Buying links that pass ranking signals is against the guidelines. The usual outcome now is that they are discounted rather than punished, which makes it a waste rather than a disaster.

What the rule actually is

Exchanging money for a link intended to pass ranking signals is against Google's guidelines, plainly and explicitly.

That is not a grey area and it has not been one for over a decade.

What has changed is the consequence, which is now more often that such links are identified and discounted than that a site is punished for them.

Which reframes the question from how risky is this to what am I actually buying.

What you are usually buying

The third is the giveaway and the reason these get discounted. A site whose entire purpose is publishing articles for money looks exactly like what it is, and the systems identifying that have been improving for years.

The pitches to recognise

Since these arrive by email constantly and the wording is consistent.

An offer of guest posting on a site you have never heard of, with a fee.

A price list with tiers based on the authority score of the site.

An offer to add your link to an existing article, which is a link insertion.

A promise of a specific number of links per month.

And anything using the phrase do-follow as a selling point, which exists only to describe passing ranking signals.

All of those are the same product with different wording, and all of them are what the guidelines describe.

A worked example

A business spent eleven months on a package of eight links a month from an agency.

The links appeared on sites with reasonable-looking scores in the tools the agency used to report progress.

None of the sites had any readers, none sent a single visitor, and rankings did not move over the whole period.

Their unbranded traffic was flat from start to finish.

The same money would have paid for a photographer for a day and four properly written service pages, which is what they did afterwards.

Nothing bad happened to them, which is the point: the money simply did nothing.

Where a penalty is still possible

Since discounting is the usual outcome rather than the only one.

A manual action can still be issued where the pattern is obvious and large.

That appears in your search console as a notice, which is the one unambiguous signal in this area.

Recovering from it means removing or disavowing the links and submitting a reconsideration request, which is a slow and unpleasant process.

The exposure is proportional to the scale, so a business that bought a few links years ago is in a very different position from one buying eighty a month.

If you have inherited a site with a history here, check for a manual action notice before anything else.

Paying for placement is not always wrong

An important distinction that gets lost.

Sponsoring a local team, paying for an advertisement, or paying for a listing is ordinary business and entirely legitimate.

What the guidelines require is that such links be marked so they do not pass ranking signals, using the appropriate attribute.

That is the publisher's responsibility and most reputable ones do it automatically.

So the sponsorship is fine, the visibility is fine, and the link should not be the reason you are doing it.

If a supplier is selling you sponsorship on the basis of the link value, they are selling the part that will not work.

What the money buys instead

Since the budget exists and should go somewhere.

Photographs of your own work, which improve every page and cannot be produced any other way.

A properly written service page with prices, which is the thing competitors above you have.

Collecting reviews systematically, which moves local rankings more than links do for most small businesses.

And genuine local involvement, which produces mentions as a side effect rather than as a purchase.

All four are slower and none of them stops working when a system is updated.

Check what you already have

Where a previous supplier may have done this on your behalf.

Look at the links report in your search console and read the list of sites linking to you.

Sites you have never heard of, in unrelated subjects or other countries, are the signature.

A handful is not worth acting on, since they are being discounted anyway.

A large volume with an obvious pattern is worth a conversation with somebody who does this properly, and possibly a disavow.

Do not disavow casually, since removing legitimate links by mistake causes the harm you were trying to avoid.

Ask a supplier what they are actually doing

Since most businesses in this position did not buy links themselves, they bought a service.

Ask plainly where the links come from, whether money changes hands for placement, and to see the last ten they built.

A supplier doing legitimate work answers that easily, because the answer is local sponsorship, supplier pages, association listings, and coverage.

A supplier buying links either declines, describes it in vague terms, or explains that this is how everybody does it.

The answer to that last one is that it may be, and you are the one whose site carries the consequence.

The counter-case

Links do still matter.

They remain a genuine factor, and a business with none from anywhere is at a disadvantage against one with local coverage and supplier mentions.

The question is where they come from rather than whether they matter.

And some paid placements are worth buying for the visitors they send, entirely separately from any ranking consideration.

Recognise the pitches, spend the budget on photographs and pages, and check your links report for what a previous supplier left behind.

What to do

  1. Delete the guest post offers.
  2. Treat do-follow as a warning word.
  3. Check for a manual action.
  4. Read your links report.
  5. Do not disavow casually.
  6. Mark genuine sponsorships properly.
  7. Spend the money on photographs and pages.

Step seven is the actual decision, since the argument against buying links is mostly that the same budget buys something that works and keeps working.

What paid local placement genuinely buys is covered in what a sponsored local post actually buys.

Frequently asked questions

What is the rule?

Exchanging money for a link intended to pass ranking signals is against the guidelines, explicitly, and has been for over a decade.

What happens now if I do?

More often the links are identified and discounted than that the site is punished, which makes it a waste of money rather than a disaster.

How do I recognise the pitches?

Guest posting on a site you have never heard of for a fee, price lists by authority score, link insertions into existing articles, and anything selling do-follow.

Is a penalty still possible?

Yes, where the pattern is obvious and large. A manual action appears in your search console as a notice, which is the one unambiguous signal in this area.

Is paying for placement always wrong?

No. Sponsorship, advertising, and listings are ordinary business. The links should be marked so they do not pass ranking signals, which reputable publishers do automatically.

What should I check?

The links report in your search console. Sites you have never heard of, in unrelated subjects or other countries, are the signature of a previous supplier doing this.

West Coast Media Solutions Inc. provides web design, web development, hosting, digital marketing, and business consulting to organisations across Canada, drawing on more than twenty-five years in the field.

Offered eight links a month?

Ask what those sites' actual readers do. The usual answer is that they have none.

Start a Conversation