal over the past few months. Plummeting stocks, failing banks, hundreds of billions of dollars being passed around in the hopes of fixing it all. People are understandably worried about the economy, their jobs, their homes and their credit.

Meanwhile, in the past 3 months my net income has risen 20% even though I've only been working an hour or two per day since my son was born. How is that possible? It's simple: Internet Marketing is very resistant to the economic woes facing other industries. Let's talk about why.

Advertising

Television and radio are kept alive by the ROI (return on investment) of their sponsors, and the commercial web is no different. The advantage of advertising online is that it's far more efficient. When a sponsor puts an ad on a television show or radio program, they can only be vaguely certain of who is watching or listening. Sure the networks provide their own research in demographics and how large their audience is, but much of it is guesswork and impossible to know for sure.

Also, results from TV and radio are very difficult to track. How do you know if the person who just bought your widget was motivated to do so by seeing or hearing your commercial? Again, it's guesswork.

The internet is different. When you place an ad online, you can track exactly how many people saw it, precisely how many people responded (clicked-through) and exactly how much money you earned from it. You can work to refine and improve your ads to improve your ROI as well. It's vastly superior to TV and radio in that regard.

So when it comes time for companies to tighten their belts, it only makes sense that they will focus on the ad medium that has the best ROI.

What does this mean for you, the Internet Marketer? It means that your advertising-driven web sites that use AdSense or other programs will likely remain relatively healthy during hard times. My own AdSense income has not changed much despite the economic troubles, which is no surprise to me. It's also good news for anyone in the search engine optimization business (or related businesses such as pay-per-click), since they, too offer great ROI opportunities.

Selling Information

Another reason that Internet Marketing does well when other sectors are having problems is that people who lose their jobs in those other sectors often turn to the Internet to try and earn a living. When an industry starts having problems, people who lose their jobs in that industry often have a very hard time finding work in the same industry. If they can't find a job, what can they do? Again, many turn to the Internet — the "new economy."

Unfortunately, there are a lot of sharks out there ready to take advantage of these individuals. But for those of us who are honestly offering real opportunities and solutions, we find even more customers during such hard times.

Leveling the Risk

A third reason why Internet Marketing tends to do well even when things look gloomy everywhere else is because the Internet makes it much easier to level your risk. I have customers in 60+ countries. When one country's economy isn't doing so well, another's is flying high, and so I'm less affected. A unique advantage of doing business on the web.

So stay focused on your online business, and remember that you're in a better position to weather the storm than most.

Please leave your thoughts and questions in a comment below.

Not excited by the prospect of making $99 in a month? You should be. Why do I say that, and what did I do to make my brand new, 2 page web site earn about a hundred bucks in one month? Let me tell you.

Why You Should Be Interested

First of all, to build your enthusiasm for the results of this case study, let me lay out a few figures that can be derived from 66 visitors, 13 downloads, 3 sales and $99.

$99 from 66 visitors is $1.50 per visitor.

Think about that. On a great day you'll earn $1.50 per click from AdSense ads on a page, but even with a good click-through rate of 10%, you need 10 visitors to earn that $1.50. That means you're really only earning 15 cents per visitor on average. The methods I used for this case study earned 10 times that per-visitor value.

3 sales from 66 visitors is a 4.5% conversion rate.

A 4.5% conversion rate is great for an affiliate product (which is what was used in this case study). It's far better when you consider that the product was a free software download that the user had to choose to register for a fee — which is when I got paid. Conversion rates for software registration are typically far lower than conversion rates for pay-first products. But in this case, of the 13 people who downloaded the software in the last month, 3 people bought. That's 23%! Very nice indeed.

It only took 6 weeks to get a #3 ranking in Google for the keywords that earned the $99.

Yup, a mere six weeks after putting the brand-new, 2 page case study site into the 3WayLinks Network, I had a #3 ranking in Google for my chosen keywords.

How I Did It

Now to get to heart of the matter: how did I do it? It's actually very simple.

1. I created a simple 2 page site that pitched the product and provided a link to download the software.
2. I put the site in the 3WayLinks network, using the name of the product as my primary keywords.
3. I gave the site a title that looks like this: [PRODUCT NAME] - GET IT FREE! — Do you see why a title like that will draw clicks from the searchers who might otherwise have clicked on the #1 result instead?

Why It Works

Ranking for the name of a product is a great way to earn easy affiliate commissions. The reasons for this are threefold.

1. Conversion rates are higher.

   If somebody is searching for the specific name of a product in Google, they are obviously much more interested in the product, and therefore are a lot easier to sell the product to.

2. Competition is lower.

   If you look for software products (or other digital products) that aren't immensely popular, you'll find that there's not much competition for the product name in Google. That means it's really easy to rank for the name of the product — and fast.

3. It's easy to "rinse and repeat."

   Since the web site is incredibly simple to build (2 pages, no fancy graphics or expensive templates), it's also very easy to duplicate. Just find another product to create a site around and repeat the process over and over again.

   3WayLinks lets you put 50 web sites in your account. Think about that: if you can build 50 sites that, on average, earn a target goal of $3 a day, that's $4,500 a month, or $54,000 a year — on autopilot.

Where can you find such digital products whose product name you can rank for? They're all over the place: ClickBank, PayDotCom, and RegSoft are all loaded with software and digital products that you can be an affiliate for. Create the sites, drop them into 3WayLinks (or 1WayLinks.net, which is also proving incredibly successful) and wait for the commissions to arrive.

To find out how competitive the keywords are for the product names, just go to Google's keyword tool and do an "Exact" match search for the product name. Look for product names that get some searches, but not a lot.

My case study site targets a product name that only gets 210 searches a month, according to Google's keyword tool. The products that only get a few searches don't have anywhere near the competition, which means it's a lot easier to rank for the product names.

Please post your thoughts and questions in a comment below.

Most people who get into business online start off either building web sites for AdSense revenue or being an affiliate of other people’s products. That’s a reasonable way to begin, since there’s less work, less responsibility, and probably most important for people starting out, less risk involved.

But the truth is that there’s simply less earning potential in AdSense sites or being an affiliate when compared to creating and selling your own product online.

There are three major benefits of being a product owner over being the a site publisher or affiliate.

1. More earning ability than affiliate commissions, both initially and after the sale.

As an AdSense publisher, you get paid once when a visitor clicks an ad. As an affiliate, you get paid once when the visitor buys the product you link to. That’s usually where it ends.

As a product owner, you have a lot more opportunities to profit. When a visitor becomes a customer, then you have the most valuable asset any business can have: a customer! It’s ten times easier to sell to a happy customer a second, third and fourth time than to convert a visitor into a customer.

I’ve got customers who’ve told me that they buy my products without even reading the sales page! They buy first and then read over the benefits. “My credit card loves you” was the exact words of a loyal long-time customer of mine.

The obvious financial rewards aside, as a product owner you also have the ability to tweak things about your site to make it convert better – modify headlines, wording in the sales page, incentives, price. As an affiliate you can’t change any of those things about the product you’re trying to sell, even if you have a good idea of what would make the product sell better.

2. Greater growth potential as you recruit affiliates.

As an affiliate or AdSense publisher, you’re limited to your own ability to create growth in your business. It’s usually not cost-effective to have other people do the work for you. For example, you can setup a Pay-Per-Click campaign to sell the products, but you have to pay for every click, which cuts into your profit margin. You can't go out and recruit others to sell the product for you, either.

As an affiliate or publisher you’re usually just a one-man show. As fast as your fingers can type is as fast as you can put up articles or web sites that drive traffic to your affiliate links. There's no way to leverage other people's work.

As a product owner, however, you don’t have these limitations. Beyond sending an email to my list, I do no outside advertising of my products. I know that if I have a good product that it will be found in the PayDotCom or ClickBank marketplace by affiliates eager to sell the product. I know a portion of my my initial customer base will also look into becoming affiliates for the product.

After I create a product I just sit back and let the affiliates do all the work! They run all of the Pay-Per-Click campaigns, they write blog posts and do search engine optimization for their web sites and Squidoo pages, they write articles and reviews and submit them to directories. I don’t have to do any real promotional work at all. In my mind that makes it a lot easier to be a product owner than an affiliate.

Let me give you an example of how much traffic affiliates can drive to your site. For just one of my products, Instant Article Wizard, I had more than 42,000 unique visitors in June of 2008. Of that 42,000, only about 2,500 came from search engines. The rest came from the work done by my affiliates. Searching for the phrase “instant article wizard” in Google returns about 118,000 results – of which only half a dozen or so belong to me.

Do you have any idea what it would cost to drive that kind of traffic with AdWords? Even at only 50 cents a click that’s $21,000 for one month’s worth of traffic! The reality is that you probably couldn't find enough keywords to get that kind of traffic out of PPC, not without paying huge per-click prices.

Even at 50% commission, affiliates are by far the cheapest form of advertising for the volume of traffic you can get from them.

3. The money is in the list.

The third major benefit of being a product owner is that even if the visitor does not buy immediately, you have the chance to get them onto you mailing list with the offer of a free gift or some specialized information. Afterward you can follow up with more teaching and coaching until they reach the point of trust where they’re ready to buy.

As an affiliate, it’s usually a now-or-never deal. Either they convert and make you a few dollars right now, or they’re lost forever. You don’t suffer from this shortcoming as a product owner. You can grow your list and teach them and win their trust over weeks or months, and in time they will help build your bottom line by becoming a customer.

As an example: I have a core set of about 5,000 people on my 50,000+ email list that are my real buyers. They’re the folks who read every email I send, leave comments on my blog posts, and have bought at least some of my products. Every so often a “lurker” on my list – a person who, up until now, has only been feeding off of the information I give out – has enough trust in me to become a member of my core list.

It takes time to build someone up to that point of trust, and affiliates don’t have the luxury of that time. Only product owners do.

So why isn't every one a vendor?

If being a product owner is so great, why isn't everybody a product owner? Because there's more risk in putting time, money and effort into creating a product. If it doesn't take off, you're left holding the bill. As an affiliate, if your efforts don't pay off, you're still holding the bill, it's just usually a lot smaller bill.

Being an affiliate also means less responsibility: no customer support, no follow-ups. You make a few dollars and you go on your merry way.

I think it's a good idea to start off as an affiliate, but you'll hit a ceiling where you won't be able to go any further. When you hit that ceiling, it's time to move on to becoming a product owner.

Please leave your thoughts and questions in a comment below.

Yes, it's true. I landed a brand new blog in the #5 spot in Google for a two-keyword phrase in 14 days. How'd I do it? It's simple: I chose the right domain name.

Did you know that Google gives special ranking bonuses to certain kinds of domain names? It does, and a significant bonus at that. Choosing a domain name that exactly matches the keywords you want to rank for will give your site a great head-start in the rankings. It's not a requirement for ranking well, but it does help a good bit.

In the case of the blog that I ranked #5, I purchased the domain name DietersBlog.net. I then posted 10 unique articles to the blog that I hired a ghostwriter to create for me. I didn't get any links, or do any promotion of the site at all (I'll be honest–I got distracted with some other work I was doing).

Two weeks later I checked the stats for the blog. I was happy to see that I was already getting traffic from Google, specifically for the phrase "dieter's blog." I ran the query through Google and, sure enough, my blog was ranked #5. This was in spite of the fact that there are 2.4 million competing web pages in Google's index for the phrase, and despite the fact that the other pages ranking in the top 10 had a few links into them (You do know that Google favors links above all else, right?).

I checked again today, and it's now at #7, but I also found that the blog ranks #3 for "dieters blog" (without the apostrophe). That emphasizes a side point: Google differentiates between keywords with apostrophes (possessive terms) and those just ending in s (plural terms).

So the next time you sit down to create a new site, be careful to do your keyword research before you purchase your domain name. Also, keep in mind that the "Exact Match Bonus" applies more to .com, .net and .org domain names. Avoid .info and the other less known top-level domains.

An exact-match domain name is only the first step, though. Once you have that domain name in place, you have to back it up with links to your site. "Dieter's Blog", while certainly a phrase worth ranking for, is not highly competitive, so I was able to get the ranking just on the strength of the domain name and the site's content. However, for keywords that bring a lot of traffic, you need a lot of links.

My 3WayLinks.net system automatically builds links to your site in the way that Google likes to see, helping you to rank in Google very quickly. The system has achieved thousands of top 10 rankings in Google for hundreds of webmasters, and can do the same for you. For rock-solid proof of its effectiveness, visit 3WayLinks.net now.

Please leave your thoughts and questions in a comment below.

A thread got started at a popular marketing forum recently, and one poster (who appears to be pretty new to Internet Marketing), stated that my 3WayLinks.net link building service was "dishonest", "immoral" and "unethical." Those were his exact words. He didn't say that he "felt" it was that way, he applied an across the board, no-contest judgment regarding the service.

I responded with a series of questions asking whether or not he felt writing articles to get backlinks is unethical, or posting comments to blogs was unethical, or using social bookmarking sites for backlinks was unethical. The user never answered these questions, so I can only assume that he was unable to do so without undermining his original argument. He continued, however, with a series of arguments which I responded to and, in my opinion, debunked. Numerous other users chimed in to support and agree with my position, but there were some on the other side of the fence as well.

I felt there was something to be learned from the debate, and I wanted to share my perspective on link building with my readers here. Your position may be completely opposite, or you may be somewhat in line with my opinion or somewhat out of line with my opinion. But here's how I feel about it:

The basic argument from the other side of the debate appears to be that any "artificial manipulation" of the search results is dishonest, including link building. I can't say this absolutely, as the other person refused to answer my questions in order for me to have a completely clear understanding of their point of view. However, it certainly appeared that this person felt anything even remotely appearing to violate Google's Webmaster Guidelines is morally wrong.

I've heard this argument before, and I disagree with it for a number of reasons.

Problem #1: Defining "the rules"

First of all, in order for something to be unethical, you have to have a consistent set of standards by which to judge the action. To make this clear, let's use an unethical act that I think everyone will agree on: theft.

Theft is defined at Dictionary.com as "the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny." Simply put, if somebody has something that does not belong to you, and you take it without permission, it's theft. I don't think there are many people who would disagree with that.

Let's contrast that with link building, using Google's Webmaster Guidelines as our "rules." Here's what Google suggestions you do in terms of building links:

1. Have other relevant sites link to yours.
2. Make sure all the sites that should know about your pages are aware your site is online.
3. Submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!, as well as to other industry-specific expert sites.

Notice how vague these guidelines are. Let's go through them one at a time.

1. Have other relevant sites link to yours.

Okay, the problem here is the lack of definition of what constitutes a relevant site. For some, it would mean only sites that are based on the same subject matter. That is, if you have a site that is generally about arthritis pain relief, they feel you should only get links from arthritis-related sites.

The problem with that point of view is that it fails to take into account the vast range of subjects that fall into that category. For instance, as was shown in a previous blog post, such diverse subjects such as swimming, cycling, weight loss, vitamins, different types of fat, comfortable furniture, etc. can all be related to arthritis pain relief. So is it okay to get links from weight loss sites or furniture sites to your arthritis pain relief site? Given the lack of specifics, that can only be labeled a personal question, not an ethical one.

2. Make sure all the sites that should know about your pages are aware your site is online.

Again, vagueness is the culprit here. Frankly, since I know that links from other sites are what rank my sites in Google, I'd like every site to know that mine is online! That means getting links from as many sites, in as many categories as possible. Without a better definition of what Google means, it's impossible for everyone to share the same viewpoint of this recommendation.

3. Submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!, as well as to other industry-specific expert sites.

The same problems that exist with #1 and #2 exist with #3. What defines "relevant"? What defines "industry-specific expert sites"? From what we're given by Google, it's left for us to decide.

So, in contrast with the pretty straightforward unethical act of theft, link building can hardly be considered an indisputable breach of ethics. Now, it certainly can be relegated to a decision of one's conscience. If a person doesn't feel that building links would be right, they certainly have the option of not doing so — and I don't advocate doing anything that doesn't sit well with your inner radar. However, to claim that others are dishonest or unethical because of link building would not be appropriate, because the standards put in front of us leave a huge amount of leeway for interpretation.

This is true in many aspects of our everyday life, too. For example, we've all been taught that we should be "kind" to people, and most would agree that we should. But to what degree, and in what situations is left up to our own conscience to decide. In the end I believe we will find out whether or not we did what was right from a higher authority, but to try and group building links to your website into a great moral or ethical issue is nonsense in my opinion.

Problem #2: "The rules" aren't rules!

The second big problem in the "unethical linking" argument is that the "rules" everyone refers to aren't rules, and Google never calls them rules. They are referred to as "guidelines." Guidelines are generally much looser in their approach then rules.

For instance, "the speed limit is 30 m.p.h." is a rule. However, "you need to drive slowly" is a guideline which relies on your own personal view of what "slowly" means. There is a point at which virtually everyone would agree that another person is not driving "slowly" in a given situation, but there's also a lot of gray area where people would disagree.

Google can't call their guidelines rules because they are intentionally vague. Google seems to feel that creating too strict a set of rules would give away too much information about how their algorithm works, and so they make vague statements bordering on being almost useless.

Problem #3: I can design my website any way I want to.

The third problem with the "unethical linking" argument is that it fails to accept the fact that, as a webmaster, I have the right to design my site any way I see fit. Just as taking an object out of my house can't be considered stealing (since I own the object), the act of adding links to my site to whatever other sites I choose cannot be considered unethical.

This third point is really where the "unethical" argument breaks down. After all, as webmasters we have not entered into any kind of agreement with Google. We have not agreed to abide by their guidelines. We have signed no contracts. Google has not requested our permission to crawl and index our sites, and they do not give us any kind of compensation for the act of doing so. What Google does, Google does of its own accord and without permission.

Granted, it's in our best interest to be indexed and rank well in Google, so we want to try and do what we can to that end, but they have not asked our permission and give us no direct compensation for using our content.

So if a group of webmasters setup their sites in a way that they know will help them rank well in Google, and Google crawls those sites, counts those links and ranks those pages, can that be defined as unethical? Google has made the choice to index and rank the sites. They don't have to do so, and if they change their minds about it, they can always remove sites they feel should not be in their index.

I see services such as 3WayLinks.net like a farmer's co-op. In a farmer's co-op, a group of farmers join forces to be able to have more buying power and get cheaper rates for equipment and supplies. It's in a smaller farmer's best interests to join so that they can compete with the "big dogs" of their industry and not be priced out of the market.

My linking service serves the same purpose. The "big dogs" of the web can afford to get huge numbers of links aimed at their sites through a variety of means (some Google sanctioned, some not). 3WayLinks.net is a "linking co-op", where the smaller guys can join forces to help each other compete with the larger sites. You may or may not agree, but that's how I see it and why I created it.

Problem #4: We have no relationship with Google.

A webmaster's relationship with Google cannot be equated to a user's relationship with a site for which they have an account. When you create an account with an interactive site, you usually agree to their terms of service, and so any actions you take interacting with that site must abide by those terms. Thus, when MySpace sued a spammer, they won, because the spammer had violated the terms they agreed to.

However, we've never "created an account" with Google. We never invited Google to our site. They just assume you want them there (and who doesn't?) and so they crawl and index the site. But if our site is doing something Google doesn't like, we have not violated any kind of agreement, and they have no right to take any legal action.

From my perspective, all search engine optimization is a risk/reward scenario. You have to be smart about how you interpret Google's guidelines, because they certainly have the right to remove your site if you're doing something they don't like. But as the owner of the site, you have the right to create it and link to it in any way you see fit (as long as you have permission to put links where you are putting them — more on that in a bit).

Problem #5: What are the real "rules" anyway?

Also, I don't think that Google's Webmaster Guidelines are what define the real "rules" of Google. They can't, because they're far too vague. The real definition of the rules is Google's algorithm. The problem with these "rules" is that they are constantly changing as the Google team modifies that algorithm. So what works well today may not work well tomorrow. That's why it's so important to diversify your search engine optimization and link building methods, which will help insulate you from future changes that are sure to come.

I can't tell you how many threads on webmaster forums I've read where people are crying that they "did everything right" and Google obliterated their rankings in a major update. So is it really Google's Webmaster Guidelines that sets the rules, or is it their algorithm?

This behavior on Google's part has lead some to abandon the "white hat" theory of search engine optimization all together. Personally, I don't wear hats. Let me tell you why.

I don't wear hats: white, gray or black.

You've probably heard of the three "hats" of search engine optimization. They are generally thought of like so:

1. White Hat - You do everything Google recommends in their guidelines.
2. Gray Hat - You don't do what Google recommends, but you don't misuse other people's web sites for your own gain.
3. Black Hat - You don't do what Google recommends, and you don't mind misusing other people's web sites for your own gain.

The "white hat" is a fantasy, some great ideal held up before people that doesn't exist. How can there be a true "white hat" when Google does not give specifics in their guidelines, and does not publish their algorithm? Also, since Google's algorithm is always changing, today's "white hat" is tomorrow's "unacceptable practice." To make matters worse, since we have no specific rules from Google, all webmasters have to go based on their own interpretation of Google's vague guidelines, so at best the hat is "light gray."

I don't like the label "gray hat" either, though, since that assumes that you are doing something "sorta" wrong by ignoring Google's guidelines, but you're not. You have the right to build your site any way you want. Of course, Google has the right to penalize or remove your site from their search results, but that's a quality decision, not a moral judgment.

I do, however, believe in the "black hat" label. Using other people's web properties without their knowledge or consent for your own selfish gain is very unethical in my mind. An example of this is blog comment spam. Stuffing thousands of comments into unsuspecting blogs in the hope that you can get some back links from those comments when you've never even read the blog posts is unethical to me, and I would never engage in such a practice. So I don't wear that hat either.

The difference between using an unsuspecting blog for comment spam, and designing a site to rank well in Google, is that Google comes to you. Google crawls and indexes your site of their own volition. The blog owner does not come to you and ask that you put comments on their blog for the sole purpose of your personal gain. Google, on the other hand, wants your content and indexes it accordingly. One similarity between the two, though, is that the blog owner can make the decision to delete a comment they feel is inappropriate for their blog, and Google, too, has the right to remove sites it feels are not of the quality they want in their index.

The Bottom Line: It's your decision.

I don't believe in the mantra, "it's not personal, it's business." I strongly believe that your personal ethics and beliefs should very much effect every aspect of your life, including your business. That said, there are situations that are simply business decisions. There are risk/reward decisions that every business has to make. "Will this advertisement help me make sales, or hurt my image?" Those kinds of decisions have to be made all the time, and there are good and bad consequences associated with those decisions.

To me, as long as you're not doing anything that steals links or content from other web sites, search engine optimization is a risk/reward decision, not an ethical one. "Will this hurt my rankings in Google, or will it help it?" There's always risk involved.

Google used to love reciprocal links, and so people got reciprocal links. Then Google changed their minds and decided one-way links were more valuable, and a lot of those reciprocally linking sites fell out of the rankings. Was Google right in their determination that one-way links are better than reciprocal? It doesn't matter, because it wasn't an ethical decision on their part — it was a business decision, and they had the right to make that decision.

Were the owners of those sites who linked to each other reciprocally "unethical"? My opinion is No, because it wasn't an ethical decision on the part of the site owners either, but a business decision which they had the right to make.

What about being a part of the very successful 3WayLinks network, or writing articles for backlinks, or creating blogs and posting to them for linking purposes, or posting to social bookmarking sites for the purpose of traffic and links? Are those actions "unethical"?

The real question is, "What do YOU think?" Please post your thoughts and comments below.

On May 23rd I wrote a blog post that should have completely destroyed the myth that you can't rank duplicate content. You can.

My new blog post sharing site, ShareAPost.com has proven that duplicate content ranks well. The entire site is made up of 100% duplicate content: snippets of other people's blog posts that users can republish on their own blogs.

Just in case anyone still has any doubts about whether Google will send traffic to pages made up of duplicate content, here is the ShareAPost.com search engine traffic from May 19th to June 26th:

May

June

Almost 2,400 visitors from a variety of search engines (mostly Google) in just over one month's time — all generated from duplicate content. Syndication has been a standard in offline and online publishing for many years. There's no reason Google should ignore content just because it's been syndicated. As the above numbers show, Google does not ignore it at all!

As I've said before, I strongly advise going to ShareAPost.com and finding some quality posts to republish on your own blogs. Some of that Google love could be going to your syndicated pages, too.

Also, see my previous post on the subject for a cool trick to turn duplicate content into "unique" pages in Google's eyes.

Please post your thoughts and comments below.

I hate to exercise. I really do. I feel good afterward, and I'm definitely getting in better shape because of it, but I hate it. It's a real chore for me. What do my exercise habits have to do with finding motivation in your business? Hang with me for a bit and it will all make sense. It may even be enlightening.

My son is going to be born in late July, and I knew I'd have to be in better shape to chase him around and prevent him from hurting himself. I know this is going to happen because he's my son, and I was a hand full. That's strong motivation to get in shape, right? Sure it is, but that didn't make it easy.

I'd get on the treadmill bound and determined to walk for 30 minutes, and I'd find myself getting bored out of my mind and irritated with the soreness in my muscles 15 minutes into it. Half the time I would just give up, and the other half was so aggravating that I vowed never to do it again. Of course, my motivation was strong, and so I'd try again the next day.

Then my family and I went to the movies to see The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian. I had read the Narnia series of books in the past, and the movie rekindled my interest in the series. So I got the full series of unabridged books for my iPod. But I'm a busy guy, and so I didn't have time to listen to them.

Lightbulb! I had 30 minutes a day of mind-numbing boredom to fill, so I started listening to the series while walking on the treadmill. I love the Narnia stories, and I get so wrapped up in listening to them while walking that I stop staring at the timer wishing it would move faster. In fact, now I often find myself not wanting to get off the treadmill because I'm in the middle of a good part! By coupling something I love to do with something I abhor, it made the task much easier to deal with. I'm very happy with the results in my energy level, as well as being able to listen to the stories I enjoy so much.

Let's face it: a successful business is rarely made up of only tasks that we love to do. There's always some real chores that are absolutely necessary. Why not apply the above lesson to your business-related tasks as well?

If you're working on something that you really don't like to do, break it up so you don't have to do it all at once. Put something in between that you love to do as a reward for your doing the dreaded task. That way you'll have something to look forward to. You'll have the needed motivation.

For instance, let's say you love to write articles, but hate to go through the drudgery of submitting them to the article sites. If that's the case, try writing an article and then immediately submitting it to the article sites, knowing that when you're done you can go write another article. If you wait until you have 20 articles written and then have to submit them all at once, the sheer magnitude of the chore will make it unbearable. But one at a time isn't so bad, is it?

Here's a personal example: I love to write code, but I get a lot less joy out of answering support requests. I have a fantastic support person now (Amin Motin), but there are usually some support requests each day that I need to handle personally. I make it a point to answer those tickets first, knowing that when it's done I can reward myself with what I love to do: write code. That gives me the needed incentive.

You probably do this kind of thing all the time in your daily life. It's just a matter of applying that same "reward yourself" principle to your business.

Here's a personal example of how I do this in day-to-day life: I'm not a fan of vegetables. I'm a meat and potatoes kind of guy. But I also want to be healthy. So I always eat my veggies first. When they're out of the way and I can move on to the slab of steak or fried shrimp that I really love and still feel good about having eaten the healthy stuff.

I'd be much less inclined to eat those awful veggies after having already downed all of those delicious, golden brown stuffed shrimp from PappaDeaux's. There's a reason we teach our children to eat their food before dessert! Not only is the food more nutritious, but who wants to eat veggies after a wonderful slice of apple pie?

The same applies to your business. Get the tasks you consider chores out of the way first, that way you can concentrate on the aspects of your business that you love to do. If the dreaded tasks are very time consuming, then break them up into chunks. For instance, if you find writing a chore, but you love the challenge of link building, then create some content when you first start working and then focus on your link building for a while. After you feel great about your link building efforts, go back to writing for a bit.

Failure to get through the drudgery and then reward yourself with the "fun stuff" can result in deadlock. If you do the fun stuff first, then you've already "had your dessert (or fried shrimp!)" so the mere thought of tackling the other tasks is loathsome and you'll find every excuse possible to put it off until later. Take it a little bit at a time, followed by an enjoyable activity, and you'll be amazed at what you've accomplished at the end of the day.

Please post your thoughts in a comment below.

Depending on whose figures you're looking at, in the USA, 90% of all new small businesses will fail in their first 5 to 10 years. My personal experience with folks who are trying to "make it" online is that the failure rate is higher and faster. Why? Because when things don't go as planned many just give up and decide that they are unable to succeed on their own.

Is there a true key to success in running a business online? Yes, there is, and it's largely psychological.

My wife and I were browsing a local mall recently, as we occasionally do to get out of the house and do something fun. I'm not a shopper — I hate shopping — but I love bookstores, so I always make it a point to stop at the Borders bookstore when we go. My wife calls me a dork for doing it, but after checking for any new John Grisham novels I always head to the Science section.

This last time I found a fascinating book called The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives, by Leonard Mlodinow. I love numbers, though I'm no mathematician, and this book is quite readable even if you cringe in fear when you hear the words "algebra" or "calculus."

The book discusses, in part, how the laws of randomness are at the heart of many successes that are often attributed to one person's abilities. To quote Mlodinow, "We all understand that genius doesn't guarantee success, but it's seductive to assume that success must come from genius."

Well if genius doesn't guarantee success, then what does?

Citing a 2005 Psychology Today article, Mlodinow later states that "psychologists have found that the ability to persist in the face of obstacles is at least as important a factor in success as talent."

Persistence is incredibly important when you're working for yourself. When you have a job, if there's a problem, you go to a manager or boss to help you solve the problem. When you're working for yourself, you have to take the initiative to fix the problem on your own. When you have a job, you earn a steady paycheck that you don't have to create. When you're working for yourself, it's up to you to ensure that you have enough work in the pipeline to keep the bills paid. There is a lot more stress and headache involved in being your own boss, especially in the formative years of your business.

Even if you're a super genius gifted with incredible talent, you're going to run into a lot of problems running a business. If you don't have the ability to persist in the face of those obstacles, you're going to fail, no matter how bright or talented you are.

This is particularly true in the online world. Many seem to believe that running a business online should be easy — but it's not. Doing business online typically does provide a greater level of flexibility and freedom, but it still requires a whole lot of good ol' fashioned (dare I say the four letter word?) work. This unexpected realization coupled with a lack of tenacity can quickly result in disillusionment and despondency.

Do people really believe that running a business online is easy? If you want evidence of this fallacious belief just look at all of the get rich quick schemes available online. Look at the top sellers in the ClickBank marketplace (especially the top Business to Business products). People promising riches for doing easy work like filling out surveys. "Common" sense should tell you that if it was that easy everyone would already be doing it, and yet these products continue to rake in money from countless people trying to chase the dream of self-employment.

The flip side of this psychological coin is that, even if you're just an "average Joe (or Jane)", with persistence and dedication you can succeed. Whether you've got a unique new idea of you're own or you're just replicating a successful method you've learned from some brilliant person, it's the persistence that's going to pay off for you.

Personally, it has taken me a few years of solid dedication, hard work, dozens of failures, sleepless nights, endless worry and loads of stress to get me to where I am now. And where is that?

I'm now at the point where I can spend 50-60 hours a month doing what really matters in life: volunteer work. Yes, I still work a lot (it's in my nature), but I can take my daughter to the arcade mid-morning on a weekday when we practically have the whole place to ourselves, and I can take several trips a year with my family without constantly worrying about my business because I have a fantastic support staff, and when my son is born in late July I won't have to ask anybody for time off to get to know him.

It is a dream, and it's one worth working hard for. Stick to it, keep trying despite obstacles and failures, and you'll get there, too (if you're not there already).

Let me close with a statement from Mlodinow's book that I particularly enjoyed: "It might seem daunting to think that effort and chance, as much as innate talent, are what counts. But I find it encouraging because, while our genetic makeup is out of our control, our degree of effort is up to us. And the effects of chance, too, can be controlled to the extent that by committing ourselves to repeated attempts, we can increase our odds of success."

Please post your thoughts in a comment below.