Keep in mind that these strategies aren't in any particular order. Also, keep in mind that though it isn't always stated explicitly, we're always referring to "related" and "important" or "authoritative" sites as our targets.

Start with Basics:

Before you begin link seeking, you might want to read article, "A Linking-Campaign Primer": http://www.ericward.com/articles/primer.html. (Eric Ward, President, NetPOST and URLwire) (http://www.ericward.com)

This is by far oldest and best-known method of improving link popularity. Basically you e-mail or contact Webmaster of a site that is complementary but generally not competitive to your own. You ask them to link to your site while outlining benefits of doing so. You would generally offer to link back to them in exchange for this courtesy. Be sure you have developed genuine content on your Web site of interest to trading partner. Explain advantages to them and to their visitors by providing a link to your content. Tell them where link on your site will be or set link up in advance with stipulation that you'll be glad to leave it there if they'll add a link to you in kind. Take time to look over their site and then suggest where a link to you might be appropriate. Most importantly, personalize your e-mails! You must distinguish yourself from all spam they receive daily. If link is particularly important to you, call them personally or write them a letter or send a fax to show them you're serious. (Brent Winters with First Place Software)(http://www.webposition.com)

(To view rest of article, which is over 12,000 words long, visit: http://www.searchengineworkshops.com/articles/leglinkpop.html If you'd like to download article in an ebook format, visit: http://www.searchengineworkshops.com/131LinkPop.html The article is also available in text format as an attachment to email by writing to RobinN@acws.com.

This article was compiled by Robin Nobles, Eric Ward, and John Alexander. The following people contributed tips to article, and we greatly thank them for their contributions and help. Their companies and URL's are listed in HTML, text, and ebook versions of article.

Mike Adams, John Alexander, Michael Campbell, Chris Churchill, Terry Dean, Elbert Flores, Chris Genge, Bill Gentry, Ron Gotcher, Don Hammond, Detlev Johnson, Dixon Jones, Jon Keel, Barbara Coll, Stephen Mahaney, Nancy Nelson, Robin Nobles, David Notestine, Susan O'Neil, Debra Paynter, Terry Plank, Rocky Rawstern, Gil Sery, Chris Sherman, Judith Silver, Marshall Simmonds, Scott Smith, Danny Sullivan, Becky Thompson, Eric Ward, Carl Watney, Steve Wilson, Brent Winters, and Gary Woods.

A special thanks to Butch Pujol and Heather Colman of Digital Page Author Software and Service (http://www.digital-page-author- software.com) for creating wonderful e-book for us.

Copyright 2002 Robin Nobles. All rights reserved.

Not surprisingly, search engines have been reduced to lumping all SEO's into "untrustworthy" basket. On their Webmaster Do's and Don'ts page (http://www.google.com/webmasters/dos.html), Google state: "Be very careful about allowing an individual consultant or company to 'optimize' your web site. Chances are they will engage in some of our "Don'ts" and end up hurting your site". Chances are? Sounds a bit presumptuous if you ask me. Likewise, at a recent search engine conference, a representative from AltaVista declared that "all SEO's could be described using four letter words". The typical Internet user can only come to conclusion that, according to some very reliable sources, SEO's are not to be trusted - now how fair is that?

So main problem is - how do we address this reputation issue? Do we establish and agree on a standard Code of Practise as in development on sites such as World Association of Internet Marketers (http://www.waim.org/ethics.html), SEO Consultants (http://www.seoconsultants.com/seo-code-of-ethics.htm) and SEO Pros (http://www.seopros.org/members/practices.htm)? Do we race around locating and reporting search engine spam in hope of improving our reputation in eyes of search engines? Or do we simply follow our own set of standards and hope potential clients can come to their own untainted conclusions? Personally I'm looking forward to day when I no longer detect immediate suspicion when I tell people I optimize web sites for a living.