Why the Value of Massive Spam links is constantly declining in power

[BishopMartin]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Talk is cheap - Be my guess and show me where it has any of the money spots for weight loss


Weight loss - Google Search


You are confused by all the Imers that post number one positions for less competitive terms. I don't deny that profile links are good for some niches and i recommend them to start out or for supplemental use but they are over hyped. They rarely are found as the major links in truly competitive niches where there are sites that have established themselves well.

Truth be told the more you do backlink analysis outside of the IM circle circle the rarer it becomes to see a page rank number one with just profile links. Its usually other links that are the real lifters.

Number 9 - www weightlosswand com is using template sponsorship along with other automated techniques:

ditchfatfast com
totalcleanseblog com

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by BishopMartin

Number 9 - www weightlosswand com is using template sponsorship along with other automated techniques:

ditchfatfast com
totalcleanseblog com

Nope template sponsorship is not an automated technique. I am well aware of it since I have used sponsored wordpress themes quite abit. I actually have that in my link from the sticky section as a linkbait technique as well (goes hand in hand). The bloggers choose to use the templates. Nothing is forced about it either.

As I said

Truth be told the more you do backlink analysis outside of the IM circle circle the rarer it becomes to see a page rank number one with just profile links. Its usually other links that are the real lifters.

even in that case the real lifters are TOTALLY obvious when you look at the backlinks.

It has several High PR links, High PR in content page links , A yahoo directory link and on and on.

You just didn't look close enough. You would have to drop down lower - which even at 9 is not a money spot - to even take a good shot. So why hasn't anyone cracked into making some good money with some xrumer runs people?

[Jacob Martus]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

So why hasn't anyone cracked into making some good money with some xrumer runs people?

SEOmoz disagrees with your assessment that spammy links won't get you good rankings for valuable and competitive terms. Here's the quote directly:

"On nearly every commercially lucrative search results I pull up these days, I see bad links pushing bad sites into the top rankings at Google"

SEOmoz | I'm Getting More Worried about the Effectiveness of Webspam

SEOmoz said it so it must be true.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Jacob Martus

SEOmoz disagrees with your assessment that spammy links won't get you good rankings for valuable and competitive terms. Here's the quote directly:

As usual you don't read very well (or at all in some cases).

A) Seomoz lists a whole range of lower competition keywords not the top tier of competition (just as I have REPEATEDLY said) nothing like even weight loss (which I have proven no one ranks top for on the power of mass bots)

I'll come back to that later to completely destroy your point

B) Seomoz is talking about a wide range of practices including

Popular paid link services that Google's search quality folks are clearly aware of have worked for months on end (some have done so for years)

Nothing to do with massive spam bots. Let me know when I say that buying links can't work will ya?

Crummy, low quality directories and link exchanges have made a comeback

Link exchanges have again Nothing to do with what we have been talking about. I

Horrifyingly bad sites are ranking atop the results using little more than exact match domain names and a few poor quality links.

We've all seen in lesser competition keywords that have domain match and links will do well. good grief I've done that and teach that. it simple doesn't work the hgher you go up the competition ladder

There's even a return of the link farms of the early 2000s, with operators creating (or buying old domains and converting them into) junky, one-page sites to boost their own link popularity.

Possible related but more likely a reference to buying high Pr domains and linking to other sites - You know that drill - Again which has little to do with link spam bots.

So despite complaining about linkbait headlines in another thread all you have done is take the headlines without reading the article. Just like you rebut video content you admit to not watching. touche!

lets really look at this and send your point packing in the next post.

[Mike Anthony]

MORE PROOF MASS LINKS SPAM DOESN'T RANK COMPETITIVE TERMS VERY OFTEN

Continued Response to Marcus

You've assumed that everything you are talking about is an exact match to what Seomoz is talking about. Now look at the list of keywords he points to. Most are classic low level IM stuff and lets prove it and show that Rand is talking about the same low competition I have said will sometimes work but seldom for truly competitive terms. Heres his list

• SEO Software
  
• Starcraft 2 Strategies
• Birthday Party Supplies
• Currency Trading Online
• Tennis Racquet Reviews
• Leather Crafting Supplies
• Nanny Services
• Home Business Ideas
• French Doors
• Vietnam Tours
• Antioxidant Supplements
• Home Espresso Machine Ratings

I'm going to bet you didn't even bother to checking some of those sites to find out what Rand was referring to. of the entire list only five have searches over 2,000 exact local matches and NONE have searches of over 10,000 local per month exact match (uh-huh your counter point just died). For reference weight loss has over 60,000 local exact.

Better yet

home espresso machine ratings has 16 per month - thats how Low Rand was going.

So lets concentrate on the five over 2,000

[birthday party supplies]
[seo software]
[french doors]
[home business ideas]
[starcraft 2 strategies]

to save myself some time I am going to skip starcraft 2 strategies and go with the top three in terms of local search. Why? Over half of those are just information seekers knowing gamers. In fact I'll jsut do the top three of these - its time consuming


So birthday party 9,000 exact - um sorry searched the top five spots (and we know thats who makes the money) no sign of mas bot spam. solid links with high PR - yaho and dmoz links to boot.

Seo software 8,000 local exact
With the niche I'd expect to find just spam but guess what - lots of natural links - even the number two position had links from dmoz and Yahoo. No sign of mass spam bots all the way down to five.

This aint looking good for your side Marcus. but lets go one more down the list and I'll end proving your point wrong there because of time

French doors 8,000 local exact
these results are heavy in links from related companies. builders, etc
its another fail for mass profile backlinks

So there we have it even the top searched terms in Seomoz list of low competition keywords proves that Not using mass spam bots does NOT leave the competition wide open for you if you do. My condolences to Catherine

Time to pack up that lie and stop telling people that they can aim their xrummer at a competitive term and they will rank. It ONLY works in some niches and in serps after serps after serps natural links and on page PR links whether bought, exchanged or however acquired still heavily dominate the serps.

You mass spam bot Evangelists do the whole community a disservice. People need to learn how to get natural high on page links. Stop pushing the garbage that you are and getting all upset when people point out the negatives. Sure people can and should start out with profile links and rank for some terms with great research but they should also learn how to work with sites that they are using so they can pick up some high on page PR links because eventually they will need some and your push button approach to everything sucks their future success dry without giving them real world success they can actually meet their goals with.

NOTE : there is no denial that you can rank for terms with more search results but again the competition will usually be low. Thats where good Keyword research comes in

[4morereferrals]

Jacob,

You must be corresponding wit the ghost of "closet spammer"? Thought that entity left the room 22 posts ago?

Its rather pointless continued to banter back n forth about all this kindergarten seo ... especially since the notion of what a "SPAM Link" -" link to SPAM", hell ... "SPAM" itself is. It changes like Sybil's personalities.

TechSmith | Screencast.com, online video sharing, 2010-10-27_1520

Ahh yes - party supplies #2 = propped on up there with those foreign language splog post comments. Of course - those are quality links - NOT SPAM :-) [ the 650 word reply to this paragraph alone will likely be worth a bag o redenbacher's ... guess the FREE teaching gig has hit the skids - so free time to ramble ]

Then again - the links in your sig file to a sales page on warrior are not spam, but the same url on a profile of another forum IS spam ????

Sybil's so twisted around it doesnt know right from left - just that ... well it's ... CASE CLOSED! [ freakin epic ... ]

[Jacob Martus]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

As usual you don't read very well (or at all in some cases).

A) Seomoz lists a whole range of lower competition keywords not the top tier of competition (just as I have REPEATEDLY said) nothing like even weight loss (which I have proven no one ranks top for on the power of mass bots)

Malcom,

Maybe it's you who doesn't read very well. Notice the part where he says:

"On nearly every commercially lucrative search results I pull up these days, I see bad links pushing bad sites into the top rankings at Google"
Emphasis being placed on commercially lucrative. In most cases, commercially lucrative and competition come hand in hand. ****, that is probably something I missed because I didn't pass my kindergarten SEO class.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Jacob Martus

"On nearly every commercially lucrative ..............In most cases, commercially lucrative and competition come hand in hand.

I feel for you bro. Thats really weak . I have found a lot of commercially lucrative keywords that were not competitive. You can't? Thats the whole reason I will still sell a profile package and teach people to use it first. Then as they make some money and not blast all the possible relationships they could have built to pieces with spam bots they can learn to build on page High PR links going forward.

Reading is STILL a problem. I've said that like what ten times already. But you know what can I say ....if thats the best you can do in response to the raw data given.

Just spare me the whining about calling you guys out on SEO with stating things about "Basic SEo etc. You guys come out in every thread you don't like an d blast away. Now you complain because you got back more than you can handle. . You just finished descending on another guy in a post calling his point illogical/stupid so please jif you don't want it don;tgive it.

I didn''t call anyone by name into this thread to bad mouth their SEO. The same crew always shows up to try to bad mouth mine. Dont expect a backdown. Call me Sybil. malcolm whatever you want. that most definitely is kindergarten

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

Ahh yes - party supplies #2 = propped on up there with those foreign language splog post comments. Of course - those are quality links - NOT SPAM :-) [ the 650 word reply to this paragraph alone will likely be worth a

far less than that to deal with your posts Steve. I've already gone through that backlink check. they have far more than splog comments and thats what blows your point up. first I heard that dmoz was a splog comment. Read it and weep

Open Directory - Shopping: Children: Parties

Oh and calm down man. you're going to give yourself a heart attack.

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Puuuure desperation. I made no claim at being a guru. You do FAR more of that in various places and we both know it. Digi lied that I had never posted ANYTHING to help people and I rebutted her as I have you and your crew this entire thread with the facts.

No, I did not LIE, Mark. It's called an OPINION. You certainly have PLENTY of those.

*I* do NOT believe that you have helped anyone with your self-proclaimed White Hat Highness. That is my O P I N I O N, not a lie.

You can disagree. That doesn't mean you're lying.

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I don't deny that profile links are good for some niches and i recommend them to start out or for supplemental use but they are over hyped. They rarely are found as the major links in truly competitive niches where there are sites that have established themselves well.

A true White Hat Purist, as you elevate yourself to, would never, ever, ever use a forum profile link as an effective means of SEO.

It's not natural.

Are you sure you weren't a politician in another life?

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by digidoodles

I'm not sure that I've ever seen you give one bit of helpful advice in terms of what to do to rank. Your advice is always what NOT to do, in your opinion.

Nice try but thats you there and it says nothing about whether my advice helped it represents that I never posted anything to help. I called it what it was. I pointed to one example in the sticky and in that thread people said they were helped so you are wrong on every count. If you were even mistaken you now had the opportunity to in fairness change that stand based on the facts that were presented to you. You still decline which has nothing to do with being honest. Sorry Not looking to upset you but my point stands as to the honesty of that statement.

and how many times do you have to try the same old dishonest technique of claiming I am only white hat when I've said multiple times I don't care about hats. I just won't slam sites mercilessly because they allow me to leave links . I am quite aware that in many circles leaving any link is black or grey hat so you have no point.

[4morereferrals]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

far less than that to deal with your posts Steve. I've already gone through that backlink check. they have far more than splog comments and thats what blows your point up. first I heard that dmoz was a splog comment. Read it and weep

Open Directory - Shopping: Children: Parties

Oh and calm down man. you're going to give yourself a heart attack.

What? No CASE CLOSED?

Surely if you repeat it a certain arbitrary number of times [ kinda like the arbitrary # of spammy OBL links googles algo has plugged into before the forum impolodes ] the whole world will canonize it as gospel - according to Sybil. Or did we already reach the arbitrary threshold?

[Mike Anthony]

the case was closed in post 205. thats what has you so enraged. every proof posted gets you angrier and angrier. thats why I said to calm down. You can bust an artery it won't change that none of those sites rank on profile backlinks alone but on high Pr pages.

You don't know anything about it me nor I you. Your entire animosity stretches back months because of the positions I hold on SEo but they are not going to change and frankly the more you come charging in to try and squelch opposing viewpoints of mine the more I will share those.

All you have done and will do in future posts is to give them more replies and bumps. haven't you seen that?

[4morereferrals]

xkcd: Constructive

[SaleemY]

Originally Posted by Jacob Martus

"On nearly every commercially lucrative search results I pull up these days, I see bad links pushing bad sites into the top rankings at Google"

Totally true, I've analysed lots of different top ranking sites in a range of markets and a very large % of them have links lots of low quality links such as profiles. Despite what Google says some of these strategies do work and I've seen a tonne of evidence to support this!

[digidoodles]

What constitutes spamming?

Are 300 links ok? How about 450? Are 999 ok, but 1,000 spammy?

Actually, the defining point of "spam" is "unwanted and unsolicited". By that definition, if permission is not requested prior to placing the link, one link could be spam.

Food for thought.

Warmly,

Brandi

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by WebTrafficControl

Totally true, I've analysed lots of different top ranking sites in a range of markets and a very large % of them have links lots of low quality links such as profiles. Despite what Google says some of these strategies do work and I've seen a tonne of evidence to support this!

The mere existence of profile links in a search result backlinks is really immaterial to this debate. You could have a link from your grandma's blog it wouldn't prove that her blog was the driving force behind a ranking if there were several other higher PR pages linking in.. They can be there but not be THE reason the site is ranking. My challenge was simple and has not been contradicted. Very seldom in a really compeitive niche is there a site that ranks JUST on profile links. As you stated there are niches but that does nt translate to highly competitive terms or to all niches.

The issue is are these links powerful enough to rank in serps that are really competitive. Post 205 has debunked that these were very competitive terms and even in those results time and time and time again the stronger links in their portfolios were not profile links they were high on page PR pages even Yahoo and Dmoz listings.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by digidoodles

Actually, the defining point of "spam" is "unwanted and unsolicited". By that definition, if permission is not requested prior to placing the link, one link could be spam.

Agreed so if you do not read the terms of service to even know whether the site you are linking in allows it or not and if you circumvent their captcha which is definitely unwanted then you are a spammer. thanks Digi. you've summarized my point.


Once however their is no prohibition about leaving the link in the terms and you follow the rules of the site and they present a place for you to leave your link BY PROGRAMMING DESIGN then by your own definition such activities cannot always be considered spam.

So it has little to do with how many links. You are right. what it has to do with is reading their rules, agreeing to their terms and not breaking their captcha. Your bots cannot do that for you.

Your definition proves my point.

[adamv]

If a site has a place for you to put your link that tells me that they want people to put links up or that they don't have a problem with it. If they did have a problem with it they could remove the ability to post links.

About captchas, what difference does it make if I enter the captcha myself or if I have someone from the Philippines do it for $.002?

I use profile linking and if someone wants to call me a spammer because of it, I don't really care. But to suggest that entering a captcha myself is okay but having someone else do it for me is wrong doesn't make any sense.

[Mike Anthony]

Well you can disagree with it but theres no rational under which it doesn't make perfect sense. Is there any difference between a person signing up for your list or having someone in the phillipines do it for the person you are sending the freebie to?


Besides thats about where you agree to the terms of service. makes no sense for you that someone in the phillipines can't agree to terms for you?

Bottom line for me is that if a webmaster is good enough in this nofollow world to let me leave a link the least I can do is at least see his site and give him a shot at converting me to a regular member. Thats why he has the forum. He really doesn't have it just so I can send a bot in to leave a link on his site and never give him the time of day and we all know that.

[Dennis Wilson]

Mike, I gotta say your powers to turn any argument around are very impressive. I see it every night on tv, politicians turning questions around and never actually answering anything. I don't have time to write 500 word posts on here as I actually have work to do as I don't sell IM products so unlike you it is not in my interests to be on here arguing with people all the time.

I don't follow you or tom goodwin or 4referalls or anyone else on this thread (never bought a product of any of you) , I just test and go with what works. I don't like to see people manipulated as many people on here are trying to make a living and are down to the bare bones. This is my last comment on this thread regardless of what essay you choose to reply to this with as I have no reason to be here and should never have got involved with this thread in the first place.

[Mike Anthony]

Dennis seeing as how your last post contained absolutely nothing to do with the topic but just another one of your typical personal attacks (you have been in multiple similar thread with the same general defense of mass spam) You could have been consistent with your claim that you should not have gotten involved in the thread.

It would have saved the time you said you needed. Pretend if you like that ample evidence has not been presented. I've yet to see a mass spam bot proponent claim otherwise but appealing to not selling IM product makes no difference to anything in relationship to spam bots. People from all niches do it and if talking about the downsides of it stopped people from making money then people would be far more successfull than the stats before this post indicate they are.

So your point to the extent there was any is pointless. For my part I see a good bit of politician in your part as well. Most politicians are willing to do whatever suits them and their purposes as well as give no satisfactory answer for their actions - similar to how people ignore the site and site owners that they blast.

[fannyballard]

The objective of all search engines provide us all with unique content and relevant. They will continue to pursue until all the tactics BH irrelevant.

[princeambrose12]

The objective of all search engines provide us all with unique content and relevant. They will continue to pursue until all the tactics BH irrelevant.

[Soulofinfamy]

Yup, just like blog comment spam not working, None of these link building techniques are new. Xrumer wasn't created last month.