Central Perk

miercuri, 5 februarie 2014

First Lady Michelle Obama: "I'm First"

Featured

First Lady Michelle Obama: "I'm First"

Today, we are releasing a special video message from the First Lady in which she talks about being the first in her family to attend college. This video is part of the “I’m First” storytelling project, which lifts up the stories of first-generation college students in order to inspire future generations.

As the First Lady says in her video, “no matter where you come from or how much money your family has, I want you to know that you can succeed in college, and get your degree, and then go on to build an incredible life for yourself.”

Watch the First Lady share her experience as a first-generation college student:

Getting Link Removals Wrong

Posted: 04 Feb 2014 03:15 PM PST

Posted by dohertyjf

Ever since Penguin launched in 2012, SEOs who for years had built less than savory links, or companies who for years had ridden off the coat tails of these links, started to ask for links to be removed. I've heard many of my friends, like Wil Reynolds, repeatedly poo-poo it from the stage (Wil did it during his now famous "Real Company Shit" talk at Mozcon in 2012).

As someone who has overseen link removal campaigns for clients when I was at Distilled, I am not down on link removals. They have a place, and I've seen positive effects from cutting out large chunks of really bad links (porn, pills, poker, you name it). But, I also believe there are good and bad ways to remove links, and I want to make an example here.

In the aftermath of Matt Cutts coming out and warning people off from manipulative guest posting (something all of us have seen and grown more and more tired of in the past few years), I think a voice of reason is needed to stop companies from doing more harm than good to themselves. Youâ€™ll see an example of an email I received a few weeks ago, the day after Matt came out with his proclamation, but letâ€™s cover some basics first before we get into conjecture.

Why remove links?

I'm not going to give a full diatribe on why you might want to remove links pointing into your website, as that is not the point of this article. But, here are some reasons why you may want to remove links -

You aggressively obtained exact match anchor text back on 2008/2009/2010;
Your organic traffic dropped for specific keywords (or rankings plummeted and did not recover) on or around the days we know Penguin rolled out (Algo History here)
You're being proactive because you see that Google is increasingly lowering the barrier to classifying something as spam and you do not want to be caught out in the cold when the hammer drops

That's a quick overview of link removal, and by no means complete. This one is.

The guest posting fiasco

For years now, as old tactics have quit being as effective (though many still work when done as part of a full and balanced campaign), many "SEO" companies turned to guest posting as a way of getting links.

Many have done it well. They've built great relationships with sites that have a relevant audience to them, have driven traffic back to their site, and yes, built a link or two. But notice the order - first comes the business purpose (customers, traffic) and tertiary is links.

Many other companies have tried to "scale" link building via guest posting, yet as we all know when you begin to scale something the first to go out the window is quality. And when you have your boss or client breathing down your neck to lower the cost per link (which is not the metric to base quality on, but money is important to keep an eye on), the temptation to outsource outreach or writing becomes very appealing. Thatâ€™s why weâ€™ve ended up with this:

When Matt dropped the hammer a few weeks ago, many companies freaked out and started getting their guest post links removed, exact anchors and all. To me, this is stupid on many many levels, such as -

If you wrote the content on a quality site, you should want credit in the form of a link, Google be damned;
If you are requesting removal and the person is nice enough to remove the anchor text link, thank them instead of also asking that the branded link be removed too.
Only manipulative posts are being targeted, and in my opinion if you been accepting bad poets just to get content on your site, you deserve to have your site disavowed.

Removal Automation

I'm in favor of automating what you can when it makes sense. Collecting data, smart algorithms to surface content via internal links, and the like are all examples of something that can and should be automated.

When we talk about link removal, I'm all in favor of automating the initial data gathering of sites linking to your page(s) that have been affected. This is where the automation stops though, because a machine will never be as good as a human pair of eyes. We're not just removing links from low authority (from a strictly SEO domain or page authority perspective) sites, but from irrelevant sites where you placed a link just to get a link.

Outreach should be personal. When you automate the gathering of pages to request your link be removed from, any SEO worth their salt will immediately see this. Here is a list of pages on HotPads that a site (redacted) asked that I remove links from (with an admission that they believe themselves to be negatively affected by a manipulative links penalty, which SEMrush seems to indicate as well):

The problem here is that, as you can see, many of these are archive and category pages. They only have links on the actual guest post (and I was nice enough to remove the exact anchor. I left the branded link), but sent me this laundry list because they got it straight from OpenSiteExplorer or MajesticSeo, I'm sure.

The other area you can automate is checking to see if links are still live, then manually qualifying if they should be or not. Many of the removal tools do this, or you can upload a list of pages to Scrapebox and see if the links are still there.

I know link qualification is a tedious process (Iâ€™ve looked at tens of thousands of links to qualify them as good/bad in my career), but putting a human touch onto your work will long-term benefit you, I believe.

What if my site is disavowed?

Here's a question I've heard posed a few times:

"But won't my site get disavowed if I don't remove the link? Will my site suffer if I am disavowed?"

No one has studied this yet, mostly because you cannot know if your site has been disavowed or not. I have to believe that Google can tell semi-algorithmically if a site is being used for manipulative linking or not. With how long it takes for a disavow file to seem to take effect, I believe that disavow lists are manually looked at, and a site may be whitelisted if it is disavowed, but judged to not be manipulative.

So no, I don't worry about my site being disavowed. If shady work was done in the past, then clean it up. If your site is clean, carry on.

Conclusion

I hope this has given you some food for thought before removing links or starting the process. It's a tricky business and can be quite effective when done well, but can cause more harm if done poorly. Proceed with caution.

Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!

Seth's Blog : "Oh sure, I studied with him at Harvard"

"Oh sure, I studied with him at Harvard"

"Actually, I read his book when it was in galleys...

I bought it when it came out in paperback...

I have it but never actually read it...

I read a few blog posts he wrote about it...

I scanned the reviews, did you see the one that really excoriated him?

I followed a link on Facebook...

I read a tweet about it.

...Who?"

What level of exposure counts as actually knowing?

For me, doing is at the core of it. If you've done something with what you've learned, then maybe you know it.

• Email to a friend •

marți, 4 februarie 2014

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Obamacare Creates Incentive to Work Less; CBO Estimates Obamacare Will Cost 2 Million Full-Time Equivalent Jobs by 2017
Treasury Debate: Gundlach (Bull) vs. Rosenberg (Bear); Price Inflation on Hold; What About Gold?
Controversy in Detroit: What's a Fair Settlement of Bondholder and Pension Obligation Claims?

Obamacare Creates Incentive to Work Less; CBO Estimates Obamacare Will Cost 2 Million Full-Time Equivalent Jobs by 2017

Posted: 04 Feb 2014 02:11 PM PST

MarketWatch reports Obamacare plans to exceed $1 trillion, create reluctant workers.

The CBO projects that insurance subsidies and related spending will account for increasing chunks of deficit spending, starting at $20 billion this year and steadily increasing to $159 billion in 2024, for a collective cost of just under $1.2 trillion. The cumulative total from the ACA for the next decade could reach $1.35 trillion.

In several charts in its report, the CBO calls these "effects on the cumulative federal deficit." But in footnotes and other portions of the 175-page report, the CBO points out there are other sources of revenue generated under the ACA that are expected to make it deficit neutral.

Labor Market Effects of the Affordable Care Act

Inquiring minds are also in interested in labor force projections. For that let's dive into the massive 182 page PDF CBO Budget and Economic Outlook 2014 to 2024 report.

Incentive to Work Less

On PDF page 44 (Report page 38) a curious footnote reads "By providing subsidies that decline with rising income (and increase with falling income) and by making some people financially better off, the ACA will create an incentive for some people to work less."

A detailed explanation is found in Appendix C on PDF page 123.

How Much Will the ACA Reduce Employment in the Longer Term?

The ACA's largest impact on labor markets will probably occur after 2016, once its major provisions have taken full effect and overall economic output nears its maximum sustainable level. CBO estimates that the ACA will reduce the total number of hours worked, on net, by about 1.5 percent to 2.0 percent during the period from 2017 to 2024, almost entirely because workers will choose to supply less labor — given the new taxes and other incentives they will face and the financial benefits some will receive. Because the largest declines in labor supply will probably occur among lower-wage workers, the reduction in aggregate compensation (wages, salaries, and fringe benefits) and the impact on the overall economy will be proportionally smaller than the reduction in hours worked. Specifically, CBO estimates that the ACA will cause a reduction of roughly 1 percent in aggregate labor compensation over the 2017–2024 period, compared with what it would have been otherwise. Although such effects are likely to continue after 2024 (the end of the current 10-year budget window), CBO has not estimated their magnitude or duration over a longer period.

The reduction in CBO's projections of hours worked represents a decline in the number of full-time-equivalent workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about 2.5 million in 2024. Although CBO projects that total employment (and compensation) will increase over the coming decade, that increase will be smaller than it would have been in the absence of the ACA. The decline in full-time-equivalent employment stemming from the ACA will consist of some people not being employed at all and other people working fewer hours.

Why Does CBO Estimate Larger Reductions Than It Did in 2010?

In 2010, CBO estimated that the ACA, on net, would reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by roughly half a percent—primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply. 2 That measure of labor use was calculated in dollar terms, representing the approximate change in aggregate labor compensation that would result. Hence, that estimate can be compared with the roughly 1 percent reduction in aggregate compensation that CBO now estimates to result from the act. There are several reasons for that difference: CBO has now incorporated into its analysis additional channels through which the ACA will affect labor supply, reviewed new research about those effects, and revised upward its estimates of the responsiveness of labor supply to changes in tax rates.

Don't worry. This won't cost 2 million jobs, only 2 million equivalent full-time jobs. Perhaps a many as 6 million work fewer hours each week. The CBO did not estimate the breakdown.

Regardless, that cannot possibly happen, can it? Didn't Obama claim ACA would create jobs? Hmm. What else did he promise?

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Treasury Debate: Gundlach (Bull) vs. Rosenberg (Bear); Price Inflation on Hold; What About Gold?

Posted: 04 Feb 2014 12:11 PM PST

I happen to like 10-year US treasuries here, and have since rates got near 3%. I believe job growth is way overstated due to double-counting of part-time jobs, the global economy is slowing more than economists expect, and the US economy is slowing more than economists expect.

Betting Against Treasuries a Fool's Game?

Jeffrey Gundlach CEO of DoubleLine Capital goes even further. Gundlatch claims Betting Against Treasuries a Fool's Game.

The market was "entering 2014 struck by a greater consensus entering any year that I can remember, that the dollar has to do well, gold is for losers and bond yields will rise," said Jeffrey Gundlach, chief executive officer of DoubleLine Capital, which manages $49 billion. "Things were so lopsided in terms of that positioning. That was late in that way of thinking."

The amount of bets against 10-year Treasuries by hedge funds and other large speculators shrunk to as low as 58,000 contracts last month from a 19-month high of about 189,000 in November, data from the Commodities Futures Trading Association show.

Mr. Gundlach predicts yields will fall in 2014, with demand rising from investors such as banks seeking high-quality collateral to meet new regulatory requirements and as a haven for others from political and economic turbulence in nations ranging from Turkey to Argentina.

Gundlach (Bull) vs. Rosenberg (Bear)

One long-time bond bull recently turned bearish, and he sees no reason to change course. Yields will reverse and end the year at 3.5% to 3.75% as the economy improves, according to David Rosenberg, the chief economist at Gluskin Sheff & Associates.

"The economy is on a moderate accelerating trend," Mr. Rosenberg said. "We're coming out of a flight to quality on emerging markets. This is a blip rather than a long-term trend. The yield decline is temporary."

Will the US Economy Accelerate?

David Rosenberg thinks the economy is going to accelerate. If the economy does accelerate, the Fed will increase tapering, not reduce it.

Looking for another opinion?

Marc Faber Bullish on Treasuries and Gold

Taken from a Barron's roundtable discussion, ZeroHedge reports Marc Faber Warns "Insiders Are Selling Like Crazy... Short US Stocks, Buy Treasuries Gold".

Faber: What I recommend to clients and what I do with my own portfolio aren't always the same. That said, my first recommendation is to short the Russell 2000. You can use the iShares Russell 2000 exchange-traded fund [IWM]. Small stocks have outperformed large stocks significantly in the past few years.

Next, I would buy 10-year Treasury notes, because I don't believe in this magnificent U.S. economic recovery. The U.S. is going to turn down, and bond yields are going to fall. Abby just gave me a good idea. She is long the iShares MSCI Mexico Capped ETF, so I will go short.

Q: What are you doing with your own money?

Faber: I have a lot of cash, and I bought Treasury bonds. ... I have no faith in paper money, period. Insider buying is also high in gold shares. Gold has massively underperformed relative to the S&P 500 and the Russell 2000. Maybe the price will go down some from here, but individual investors and my fellow panelists and Barron's editors ought to own some gold. About 20% of my net worth is in gold. I don't even value it in my portfolio. What goes down, I don't value.

Curious Position

US treasuries are a curious position for someone frequently in the hyperinflation camp, which brings up this humorous conversation from Barron's.

Faber: I recommend the Market Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF [GDXJ], although I don't own it. I own physical gold because the old system will implode. Those who own paper assets are doomed.

Zulauf: Can you put the time frame on the implosion? Faber: Let's enjoy dinner tonight. Maybe it will happen tomorrow.

Price Inflation on Hold

If the economy implodes (or even modestly declines) US Treasuries will benefit. Even a frequent hyperinflationist and firm disbeliever in paper assets gets it!

Here's my claim: Deflation Will Return: Europe First, Then US

Strong consumer price inflation, is on hold for a long time. US hyperinflation in this environment is next to impossible.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Controversy in Detroit: What's a Fair Settlement of Bondholder and Pension Obligation Claims?

Posted: 04 Feb 2014 09:49 AM PST

A huge battle between pensioners and bondholders is on. Last week, a Bond rating agency blasted Governor Rick Snyder's $350-million Detroit pension rescue plan as being too favorable to creditors at the expense of bondholders.

Today, the New York Times reports Detroit Turns Bankruptcy Into Challenge of Banks.

Amy Laskey,a managing director at Fitch Ratings, said in a recent report that she sensed an "us versus them" orientation toward debt repayment. And in the view of bondholders, bond insurers and other financial institutions, it only grew worse last week after the city circulated its plan to emerge from bankruptcy and filed a lawsuit on Friday.

The suit, brought by the city's emergency manager, Kevyn D. Orr, seeks to invalidate complex transactions that helped finance Detroit's pension system in 2005. In a not-so-veiled criticism, the city said the deal was done "at the prompting of investment banks that would profit handsomely from the transaction."

Of even greater concern to creditors is the city's 99-page "plan of adjustment," the all-important document that details how Detroit proposes to resolve its bankruptcy and finance its operations in the future. Banks, bond insurers and other corporate creditors think they are being asked to share a disproportionate amount of pain under the plan, still in draft form and not yet filed with the bankruptcy court.

"The essential issue is the near-total wipeout of the bondholders," said Matt Fabian, a managing director of Municipal Market Advisors. He said Detroit's case appeared to be heading toward a "cramdown," or court-ordered infliction of losses on unwilling creditors.

The plan calls for the city to give pensioners up to 50 cents on the dollar for their claims, while other unsecured creditors, like those that bought Detroit's general-obligation bonds, would end up with about 20 cents on the dollar. The pensioners' claims would be paid with cash, while general-obligation bondholders would receive notes that Detroit proposes to issue.

The debt that raised $1.4 billion for the city pension system in 2005 would suffer bigger losses still. The plan of adjustment does not accept the entire $1.4 billion as a valid claim, only about half of it. So the investors who bought that debt, called "certificates of participation," often called COPs, would end up with about 10 cents on the dollar. It would come in the form of a different series of notes, which has lags built into the payment schedules.

What's a Fair Settlement?

Last summer, Gov. Rick Snyder of Michigan said the intent was to "determine the best path forward that respects, and is fair to, pensioners and all parties."

In bankruptcy, the court has an obligation of fairness. However, it's not unprecedented for judges to take one side or another. Until now, the article claims "municipal bondholders have not had losses of principal forced on them by a court."

Here is a key point: Both the pension obligations and bondholder debt are unsecured debt.

Why not treat both pensioners and bondholders equally? The proposal currently on the table is for pensions to get 50 cents on the dollar (a 50% haircut) and bondholders 20 cents on the dollar (an 80% haircut).

I have a simple proposal. Give everyone 35 cents on the dollar (a 65% haircut). Neither side would be happy, but the ruling would be fair.

I also recommend the court trash the city's defined benefit plan entirely, or Detroit will be back in bankruptcy in a number of years.

Finally, if bondholders do not think they got a fair shake, they will demand higher interest rates going forward. Regardless of what the judge decides, the Detroit bankruptcy settlement will affect municipal bond interest rates going forward, not just in Michigan, but nationally.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Damn Cool Pics

Things They Only Sell At Chinese Walmarts
Night Club Girls of South Korea
42 Biggest Travel Don’ts Around The World [Infographic]

Things They Only Sell At Chinese Walmarts

Posted: 04 Feb 2014 02:20 PM PST

You can buy all these things at Wal-Marts in China.

Crocodiles (ready for roasting, it seems)

Bulk rice

Mixed mystery meats

Orange juice and cooking oil combos

Frogs 'n turtles

Bulk, Wal-Mart brand liquor

Cheap ribs

Dried reptile parts

Boxes of liquor

More frogs

More chopsticks than you could ever imagine

Ducks

"Great Value" beef granules (that look like candy?)

Pig faces

Anti-bacterial underwear for men

Night Club Girls of South Korea

Posted: 04 Feb 2014 12:01 PM PST

Let's take a look inside South Korean night clubs. There are a lot of hot Asian girls.

42 Biggest Travel Don’ts Around The World [Infographic]

Posted: 04 Feb 2014 09:48 AM PST

International etiquette can be complicated. Clearing your plate in Ukraine is an insult to the chef - in England, it's a compliment. Similarly, the 'ok' gesture - an internationally recognised diving sign - could get you into serious trouble in Brazil.

We at Love Home Swap were curious about the unspoken rules and regulations of other countries. After some serious research, we've compiled a list of the biggest travel don'ts around the world.

Check out our infographic before your trip abroad, and avoid making an etiquette faux pas.

Click on Image to Enlarge.

Via lovehomeswap

miercuri, 5 februarie 2014

First Lady Michelle Obama: "I'm First"

Getting Link Removals Wrong

Getting Link Removals Wrong

Why remove links?

The guest posting fiasco

Removal Automation

What if my site is disavowed?

Conclusion

Seth's Blog : "Oh sure, I studied with him at Harvard"

"Oh sure, I studied with him at Harvard"

More Recent Articles

marți, 4 februarie 2014

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Damn Cool Pics

Damn Cool Pics

Pagini

Persoane interesate

Arhivă blog

miercuri, 5 februarie 2014

Why remove links?

The guest posting fiasco

Removal Automation

What if my site is disavowed?

Conclusion

marți, 4 februarie 2014

Pagini

Persoane interesate

Arhivă blog

Subscribe to