Profile Backlinking- Still works?

[Arav]

From past few days observation,I've been seeing that 'Profile Backlinks' are getting least importance, even Zero importance in terms of SEO method.And this probably for Google Panda update.
So, really profile Backlink has no use or contribution to SEO?

[Arav]

Originally Posted by mahni1390

Backlink profiles are commonly discussed in SEO forums as if they mean something. In most cases the backlink profiles that people build are completely useless. As I recently explained in one SEO forum, “numbers of backlinks has nothing to do with search engine optimization”. You don’t optimize a Web site through backlinks.

Would you please illustrate a more?
Thanks.

[Rukshan]

Not much. But we can create mass amount of profile backlinks as 2nd tier backilnks to submitted articles(1st tier) get indexed well.

[swords]

I would have to disagree that they have VERY litte or NO link juice... if done right, profile backlinks can still yield great results - done correctly.

Throwing in a URL and 1 anchor text into XRumer and sending to 20,000 links is definitely not a prosperous road to take, but change it up a bit and put 50-100 words and rotate anchor texts... you'll be seeing much better outcomes.

[Arav]

Originally Posted by swords

I would have to disagree that they have VERY litte or NO link juice... if done right, profile backlinks can still yield great results - done correctly.

Throwing in a URL and 1 anchor text into XRumer and sending to 20,000 links is definitely not a prosperous road to take, but change it up a bit and put 50-100 words and rotate anchor texts... you'll be seeing much better outcomes.

Yes,an instant rush of links isn't a better way.
Would you please tell that where to put the '50-100' words? In the signature or Bio with the Anchor Text in it? And if the number of links are few like 250-300, is there any need of Rotating the Anchor Text?

[Oranges]

Use them for anchor variation and feeding your main links (2-3 tier links). But money sites? Nah! Don't!

[swords]

Originally Posted by Arav

Yes,an instant rush of links isn't a better way.
Would you please tell that where to put the '50-100' words? In the signature or Bio with the Anchor Text in it? And if the number of links are few like 250-300, is there any need of Rotating the Anchor Text?

I usually do it in the signature because it typically is longer than the Bio in most forum platforms.

I still think rotation is a key factor... Doing 60%/30%/10% keyword variation is what a lot of people have recommended - and that's what I use as well.

[Arav]

Originally Posted by Oranges

But money sites? Nah! Don't!

Why not for money Sites? What's the actual reason behind this conclusion?

[danadana]

I think profile backlinks are still important as long as these are natural find by search engine,not through bookmarkings etc.

[owenlee]

i only use them for my 2nd layer of backlinks...and it works fine for me..

[mazdak]

Not as there used to be! google does not index most of them.

[JSProjects]

They're definitely nowhere near as strong as they used to be. And personally, I question how strong they've ever really been. In large quantities they should be able to at least help boost your lower tier backlinks a little. But beyond that, I'm not sure how much of a purpose they serve.

[swords]

I'm sorry, but I just don't agree with you people saying that they are not worth it anymore.

Think about it.... do you REALLY think that Google can tell the difference between a forum profile and a webpage? Hell no, it looks all the same to a 'spider' - if done correctly!

That's why you MUST write 50-100 words of SPUN content in each profile so it APPEARS to Google that these are actual webpages of small content - which will give you the link juice you deserve.

[commoditytrainer]

Profile backlinks are good for places such as Google, MSN, Yahoo, etc, so you get a profile backlink PR 10 in most cases where it is helpful. Otherwise it does nothing for the serps. Better off using all available methods of SEO rather than concentrating on only one.