Google is Flawed - You Can Influence Other Sites’ Rankings With Backlinks

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

LMAO! I just read your post whilst taking a mouth full of beer and coughed it out through my nose because I laughed so much. Seriously, you're joking right? Please tell me that's a crank post and you're not really kissing ass that much??

But yes, I'm very happy to build the links for you. No need to ask me in the third person in a post directed at Matt, all you have to do is give me the address and confirm you own the site.

Haha, Neil. I like your style.

[neil_patmore]

I'm game for that too. Give me the link publicly here and we'll do an experiment with your site as well.

In fact the next 10 Warriors who want in on the same deal can. I'll give you free links and we'll dare anyone to drop it in the serps.

That's a great idea. Matt gets you to #1 for a given key phrase for free and then I'll create the links for the penalty. Perfect.

[ulcseminary]

If it's just the site that has to be new, give me till later today or tomorrow and I'll have one you can give a go. I'm moving some stuff to a new domain. The domain is old, but I haven't had a site on it before. My links don't seem to be worth much anyway, so if it got buried, not the end of the world for me. lol

[neil_patmore]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ulcseminary
Does the domain need to be less than six months old? Or just the site?

I'll let the OP define those parameters.

Definately the domain, this I believe to be an extremely important factor. I built the same backlinks to another site which was a 3 month old site but I registered the domain last September. That site is still ranking #1 - #3 for all it's key phrases.

[JamesGw]

I'm interested to see how this experiment goes. I'm personally pretty confident a site can be knocked off.

[guitarjosh]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

LMAO! I just read your post whilst taking a mouth full of beer and coughed it out through my nose because I laughed so much. Seriously, you're joking right? Please tell me that's a crank post and you're not really kissing ass that much??

But yes, I'm very happy to build the links for you. No need to ask me in the third person in a post directed at Matt, all you have to do is give me the address and confirm you own the site.

I'm not sure how you might even suggest it could be a "crank post". Matt himself states above that he runs "35 servers and 5000 site blog network". You know someone who owns/operates a bigger IM network? If so, please share.

I'm not sure when stating facts became "kissing ass". You'll have to enlighten me. I don't use Matt's services and likely never will so just saying that it is what it is. If there's a big purple elephant in the room.. well.. there' s a big purple elephant.

But I don't really care to get involved in your little experiment. I just know that you're wrong about being able to bury these sites. That was the motivation for my comment. I'm going to enjoy watching this.

[stevenjacobs]

I disagree with this i have been using scrapebox blasts to get my sites ranked on page 1 since scrapebox came out. It is important to make them look natraul, because in the end this is what search engines want. Sites do get influxes of links these sites do not drop in rank. For example all the new electronic releases can have over 100k backlinks one day. Here is my little spill.

[neil_patmore]

Thank you Josh, for clearing up any confusion

[neil_patmore]

I disagree with this i have been using scrapebox blasts to get my sites ranked on page 1 since scrapebox came out. It is important to make them look natraul, because in the end this is what search engines want. Sites do get influxes of links these sites do not drop in rank. For example all the new electronic releases can have over 100k backlinks one day. Here is my little spill.

Hello Steven,

Forgive me but I'm not sure what part of the the thread you are disagreeing with.

However it's worth mentioning again, that these links are not scrapebox, scrapeboard, Xrumer or any other links generated with 'blast' type software.

[guitarjosh]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

Thank you Josh, for clearing up any confusion

No problem. My judgment sometimes get's clouded when drinking beer through my nose too.

[thecableguy]

Interesting experiment. And just my 2 cents, but you're never going to be able to sabotage a site with offsite factors. I'll gladly take my foot out of my mouth if there definative proof, as that's what I've said here for years.

An as example back in the late 90's when Mark Joyner's Searchengine Tactics (considered black hat these days) you were able to sabotage a competitor by spamming the URL to the directories until you got them banned. The searchengines quickly caught on to those types of off site tactics and made them useless.

There's been blog post's (I've never tried it though so whether it's true or not remains to be seen) that tactics link bombing a competitors site with ten's of thousands of spammy type links worked while Google did it's dance, but the sites actually came back stronger after awhile.

JMO but I don't think you'll get penalized for them, but instead if anything you just won't get credit for them. If not the searchengines would be like the wild wild west.

Like I said interesting experiment, I'll be tracking it with MS. (that domain sounds awfully familiar)

[neil_patmore]

OK, I need to make a point here after having a conversation with a fellow Warrior. It's important to understand how the (my) ‘perceived’ Google penalties work.

I strongly believe that the penalties affect a site paired with a key phrase.


We optimise for keywords right? We make a site, actually we make a PAGE rank for a given keyword (or keywords).

So, just as Google increases our site (sorry, page) for the keyword we are optimising for, it also penalises us for the keyword we are optimising for.

The penalties affect the keyword/page pairing. For example, if I build a site around widgets and I have 5 pages each targeting a widget, let’s say the home page is optimised for ‘blue widgets’ the next page is optimised for ‘red widgets’ etc, you get the picture.

Well, when these penalties hit, they penalize the pages in the serps for whatever keywords you are optimizing for.

My two sites that were hit still appear when I search using a random piece of text copied and pasted from the pages’ body text.

This is important. The site hasn’t tanked completely, but it has tanked for the optimised key phrases.
I think you’ll agree the site is still rendered completely useless!

Just thought I’d clear this up. This is why the site we are hopefully going to use as an example MUST be ranking highly for a given key phrase.

Thank you!

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by guitarjosh

I'm not sure how you might even suggest it could be a "crank post". Matt himself states above that he runs "35 servers and 5000 site blog network". You know someone who owns/operates a bigger IM network? If so, please share.

ROFL my time to laugh and make drink come up through my nose . its an IM board dude people say things to make themselves look bigger than they are. Matt does not "run 35 servers" in order to host 5,000 blogs. If he did he would be an idiot since you can easily put that on 10 or less. Matt utilizes SEO hosting just like all the rest of us that have our own network (with some servers for busy sites) and they are not 35 dedicated servers because it would be silly to place a 140 different blogs on each and then get another server.

[neil_patmore]

ROFL my time to laugh and make drink come up through my nose . its an IM board dude people say things to make themselves look bigger than they are. Matt does not "run 35 servers" in order to host 5,000 blogs. If he did he would be an idiot since you can easily put that on 10 or less. Matt utilizes SEO hosting just like all the rest of us that have our own network (with some servers for busy sites) and they are not 35 dedicated servers.

High Five Brother!

But I actually really do have 2 dedi servers, does that make me a bigger kid? Just asking :-)

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

High Five Brother!

But I actually really do have 2 dedi servers, does that make me a bigger kid? Just asking :-)

Who ever said I used 35 servers to host our blog network? We use the servers to broadcast out links to our network. It really is silly me having to come in and explain these sort of things.

[yukon]

So did you guys settle on a domain yet, OP, are you going with the link that Matt posted?

I'm waiting for both sides to hammer the $hit out of it with good links & crappy links at the same time, should be interesting.

[neil_patmore]

OK, c'mon guys. Let's not jeopardize the thread, please.

[neil_patmore]

So did you guys settle on a domain yet, OP, are you going with the link that Matt posted?

I'm waiting for both sides to hammer the out of it with good links & crappy links at the same time, should be interesting.

Still waiting for ownership confirmation and #1 rankings.

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

OK, c'mon guys. Let's not jeopardize the thread, please.

Agreed! We just had a thread closed because of our bickering. It's the little digs that are doing it. One dig spawns another. Is it possible for us to disagree without getting into that?

It's the same in fighting as usual. Spinners versus Uniquees. High PR Blog studs versus low pr blog network owners.

Threads get pinched when we start fighting about those two things.

It would be cool to focus on seo experiments we can run together. I for one am finished without all that other nonsense. Sometimes I get a bit too sensitive on issues. It's something I'm working on.

So who wants in on this experiment?

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

As usual Mike Anthony comes with complete jibberish. It's the reason I put him on ignore.

You can't handle how I deconstruct your utter nonsense. in almost every thread you are in you do two things. Hijack the thread to make it about your service and make up numbers that later contradict themselves. No one cares how many servers you use to blast your spun content gibberish and waste dollars. The point being made by the poster was the size of your network as compared to others many of who do not slush around pure gibberish spun content.. You do not operate a network with 35 servers as he was representing. case closed

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by yukon

So did you guys settle on a domain yet, OP, are you going with the link that Matt posted?

I'm waiting for both sides to hammer the out of it with good links & crappy links at the same time, should be interesting.

Someone from my staff is optimizing Welcome to Weight Loss Diet Tips right now for ten keywords. We will backlink to all ten keywords in order to get the quickest page one rankings.

Then the experiment will be on like Donkey Kong.

Should I post here or create a new thread? I'll even keep my sig file disabled for the entire length of the experiment.

Want me to also post the keywords and the comp numbers? Anything that I am forgetting?

[JamesGw]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Agreed! We just had a thread closed because of our bickering. It's the little digs that are doing it. One dig spawns another. Is it possible for us to disagree without getting into that?

It's the same in fighting as usual. Spinners versus Uniquees. High PR Blog studs versus low pr blog network owners.

Threads get pinched when we start fighting about those two things.

It would be cool to focus on seo experiments we can run together. I for one am finished with out all that other nonsense. Sometimes I get a bit too sensitive on issues. It's something I'm working on.

So who wants in on this experiment?

I'd be willing to put together a site for this experiment.

10 pages, 5000-10000 words of content total. Basic on-page optimization. Fitness / MMA niche (easiest for me to write about.)

Can also do test taking/studying. That might be better, since I'll be releasing a product on that soon anyway.

I'd even be willing to forgo putting outbound links on it for the duration of the experiment so to limit the possibility of any other penalties.

[neil_patmore]

It would be cool to focus on seo experiments we can run together. I for one am finished with out all that other nonsense. Sometimes I get a bit too sensitive on issues. It's something I'm working on.

I agree. C'mon guys, Matt is willing to get you a #1 position for a given key phrase for nothing, READ NOTHING. Surely, for the good of the community this is a risk worth taking?

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by JamesGw

I'd even be willing to forgo putting outbound links on it for the duration of the experiment so to limit the possibility of any other penalties.

Good point. Any sites taking part in this experiment should have unique content only on it. They should also be optimized for their keywords. Plus zero outbound links unless it's a link on a blog to your money site.

[neil_patmore]

Actually, the more willing to take part the better. I think the global effect from several sites will only help to increase the power of the penalty.

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

Actually, the more willing to take part the better. I think the global effect from several sites will only help to increase the power of the penalty.

Should we put a friendly wager on it? Loser has to sport whatever avatar the winner chooses for them for an entire week.

You game friend?

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

Still waiting for ownership confirmation and #1 rankings.

Thought you might find this link interesting -

My Site was Manually Flagged By Spam Team

The problem with your test is twofold - there are clearly a variety of factors involved as evidenced by the fact that not everyone has the same result. So even a negative finding will not prove that it cannot happen and a positive result (causing a site to respond downward) isn't going to mean it is possible for all sites.

second its really unnecessary to have to wait around for someone to rank a site. It only serves one purpose - to advertise a service (the usual I might ad ). If there are so many people swearing its impossible to be negatively affected why don't we cut through the nonsense of waiting for a site to rank and use an existing site that is already there at thetop of Google.

Is this board so sad that we can't find anyone who swears its impossible to hurt a site with backlinking who - you know - ranks for something?

[neil_patmore]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGw
I'd even be willing to forgo putting outbound links on it for the duration of the experiment so to limit the possibility of any other penalties.

Good point. Any sites taking part in this experiment should have unique content only on it. They should also be optimized for their keywords. Plus zero outbound links unless it's a link on a blog to your money site.

I totally agree. Perfect!

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

I totally agree. Perfect!

I'll go one step further. I will be willing to create new sites for the first ten people to jump in on this experiment. Just give us your niche and money site and we'll take care of the rest. So basically we are giving away ten new sites with ten page one rankings.

If someone has a new site they just created that is more than welcome in our experiment as well.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Someone from my staff is optimizing Welcome to Weight Loss Diet Tips right now for ten keywords. ?

Somebody tell Matt that if he wants this to be a legitimate test he needs to come clean with all the keywords so that everyone can see all the terms and monitor them so that everyone can see what is happening across all the terms.

[andynathan]

Sorry to come in late, but this sounds like a cool experiment! Will be keeping tabs to see what happens.

[yukon]

I'm with you on that (red text below).

I don't think the age or authority of the web page that is already ranking should be a factor.

Pick a wikipedia page that is #1 in the SERPs & knock it off of the first page. Heck you can even edit the wiki page, lol.

If you can remove the wiki page from page #1 position #1 in the SERPs, I'll believe it's possible to dethrone a ranked page.

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Thought you might find this link interesting -

My Site was Manually Flagged By Spam Team

The problem with your test is twofold - there are clearly a variety of factors involved as evidenced by the fact that not everyone has the same result. So even a negative finding will not prove that it cannot happen and a positive result (causing a site to respond downward) isn't going to mean it is possible for all sites.

second its really unnecessary to have to wait around for someone to rank a site. It only serves one purpose - to advertise a service (the usual I might ad ). If there are so many people swearing its impossible to be negatively affected why don't we cut through the nonsense of waiting for a site to rank and use an existing site that is already there at thetop of Google.

Is this board so sad that we can't find anyone who swears its impossible to hurt a site with backlinking who - you know - ranks for something?

[JamesGw]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Somebody tell Matt that if he wants this to be a legitimate test he needs to come clean with all the keywords so that everyone can see all the terms and monitor them so that everyone can see what is happening across all the terms.

I think we'll be making a thread for it where the sites and keywords will be listed and tracked.

I'm kind of excited, tbh. We should try to get electronplumber in on this too. He has some cool ideas and experience with the sandbox.

Originally Posted by yukon

I'm with you on that (red).

I don't think the age or authority of the web page that is already ranking should be a factor.

Pick a wikipedia page that is #1 in the SERPs & knock it off of the first page. Heck you can even edit the wiki page, lol.

If you can remove the wiki page from page #1 position #1 in the SERPs, I'll believe it's possible to dethrone a ranked page.

Of course authority matters. We don't know HOW Google's algorithm determines whether or not to impose a penalty or devalue links for a site. If it's based on some sort of ratio, then using a wikipedia page is probably a bad idea as most already have a ton of inbound links (whether internal or external.)

I'd be down with doing some experiments on authority sites, but would definitely want to do it on new ones as well. The more data we have, the more accurate a conclusion we can draw.

[mattlaclear]

Here's the keywords we are targeting:

weight loss
weight loss tips
weight loss programs
weight loss diet
weight loss supplements
rapid weight loss
healthy recipes for weight loss
healthy weight loss
diets for quick weight loss
weight loss diets

Changing the images now. Was just informed by my lead html guy that the site was not ready for public viewing yet.

Switching out the place holder images now.

[neil_patmore]

Should we put a friendly wager on it? Loser has to sport whatever avatar the winner chooses for them for an entire week.

You game friend?

Mate, I'm not a betting man. Ever since my daughter was born with a condition that is a million to one to get I lost faith with odds. :-)

However I do believe that what I'm saying is the truth.

If I'm wrong I'm wrong. I'm man enough to admit defeat!

[ichl13]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

I'll go one step further. I will be willing to create new sites for the first ten people to jump in on this experiment. Just give us your niche and money site and we'll take care of the rest. So basically we are giving away ten new sites with ten page one rankings.

If someone has a new site they just created that is more than welcome in our experiment as well.

Wow, how can I pass up such an offer... sign me up, I'll register a domain tonight and build my site by tomorrow. A brand spanking new website untainted by with no inbound or outbound links yet. Can't get a fairer test than that

How much content is needed?

[neil_patmore]

Changing the images now. Was just informed by my lead html guy that the site was not ready for public viewing yet.

Switching out the place holder images now.

Excellent. whats the main keyword for the home page?

[neil_patmore]

Wow, how can I pass up such an offer... sign me up, I'll register a domain tonight and build my site by tomorrow. A brand spanking new website untainted by with no inbound or outbound links yet. Can't get a fairer test than that

How much content is needed?

Get the site ranked #1 for any keyword you choose and we are in business my friend.

[Tashi Mortier]

It's really interesting to read what is going on here, I will definitely follow your experiment.

We have a lot of inconclusive results from different people here... I think there may be a grain of truth in everything.

I guess what might be happening is a combination of manual intervention of Google, some threshold in their algorithm (some mails go to spam folder, some don't, maybe the same here?), and then of course the different sources of the backlinks. Maybe even something like "known spammer web hosts or ips".

Anyways <gg> It seems pretty obvious to me that something that has been thought up by the best engineers of our time can't be reverse engineered or "beaten" so easily.

[neil_patmore]

OK for clarity. One keyword one site. It's that simple.

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

Mate, I'm not a betting man. Ever since my daughter was born with a condition that is a million to one to get I lost faith with odds. Google me to find out more :-)

However I do believe that what I'm saying is the truth.

If I'm wrong I'm wrong. I'm man enough to admit defeat!

Sorry to hear about your little girl.. I have 4 of my own and I know how absolutely precious they are to me.

Originally Posted by ichl13

Wow, how can I pass up such an offer... sign me up, I'll register a domain tonight and build my site by tomorrow. A brand spanking new website untainted by with no inbound or outbound links yet. Can't get a fairer test than that

How much content is needed?

At least 600 - 1000 word article would work.

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

Excellent. whats the main keyword for the home page?

We'll go with the exact match of the domain as the kw for the index. The other 9 keywords will be interior pages we run campaigns for.

[mattlaclear]

But while we're backlinking why not go after a wikipedia site that is already ranked really high like Yukon suggested.

I love this kind of stuff. Pity we don't do it more often.

[neil_patmore]

Thank you Matt, kind words :-)

This 'experiment' is sizing up pretty damn interesting. I'm glad I started the thread.

[neil_patmore]

But while we're backlinking why not go after a wikipedia site that is already ranked really high like Yukon suggested.

I believe this particular penalty affects new domains only. Think tanking out sniper or IPK sites only.

[ichl13]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

At least 600 - 1000 word article would work.

Ok thats fine, so I'll just build the site, add my content do the onpage seo adn give you the URL?

[neil_patmore]

Ok thats fine, so I'll just build the site, add my content do the onpage seo adn give you the URL?

Sounds perfect!

[ulcseminary]

Dang. I want to get in on this! Sadly, I'll just have to watch from the sidelines. lol

[DavidG]

Very interesting thread.

I have 2 affiliate sites if you guys would like for them to be worked on.

The Sites are well optimized and have been on for about 3 months.

They have great SEO onpage and also they don't have any backlinks - so they are the cleanest sites for this experiment. Matt can rank them then OP and others can challenge the Penalty Idea. They also have good EMD. With good quality content.

Ylod

Main Keyword - ylod repair

Delaying Ejaculation

Main Keyword - delaying ejaculation


regZ

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by neil_patmore

I believe this particular penalty affects new domains only. Think tanking out sniper or IPK sites only.

Ok, agreed. You started the thread and we'll test your assertion to the limit. But after this we should set up another experiment.

If we can learn to work together and pool our resources we may be able to accomplish some amazing things.

We could test:

high PR blogs v. low PR
spun content v. syndicated unspun content
which top level domains are better
whether hyphenated urls still work
whether we can make rank a .info

The key is we need to work together and all put our differences aside. Just because we're Warriors doesn't mean we should war with one another.

Right now we look like the jokes of the forum the way we knife fight each other.

So I'll put myself to the test here. If anyone catches me bragging or slamming someone's opinion call me on it and I'll immediately donate $100 to the charity of their choice.

I am very enthusiastic about my business and sometimes it comes off as if I'm bragging. It's something I deal with in the real world too. So I know I do it. I love what I do so much so I assume everyone else does too.

I'll also do away with my sig file completely if that will help me be able to communicate without fear that someone will think I'm trying to hijack a thread.

Sappy enough post?

[Andy Hart]

wow this is a rollercoaster of a thread.

The 2 guys started out pretty much eye ball to eye ball with each other and "what do u ya know" its turned into an actual decent SEO experiment.

Respect to the 2 guys for that

My 2 cents.

I know that the Bl@ck hat community do sometimes get a bit naughty and claim to be able to knock sites out of the serps by doing what they call "google bowling" but the problem is there are just to many variables.

In a recent Google video they said they do around 20,000 changes to the search algo in a year, who knows when each one hits and what effect they have had on rankings.

Was it bad links causing your site to dance or a recent change to the algo? There are apparently many small changes we don't hear about as loudly as panda/farmer.

I know one thing, Googles got the whole "secret sauce" down to an art form!

Andy