Time taken to reach No.1 on Google with SEO?

[guest]

Hi guys,

This ones for you SEO experts. It's a bit of challange -- and i'm going to try the advice - and post the results!

(Forget big keywords like "ringtones", "mortgage", etc -- and not including phrases only 1 or 2 people search for each month.)

Lets say a keyword phrase that gets 12,000 global searches a month (12,000 local)

It's a 3 keyword phrase - with an exact domain using hyphens available. (keyword1-keyword2-keyword3 . com)

Current google results shows top 10 sites have PR from 0 to 4. (But top result is 2)

What would you do to get this site to the top of google - and from experience - how long would it take to get it there?

Starting on monday - i'm going to create 3 sites -- meeting the specs above.

1 will only get 1000 article directory links
1 will only get 1000 link directory links
1 will get 500 article directory - 500 links.

Each site will be updated 3 times a week.


Anyway - would love to hear what you would do - and how long it would take? Maybe you use backlinks services which work? Buy paid links -- all advice would be great!

Cheers.

[jacobjoseph]

Absolutely impossible to say without seeing the other websites but with that linking strategy I would say a very long time.

Links will be to unnatural and low quality.

We also have no idea of you're content writing ability which now makes a big difference in terms of getting ranked.

With a working strategy and good content I'd say 3-6 months.

[Alexa Smith]

Originally Posted by guest

1 will only get 1000 article directory links
1 will only get 1000 link directory links
1 will get 500 article directory - 500 links.

It's impossible to say accurately, without knowing a lot more, as JacobJoseph wisely mentions above.

Link-directory and article directory backlinks are, in SEO terms, just about "the lowest of the low", I'm afraid ("profile backlinks" are arguably even worse, as so many of them aren't even indexed). They're all non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks. Typically one would need something between 50,000 and 100,000 of them to confer the equivalent "link-juice" of one relevant authority-site backlink (no exaggeration). So in anything approaching a competitive niche at all, I'm afraid this really isn't even going to scratch the surface.

Originally Posted by guest

Each site will be updated 3 times a week.

This sort of on-page SEO will clearly help. And the more regularly you update your sites, the more regularly the search engines will learn to re-index its fresh content.

Originally Posted by guest

Anyway - would love to hear what you would do

Personally, I write articles for syndication, which are published and indexed on my own sites first, and subsequently re-published on some niche-relevant authority sites with links back to my landing pages, bringing me pre-targeted traffic and high quality backlinks.

[jacobjoseph]

Link-directory and article directory backlinks are, in SEO terms, just about "the lowest of the low", I'm afraid ("profile backlinks" are arguably even worse, as so many of them aren't even indexed). They're all non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks. Typically one would need something between 50,000 and 100,000 of them to confer the equivalent "link-juice" of one relevant authority-site backlink (no exaggeration). So in anything approaching a competitive niche at all, I'm afraid this really isn't even going to scratch the surface.

I'd say that is pretty accurate numbers wise...

If you want results then scrap the quantity approach and focus on quality.

[Colin Thompson]

Forget the 1,000s of profile links, blog comment links and other useless spam blasts!

As these do not get you to Googles page one other wise I would go create a hundred sites and spend $20 on each one for 1,000s of xrummer links and sit happy at the top of google, however if this worked we would all be competing 10x as hard as we do now.

10 relevant high PR links from other relevant sites in your niche is 100x more important in link power than having millions of spammy profile links from forum profiles that relate to dog training, cars and stamp collectors forums.

Especially when your site is about, selling antic grandfather clocks or whatever.

You get my point though!

[Colin Thompson]

Originally Posted by jacobjoseph

I'd say that is pretty accurate numbers wise...

If you want results then scrap the quantity approach and focus on quality.

Exactly right!!!!!!!!!!!

Why do so many people fail to focus on this part???

AAAARRRRGGGHHH it really makes my head spin

[jacobjoseph]

Originally Posted by MarketingMonkey

Exactly right!!!!!!!!!!!

Why do so many people fail to focus on this part???

AAAARRRRGGGHHH it really makes my head spin

Because more equals more in most peoples books.

The wiser folk amongst us understand that less is more...

[AdFocus]

it might not be too hard depending on how strong the competition is in building links. I'd suggest building relevant keyword links to the keyword you are trying to rank for

[myob]

If you want fast results have your high quality articles hitch a ride on the high PR websites within your niche.

You can be making substantial sales with targeted traffic, and build quality backlinks nearly simultaneously.

[jacobjoseph]

Originally Posted by jacobjoseph

I'd say that is pretty accurate numbers wise...

If you want results then scrap the quantity approach and focus on quality.

In reference to this -

My SEO bible suggests that 1 PR4 link is equal to around 625-3,125 links from PR0 (most links everyone thinks add value).

PR7 and you're looking at 78,000+ links from PR0 to add the same amount of value.

Food for thought y'all...

[HarryS]

My experience for long tail keywords is it is relatively easy to get on the first page. But no matter what you do it is hard to get to number one. You just need to be persistent, and like others said focus on quality.

[InternetMarketingIQ]

I don't want to rain on your parade but here are two things to think about.

1. #1 for any given term is a moving Target. Turns out Google factors in more than just keyword phrases into search results.

2. Real marketers are less concerned with ranking algorithms than getting their message in front of prospective buyers. SEO is one small way to make money. But for some reason it is the obsession of nearly all people in Forums who claim to be Internet Marketers.

[jacobjoseph]

Also, my final note on this thread (or at least I think)...

The OP mentioned the amount of searches which actually bares no relevance to the difficulty as many would think.

I think myself and many others have made a lot of money from exploiting this common misunderstanding. Whilst the rest of the pack are competing for keywords that get 4400 searches there is pretty much free reign of over the large keywords in many cases.

Don't let big numbers put you off - makes no difference...

[Mike Grant]

Originally Posted by MarketingMonkey

Exactly right!!!!!!!!!!!

Why do so many people fail to focus on this part???

AAAARRRRGGGHHH it really makes my head spin

Have you looked at your sig?

[jacobjoseph]

I don't want to rain on your parade but here are two things to think about.

1. #1 for any given term is a moving Target. Turns out Google factors in more than just keyword phrases into search results.

Don't think anyone has disputed that here.

2. Real marketers are less concerned with ranking algorithms than getting their message in front of prospective buyers. SEO is one small way to make money. But for some reason it is the obsession of nearly all people in Forums who claim to be Internet Marketers.

Yes but this is a thread about getting ranked is it not?

If the post was about "best way to get visitors" I could see your point.

Perhaps the reason it is an "obsession" is because most information out there is useless and beginners don't know their a*** from their elbow because of it.

[guest]

Cheers guys!

You've all said the same thing quality over quantity.

Next question then - can you buy quality - can I just buy 10x PR4 links from text-link-ads --on related sites to my nice and rank well?

How would you rate paid blog posts/reviews

I'm open to all ideas - and love the idea of just buying a few quality links if it gets the sites ranked faster.

Cheers!

[jacobjoseph]

Originally Posted by guest

Cheers guys!

You've all said the same thing quality over quantity.

Next question then - can you buy quality - can I just buy 10x PR4 links from text-link-ads --on related sites to my nice and rank well?

How would you rate paid blog posts/reviews

I'm open to all ideas - and love the idea of just buying a few quality links if it gets the sites ranked faster.

Cheers!

You could just buy/find high PR links on related blogs. It still won't be "fast" but will be faster.

If I had my time again I would probably go with something similar to what Alexa mentioned earlier in the thread.

Find related sites, guest post and piggy back off their traffic whilst gaining good links in the mean time.

There is probably a lot more to it than that but I think that is the jist of it?!

[Alexa Smith]

Originally Posted by jacobjoseph

If I had my time again I would probably go with something similar to what Alexa mentioned earlier in the thread.

Find related sites, guest post and piggy back off their traffic whilst gaining good links in the mean time.

There is probably a lot more to it than that but I think that is the jist of it?!

Yes, I do a lot of that, and stuff very like that, one way and another, mutatis mutandis. (I don't give anyone unique content, though, apart from small, unsolicited blog comments).

[jacobjoseph]

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

Yes, I do a lot of that, and stuff very like that, one way and another, mutatis mutandis. (I don't give anyone unique content, though, apart from small, unsolicited blog comments).

Very good working model, I just felt bad for dumbing it down to about a sentence and a half when there is actually a bit more to it

I'll give the Latin a miss today I think!

[mkmossop]

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

Link-directory and article directory backlinks are, in SEO terms, just about "the lowest of the low", I'm afraid ("profile backlinks" are arguably even worse, as so many of them aren't even indexed). They're all non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks. Typically one would need something between 50,000 and 100,000 of them to confer the equivalent "link-juice" of one relevant authority-site backlink (no exaggeration). So in anything approaching a competitive niche at all, I'm afraid this really isn't even going to scratch the surface.

Originally Posted by MarketingMonkey

Forget the 1,000s of profile links, blog comment links and other useless spam blasts!

10 relevant high PR links from other relevant sites in your niche is 100x more important in link power than having millions of spammy profile links from forum profiles that relate to dog training, cars and stamp collectors forums.

Ok so profile links, article directories and blog comments are out... so what's left? Social bookmarking? Press releases? Getting in-post links on another blog or buying a home page back link?

Do you two avoid completely article submissions and blog commenting? Although maybe they don't have the best link power, it's good to at least mix up the types of backlinks you're getting to your site so things look natural no? I.e. it would be better to have 500 article backlinks, 200 blog comment backlinks, and one relevant authority-site backlink than just the relevant authority-site backlink alone... or should one just completely forgo articles, blog comments and profile links? I would also think maybe it's not the best idea to go straight for a high PR backlink for a brand new site... or is this also false?

I'm debating right now whether I should ditch Article Marketing Robot. For one I hate writing articles and spinning, and two I haven't seen any results from it. I was also considering buying scrapebox (specifically for blog commenting), but after reading this I'm not so sure.

I'm currently having some success with high PR profile linkwheels and some other low quality link types, but I would much prefer to focus on high quality links. How would I go about finding high PR relevant authority sites to get links from? Open Site Explorer?

Thanks in advance for any help!

[jacobjoseph]

Ok so profile links, article directories and blog comments are out... so what's left? Social bookmarking? Press releases? Getting in-post links on another blog or buying a home page back link?

Not out completely - I use these type of links to make everything appear more natural. We're not talking thousands though that is for sure...

I use a few services, usually very private HIGH PR networks which cost around $100+ per month per site.

There is no reason why Google would think a HIGH PR link to a new site was strange. Sure it does happen to most people but you could never rule out a newcomer writing very good content, would be very naive.

I think the best advice I could give you would be to go out and TRY everything for yourself. Give yourself an adequate amount of time and see what works and what doesn't. If you have not given up after this period of time you've won the war, you just need to go that little bit further and win the battle.

As for finding sites to get guest post for and get links from it is not really my area so Alexa is probably best chipping in here if she drops by again but you can google "Your Niche" "Write For Us" and install something like SEOQuake (Free) to gauge the value of the links you would get from such sites.

OR

Simply email the owners of websites you already know bare relevance and authority.

Not going to be easy by any stretch of the imagination but if you can afford to sit in for the long haul then you're get much better results.

Rome wasn't built in a day.

[mkmossop]

Originally Posted by jacobjoseph

Not out completely - I use these type of links to make everything appear more natural. We're not talking thousands though that is for sure...

Thanks a lot for the reply.

All the waiting and the unknown and the money wasting is frustrating, but I think you're right... basically just gotta test things out for myself and see what happens and make my own working formula.

Anyway thanks again... appreciate the response.

[BudgetSEO]

4 months.
close to 0 SEO (whatever was did was 100% WH)

[kjblitz]

It really depends! But from my own experience, anything with a web 2.0 site (with the exception of About.com) on the first page and less than 100 backlinks would be easy to rank with minimal backlinks!! You will see results in about three weeks...with the right links of course.

Then again, getting to #1 doesnt mean you will always be there...you can always drop to the 2nd or 3rd page. SEO is really fickle.

[thrallie]

Google is not going to penalize you for profile links. But yes, high pr links and article back-links go much further.

[timpears]

In my expert opinion, I would say it will take you, that long.

[john smith1]

with out the website details and search volume of that keyword it is not possible to predict the judgement