Popular social bookmarking sites are not better than new ones

[tadisaus2]

Hello friends,

After submitting my websites to social bookmarking sites for a few months, I have gained some experiences about popular and not-too-popular social bookmarking sites.

Popular social bookmarking sites are not better than new social bookmarking sites.

Why?

When I submit one link to a popular one like digg.com, my link is nowhere in the next few minutes. The new or not-too-popular social bookmarking sites have my link there for a few hours or few days.

My link is easily indexed if I submit to old social bookmarking sites.

I hope I am not wrong.

Any idea is appreciated.

Thanks.

[snapshot]

All forms of traffic building can be useful but it would be a mistake simply focusing on the social bookmarking portals for building traffic for the websites.

[joesmith.aj]

Digg like sites will help to index faster, the new sites as you told having your link on top indicates it wasn't used by others.

[cantthink]

You have to take into consideration each site's PR and dofollow/nofollow status. That's the only way you could be sure that any links on them would be of value toyou

[jay 11]

You have to take into consideration each site's PR and dofollow/nofollow status. That's the only way you could be sure that any links on them would be of value toyou

i disagree.. relevant citations can provide value regardless of toolbar pagerank and nofollow status.

[joelchrist]

you may be top on not popular book marking sites, also they will provide less traffic, but sites like digg will provide you more traffic.

[joeblacksmith]

thanks everybody, great useful information, i also reccomend local websites

[infinique]

It's all dependent on the PR of the social site as well as whether it is dofollow.