The Angela Experiment: aka Let's gang up on Angela thread

[Jeremy Kelsall]

Originally Posted by belgirl

OK, "hasta la vista" everyone. What was started as a thread that I thought would be helpful and informative has turned into a meaningless shouting match. Way too much testosterone floating around. I'm done. Have fun.

Are you saying Angela isn't a woman?

[zerofill]

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall

The way you keep posting things over and over again Google might slap the forum for duplicate content....although if it did happen you would probably just explain it as the google dance

Is this it?

YouTube - Safety Dance- Men Without Hats

[Doug D]

Originally Posted by zerofill

Is this it?

YouTube - Safety Dance- Men Without Hats

Jesus Christ!....

I took a drink a water...hit play...discharged water through nose...and now I can't get that Godamn song out of my head......

Thanks for that, zerofill

[Jeremy Kelsall]

Originally Posted by mikeong88

Mr Jeremy, I am afraid you might have a "CRUSH" with Angela soon...

You know what happens when you think and focus on someone too much

I would have left this thread long ago...but she seems intent on trying to discredit me and call me a penis enlargement spammer

Just to make it clear, this is exactly what I did...

1.As a customer talked to her privately about how many people were getting her link packs.

2. Tried to help people in this thread

3. Spoke with her in this thread about the number of her links that were going dead.

4. Made a recommendation to my subscribers about the link pack

5. Defended myself

Trust me, I'll be happy when I don't have to come back to this thread. Unfortunately that can't happen until Angela comes back to her senses.

[walshm56]

Timeout already. I just stated above what the problem is. You guys are getting pissed with Angela for the wrong reasons.

[zerofill]

Originally Posted by Doug D

Jesus Christ!....

I took a drink a water...hit play...discharged water through nose...and now I can't get that Godamn song out of my head......

Thanks for that, zerofill

haha...Yeah thats the stupid song that goes through my head when I hear "Google Dance" lol...

[walshm56]

I've been a member of this forum since '02 and I can tell you that 99% of the advice and products sold on here are complete bull****. Whenever a product comes along that actually does work as advertised a swarm of locusts come in and abuse the hell out of it and then render it useless. That's what's happening now, again.

[Jeremy Kelsall]

Originally Posted by walshm56

I've been a member of this forum since '02 and I can tell you that 99% of the advice and products sold on here are complete bull****. Whenever a product comes along that actually does work as advertised a swarm of locusts come in and abuse the hell out of it and then render it useless. That's what's happening now, again.

I agree. I loved getting Angelas packets to the point where I recommended them to anyone that asked and even told people about them in my own products.

[Tom Brite]

Loving the new thread title LOL!

Now that is just taking it to far!

Tom Brite

[Doug D]

And the saga now has a new title.
You know belgirl, I happen to like Angela (from my interactions with her), and I have know interest "ganging up" on her. But I stated a couple of weeks ago...in this thread...that I was a bit disheartened when I saw the word affiliate in her packet.
I tried at that time to express concerns about problems arising from the numbers getting so large.
Obviously Angela can not control the degenerates that either buy or obtain for free, and then hit these sites hard with the ppc or whatever.
However, some people did suggest some solutions that may or may not be viable, but it didn't seem to matter. I was just naive for even thinking that G. or these types of sites could ever take any actions to negate a significant amount of the value of these packets. (in one way or another). "naive"- was implied, anyway.
And perhaps there have been a few exaggerations here recently, I couldn't say...haven't bothered checking my profile urls.
Nevertheless, I would have preferred to see a little less "nobody seems to understand how big the internet is" (I'm paraphrasing) and a little more "Just possibly at some point this my actually get large enough that it might pose some problems."
Having said that, Ya...I get that there will probably always be degenerates that try to make it available to their cohort regardless of the distribution method.

[walshm56]

"I agree. I loved getting Angelas packets to the point where I recommended them to anyone that asked and even told people about them in my own products."

So let's all cool down and discuss this rationally.

[Jeremy Kelsall]

I wasn't the one that led this in the direction it has gone.

I simply suggested limiting the number of people that got the packet..Suddenly she starts posting fake testimonial accusations and accuses me of spamming her link packs with "penis enlargement" anchor texts for articles written by an author other than me.

Not only did she post these things once, but posted them repeatedly.

[Doug D]

Originally Posted by zerofill

haha...Yeah thats the stupid song that goes through my head when I hear "Google Dance" lol...

In that case...
How the hell did you manage to get any work done over the last few months?
Oh...you must of stayed out of the W.F.

[nobluff]

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall

I believe it was the netscape site...

Not only did they make threats, but also list the name, site, and IP address of people that have posted links on their site as spammers...

Just looked at that list again, and its amazing that out of the 50 plus in the list, only about 6 attempted to add real information (meaning first and last name), while the others are real spammy looking. It reminds me of the fools that spam my blog with "nice site" comments.

If you are taking the time to create a profile, then at least make some effort to add some realistic information.

[walshm56]

I tested these links first back in the beginning of April. I cut and pasted some articles(duplicate content and ****ty clickbank products with raw hoplinks.. LOL). I haven't done a thing to promote them since.

Do a search in google for ...lose 10 pounds fast...green energy..burn the fat feed the muscle...all without quotes...

I've moved on to other ways to use these links but you should get the idea...

[Doug D]

Originally Posted by Franco Mocke

Doug,

Angela is making a killing with these packets, I'm sure she has over a thousand subscribers, so it is only natural for here to defend her own product. You can't blame her for doing that...

I wouldn't really call 5k a mo...a killing (if that were the case).
Personally, I wouldn't want to do what she does and manage 1000 subscribers a month...for 5k. (again, if that's the case?)

And I don't blame her for defending her product. I have know issue with the product itself, anyway. And I don't have a problem with her, either.
I only took with issue with her insistence that the web is so big, and G.....and these types of sites...would never notice a little ole Angela--type attitude.
And I'm not saying that G. has done or noticed anything. I'm not saying that these sites collectively got together and blah, blah, blah
I'm only saying that we should all self medicate and relax. Wait....****!...wrong forum.
Well whatever, as i said, I don't begrudge Angela the right to defend her product.

[Joe118]

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

...

Joseph Horn

I suspect those are the types of products that webmasters DON'T want linked to their sites.

Is there anything in your use terms that says that someone can NOT use your packets to promote penis enlargment? Do you know for a fact that this person is not a paying customer of yours?

I suggest to you here and now that this "customer vetting" and then accusing your customers (potentially) of causing problems with your product, is a slippery slope you don't want to go down. Or are you saying that this person is a spammer, because he sells penis enlargment devices? And oh of course he couldn't be a customer, since he sells penis enlargment devices and therefore must have stolen your packets? Is that what you are saying?

In fact, if I was a real hard core spammer, the *last thing on earth* I'd do is use sites in your packets -- hell would freeze over before I'd join your crowd of clueless newbies and risk my postings being deleted. Spammers try to avoid notice and detection, and joining your stampede is a stupid thing for a real spammer to do.

You're constantly harping on the accusation that your product is losing sites to post on because of stolen packets and spammers. You obviously want to perpetuate that fantasy and not admit the truth, which is that the sites in your packets are all of a sudden blasted with thousands of new profiles and backlink spam. If I were the webmaster of one of these sites I would sure as hell lock it down. I'm surprised that not more of the sites in your packets are locking people out immediately.

[Joe118]

Originally Posted by askloz

Well said, it kinda ruins it for everyone else... oh hum.

Angela, put the price up to $997 per month. Get the serious SEO'ers in.

The reason its priced at $5 is that that's what its worth. It's directed at newbies, not serious SEOs. Anyone with a bit of knowlegde -- and you surely are in that group -- can come up with a list of high PR sites that provide the ability to post links, and noone in their right mind will pay $997 or even $97.

[Doug D]

Originally Posted by Joe118

The reason its priced at $5 is that that's what its worth. It's directed at newbies, not serious SEOs. Anyone with a bit of knowlegde -- and you surely are in that group -- can come up with a list of high PR sites that provide the ability to post links, and noone in their right mind will pay $997 or even $97.

Dude, the $997 was meant to be a joke, I'm sure.

[4morereferrals]

Rather authoritative tone ...

Yes - anybody in their right mind would pay $97 ... not for 30 but ... and yeah people could scour the web for the coveted do follow high pr sites ... but for $5 freaking bux - why would you waste your time?

You cant create a profile, confirm registration via email and test 30 sites ability to allow full html anchor text capabilities for under $5 - hell under $50 in the value of your time! Hell - if you value your time at $150 hr ... well you get the point.

It takes most skilled people a couple of hours to place links on these sites AFTER angela has already done most of the hard / time consuming work - proving they are viable. Imagine the search, test, discard, keep and log phase of the process. 45 sites may yield 30 useable?

Finding is one thing ... vetting and testing is another.

Originally Posted by Joe118

The reason its priced at $5 is that that's what its worth. It's directed at newbies, not serious SEOs. Anyone with a bit of knowlegde -- and you surely are in that group -- can come up with a list of high PR sites that provide the ability to post links, and noone in their right mind will pay $997 or even $97.

[Joe118]

All of this stuff except the email confirmation step can be *easily* automated. It doesn't really cost $150 for 30 sites. At least that's how *I* get them

[peter gibson]

Originally Posted by Joe118

The reason its priced at $5 is that that's what its worth. It's directed at newbies, not serious SEOs. Anyone with a bit of knowlegde -- and you surely are in that group -- can come up with a list of high PR sites that provide the ability to post links, and noone in their right mind will pay $997 or even $97.

In the first place, I'm pretty sure that was a joke. Secondly, you need to slow down Joe. You are insulting more than Angela with all this packet bashing. Thirdly, judging by your sig you are competing with Angela - or at least highly motivated and interested in the same market she has been successfully selling to. That, coupled with your last few posts, says to me that you may just have a vested interest in making Angela's product look bad.

If these packets are directed at knucklehead newbs, why did Jeremy buy the early versions, and then proceed to recommend to his lists? Are you suggesting that he is a newb? I am certainly not a newb, and I have used her packets and seen good results. Is everyone that has used and thus recommended Angelas packets a newb? Because I can go through this forum and pick out at least two dozen seasoned veterans that have used and spoken highly of Angela's stuff. What are you offering for 5.00 (or for free) that isn't almost identical to what she is offering? If she is so far from being cool, why are you giving away similar stuff?

I understand all the points being made about why Angela should slow down on making this stuff available to so many people. I even agree with a lot of the things you are pointing out, previous to your last few posts.

But you are wrong about one thing. If these packets were made available to a significantly lower number, they would in fact be worth more to the buyer. An assurance that the links would stick and not be spammed by thousands is worth it's weight in gold to Angela. Hopefully she will come to that realization soon enough.

Not every internet marketer is even mildly interested in SEO work, other than finding cheap ways to outsource it. That doesn't make them newbs or worthy of your condescending attitude. Furthermore, if she did all the linking herself as a stand alone outsourcing business, it would be worth more still. I personally know one very successful SEO company making a killing that would never share their methods - as Angela has - and some of said methods are identical to Angelas. So for you to say that "serious SEO's" aren't interested in this method, you are making a blanket statment that doesn't hold weight.

Give the vitriol a rest. If you think you can help Angela combat the problems people here are pointing out, do so in a respectable manner. If not, start your own thread and title it "why my stuff is better than angelas" and have at it.

[Joe118]

Actually if you'll look around you'll see I highly recommend Angela's product, for a certain class of warriors.

My stuff is free so I'm definitely not competing with her. My stuff is free because I value it as worth that much. I'd rather have people on my list and be able to sell them really valuable stuff. By the way, I only gave away one packet to test the waters, I havent launched yet, so again I'm in no way competing with Angela. You'll see me continuing to recommend that a certain class of people buy her packets, Paul's, whoever's. But this thread was/is about Angela's product, not mine.

As to the vitriol: I got riled by Angela's accussations (completely unfounded) that sophisticated spammers and b-lack h-atters are destroying her product. Like I said if I was one of these people, I'd stay as far away as possible from her sites. In fact its the large audience of people that get these packets and then spam sites in a clueless way that's the problem. This will happen with her customers and with people that steal the packets.

I probably mis-stated what I intended to say about newbs: with the large volume of subscriptions that these packets have -- Angela's, Paul's, everyone else's -- these packets are now useful mainly for newbies and people that want to trade money for effort. At some time in the past they were useful for people who can find these sites on their own. Now with the huge volume, the equation has changed. Serious SEO types should IMHO develop their own network of sites and cross link there; control over your fate is everything in this game. It's always better to have full control, a guarantee that the links will stick, etc. That is exactly why some people are upset when some fraction of the sites in Angela's packets become useless.

[Joe118]

One more point. If I ever said than serious SEO people should not be interested in Angela's *method* then I mis-spoke. I meant to say that they should not be interested in the sites that she recommends -- it's the kiss of death to join in the frenzy that hits these sites whenever one of Angela's packets comes out every month.

I never bought Angela's method ebook and don't know what that method is. For all I know I may even be using the same method to find sites or a similar one to hers.

[askloz]

nah, top priced products are normally geared to show the quality of the product. Keeping secrets or unknown doings by a majority of people and placing a high price tag more or less keeps the secrete, a secrete to the chosen few. You're less likely to hand out that information after paying a grand for it, than you are $5 a month.

I've seen it happen, give it time, and all these links will be worthless. It would not surprise me at this price, someone at MSN, Yahoo, Google will take note of these URL's and add them into their algorithm and devalue the links. It's happened before. And they still do it.

Originally Posted by Doug D

Dude, the $997 was meant to be a joke, I'm sure.

[Doug D]

Then I reckon I stand corrected. I have no problem forking out the cabbage for info that will save me significant time in research, trial/error whatever, but if I paid $997 to discover that I'm getting 30 links a month...I think I'm exercising the refund...with extreme prejudice.

Originally Posted by askloz

nah, top priced products are normally geared to show the quality of the product. Keeping secrets or unknown doings by a majority of people and placing a high price tag more or less keeps the secrete, a secrete to the chosen few. You're less likely to hand out that information after paying a grand for it, than you are $5 a month.

I've seen it happen, give it time, and all these links will be worthless. It would not surprise me at this price, someone at MSN, Yahoo, Google will take note of these URL's and add them into their algorithm and devalue the links. It's happened before. And they still do it.

[askloz]

You're not the only one mate. I have nothing against Angela. But, this is one of the biggest mistakes she's made so far. She's better off just SHOWING people how to get them, rather than doing the work. She's feeding all this information at a LOW price to let any of the Big Search Engines to come in, pay $5 a month, and devalue all those links in the their next Algorithm update. She's ruining it for everyone, but just too blind to give a rats bum right now. Sorry Angela, I've been in this game far too long and had it happen to me when I bought links from someone years ago. When I found a majority of the links just fade into the background, i was pissed big time, spending hours and hours and months getting those links to find all my work was wasted.

And now people wonder (or have wondered) why I have over 1200 websites and where I get most of my back links from. And no one not even Google, Yahoo, MSN know what they are and for over two years, my rankings have remained at the very top, nice and stable.

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall

Angela, don't be bitter because I think your product is going down hill...

[askloz]

LMFAO

But if it generated you $2k a month, would be a bargain, no?

Originally Posted by Doug D

Then I reckon I stand corrected. I have no problem forking out the cabbage for info that will save me significant time in research, trial/error whatever, but if I paid $997 to discover that I'm getting 30 links a month...I think I'm exercising the refund...with extreme prejudice.

[askloz]

Hmm, ok, so, sorry to add to the fire... but, you say if it was not honest, ethical, you would not sell it?

Ok, well, i can tell you right now, that you are breaking the most ethical rule in SEO.

#1 do not spam websites with links.

Put yourself in someone else's shoes, it's not your website, you just trample all over someone else's like you're inviting yourself into someone's house unannounced, jump on their couch and turn the TV station over without even asking.

I'm pretty sure that you would be totally ticked off if you had hundreds of people coming over to your website banging out a link for you to remove the next day.

Webmasters duty is to add good quality content to their sites, not spend all freak'n day removing spammy links.

Show some respect for the other people out there will ya.

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

. This is my product and if it wasn't a good, ethical, HONEST product I wouldn't sell it.

[askloz]

You're not thinking with a clear head here.

it does not take a lot of human intervention.

Big sites like WF, are a magnet for Google, MSN, Yahoo officials to come over to see who is boasting the next SEO product. Believe it or not, they buy most of these out there that create the biggest wave of interest to check it out.

You've done quite well creating a wave of your own. Who's to say that you do not have one of the latter officials on your list that you're dishing these links out to... one copy and paste into their "devalue link database" and boom, with a big smile on their face thanking you for making their jobs easier.

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

Yes, but they'd have to know what is "relevant" and that will take a LOT of human interaction.

[askloz]

LOL, maybe you should ask for a $2 rebate on every $5 you give her

Originally Posted by axleman

FWIW

I keep a spread sheet of every profile I have made since I joined up in June.

Out of 160 total sites (June/July, including Pauls 50 packs as well), 95 are still good. That's roughly a 40% loss rate which is in line with what others are posting. I don't know how that compares with previous months.

[Doug D]

"Put yourself in someone else's shoes, it's not your website, you just trample all over someone else's like you're inviting yourself into someone's house unannounced, jump on their couch and turn the TV station over without even asking."

Such actions would be blasphemous, man.*please see disclaimer

*unless it's one of my drunken hottie ho's
*unless said offender is accompanied by several of--please refer to 1st disclaimer
Damn't, wrong forum again. I'm just not feeling it on the longevity thing here.

[Doug D]

"LOL, maybe you should ask for a $2 rebate on every $5 you give her "

Now ya gotta laugh at that, thats just f%@kn funny!

Sorry A.

[Gwuido65]

I'm sorry but I have to step in here...I've never read so much petty bickering in my life....Why are people getting so uptight?

Isn't it a case of mixing things up? Angela's package is just one tiny component of a comprehensive backlinking strategy...

People should combine Angela's Package with a myriad of other methods i.e Their own research, etc etc..

For $5 a month, at least they can get you started..but who cares if 50% of them are deleted.

Surely as well as creating good enough content for people to link to naturally, everybody should be doing lots of other link building?

Its not a case of use Angela's package and that it is it?

[Doug D]

It's not about the 5 bones chief. It doesn't matter to me 5 or 50. But, my time is important. So whether I do them myself because I only have 1 ecommerce site, or I spend the time training someone to do it, and they go and take the time to set em all proper-like--It does equate to time, resources..whatever. It's not the $5.
The original sentiment (or at least mine) was for her to be cognizant of potential issues arising...and possibly find some sort of solution. Hell, its in her best interest to do so anyway.

Originally Posted by Gwuido65

I'm sorry but I have to step in here...I've never read so much petty bickering in my life....Why are people getting so uptight?

Isn't it a case of mixing things up? Angela's package is just one tiny component of a comprehensive backlinking strategy...

People should combine Angela's Package with a myriad of other methods i.e Their own research, etc etc..

For $5 a month, at least they can get you started..but who cares if 50% of them are deleted.

Surely as well as creating good enough content for people to link to naturally, everybody should be doing lots of other link building?

Its not a case of use Angela's package and that it is it?

[peter gibson]

Originally Posted by Gwuido65

I'm sorry but I have to step in here...I've never read so much petty bickering in my life....Why are people getting so uptight?

Isn't it a case of mixing things up? Angela's package is just one tiny component of a comprehensive backlinking strategy...

People should combine Angela's Package with a myriad of other methods i.e Their own research, etc etc..

For $5 a month, at least they can get you started..but who cares if 50% of them are deleted.

Surely as well as creating good enough content for people to link to naturally, everybody should be doing lots of other link building?

Its not a case of use Angela's package and that it is it?

Honestly, I began today thinking I was just being paranoid about all this stuff, but since I just finished spending 20 minutes convincing a webmaster that I genuinely joined their forum out of interest and not because I was a paid spammer, I've become concerned again.

Anyway, Gwuido, yes - anyone worth a salt is using many different strategies to SEO their sites, Angela's packets being just one. But bear in mind that the more popular something like this becomes, the more attention will be paid to safeguard against it - by both webmasters and search engines alike. It doesn't take too many complaints flung at the wall before something sticks. All that Angela and her customers need is for someone to figure out an effective penalty structure and/or an effective strategy to combat the opening flood gates of thousands of monthly spam links.

This is something none of us want. I, for one, don't want to end up losing strength from my other SEO efforts because I paid for and used this service. While that is not likely to happen, it's certainly not impossible, and people really need to stop being so defensive and understand the gravity of making her system so readily available.

We all know what happens when you link to a "bad neighborhood" yes? If not, try it. It right sucks. If you do link to one, your SEO efforts can screech to a halt, and even worse you have a chance at being de-indexed and tanked. What's to stop google (or any webmaster for that matter) from creating an algo that can figure out Angela's packets and then offer a penalty to the end user of Angelas links?

Granted the internet is HUGE (as Angela points out), but it's not paranoia to believe that what I just mentioned is possible. Let's put huge into some context. Assume Angela and Paul currently have 1000 subscribers. Multiply that 1000 subscribers by 80 sites (Angela + Paul). Then multiply that by the average amount of links people are placing on each of the 80 sites. I'll say people place 4 links to each profile. Conservatively that ends up being 320 000 extra links suddenly rushing forth at only 80 sites. This is fairly disproportionate, yes?

Does anyone here really believe that this kind of volume won't raise alarms, or at the least, cause the site owners to start a campaign of mass deletions? We are already seeing that a few webmasters are extremely uptight about the whole affair.

There are always ground rules for systems like Angela's packets, axioms that are THE CORE reasons these links work in such a powerful way. In the first place they only work well only in limited numbers. Just for example, I signed up for this system thinking "wow, I got in before she closed the doors". At this point I really can't understand why they are being marketed and sold even more.

In the second place, these links only work if they stick, and when more numbers of people start bombing the same 30 sites it is going to become increasingly harder for them to stick. Hence this "google dance" that seems to be the phrase of the hour.

So we can take from these rules that the more people using these packets, the less likely they will produce the kind of results we are all paying to see. This is why Jeremy, a few others, and myself, have suggested that Angela and Paul impose limits and raise prices. From the responses I have seen in this thread, she's having to defend herself far too much to really allow that advice to sink in. Hopefully she will allow the rudeness to die away and look at the message behind the fluff.

And as an aside, I'm really not impressed with Angela's response to Jeremy. I'm sorry Angela, but I have to tell it like it is. I've followed this thread now for 2 days, and I can only see that Jeremy is concerned and trying to offer sound advice. In response Angela has become more and more defensive, as if he is attacking her. Not so. Her bringing up the "penis enlargement" thing was bad form to me, and the first sign I have had to date that Angela may be getting a bit frazzled by all this dissing.

Angela needs to understand that all it takes for one furious webmaster to set out and acquire her packet (which is now so readily available) and email every site on her packet lists with a stern warning. Once that communication starts between site owners, anything can happen. That would be nothing nice, I can personally guarantee it.

Whether or not Angela can start to understand and realize this or not, I believe I will cancel my subscription and wait for her private WSO to come out - wherein she will do the work herself and not allow people to become privy to her sources. Now that is a system I will get behind. Now that she's proven her worth to the crowd, I think she can afford to let go of this "helping newbies out" packet. It just makes more sense to me to end my relationship with these packets since she doesn't seem prepared to take countermeasures against what is now obviously happening.

DISCLAIMER: Angela, I am not slighting you in the least here, but I am trying to communicate that there are things being said within this thread that you should truly consider... seriously. I only want for your success, and my opinions are only meant to assist in that regard.

[Paul M]

Whoa, this thread has become a beast. Ignoring all the other stuff going on in here for a second.

Angela,

I've been a subscriber for a long time and you've always been helpful, but there is a serious problem . There is a clear increasing trend of sites that no longer allow links or take steps against them each month. You cant ignore that problem for two reasons IMO.


1. Your putting your subscribers at an ever higher risk of getting blacklisted or penalized.

2. Your putting the long term future of your business at risk if you don't change how you operate.

Your gonna have to adapt and consider your ever growing and probably already large subscriber base and other forums sharing your packets. There have already been other good ideas how you could do that in this thread. If that means more work for you, then put the price up to $7 or $10 ect...to compensate.

Also another way that could cut down on your packets being shared on other forums is by ending the "first packet free offer". I would guess, and it is just a guess, that members on other forums are subscribing and then un-subscribing from your WSO each month after you update the packet being offered for free. Then sharing those packets on other forums. You could put more emphasis on the results your subscribers have been getting rather than drawing people in with a free packet. You have plenty of glowing testimonials for it.

Don't take the above as me trying to tell you how to run your business. The above is just my opinion and suggestions.


Belinda (belgirl),

Originally Posted by belgirl

OK, "hasta la vista" everyone. What was started as a thread that I thought would be helpful and informative has turned into a meaningless shouting match. Way too much testosterone floating around. I'm done. Have fun.

You say your done with this thread because it's turned into a "shouting match" but your last contribution was to change the thread title. To one which will help provoke that "shouting match" to continue and/or escalate. Nice job


Joe,

Originally Posted by Joe118

In fact, if I was a real hard core spammer, the *last thing on earth* I'd do is use sites in your packets -- hell would freeze over before I'd join your crowd of clueless newbies and risk my postings being deleted. Spammers try to avoid notice and detection, and joining your stampede is a stupid thing for a real spammer to do.

You do realize you probably just insulted a couple of thousand or more forum members with that statement...don't you? Being one of Angela's subscribers doesn't mean I am (or anyone else) is a "clueless newbie". I for one am well aware of what am doing and why I buy these packets. While the packets are still effective. I can just pay Angela $5 instead of spending more of my time or money researching. I also use other link sources and have my own database of links. Your making assumptions about a large group of people you don't know. Not a good idea.

BTW, I would say most of us are not "hard core" spammers and don't want to be either.


-Paul

[dadaas]

I see many people here talking offtopic.

Just wanted to ask how did that guy go.
Did you earn anything from that panic attack.

@those that are sceptic.
You guys dont know what SEO is.
Who are best SEO experts? Answer me this question. Who you think out there are best SEO experts? I mean webmasters that are involved into what niche?

Every decent webmaster knows whos best SEO experts.

[djbory]

Originally Posted by Joe118

Changing Title Meta Tag can hurt Google Rankings | Google Success SEO SEM Tips

Example of how easy it actually *is* for google to shut down anything they dont like. Granted, this is on-page SEO, not off-page, so it's a lot easier to determine what's happening.

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

Thank you for posting that, Joe. However, all I see is a blog post and some comments. I don't see any type of evidence, showing that what this person is saying is true. He hasn't linked to anything or shown any kind of proof that what he's saying is right. So once again, all we have is "someone said". Just like most of the things we keep hearing about backlinks and SEO.

P.S. I changed my "Angela" page title tag to Angela/Angela from Aberdeen and then back to Angela from Aberdeen. None of that hurt my rankings.

'WHAT JOEL SAID IS very much TRUE - IT JUST HAPPENED TO ME'

One of my sites was on first page of GOOGLE for several KW’s. Last night I changed the title metta tag to include one more keyword I wanted to optimize the site for...

I came to this thread as every morning, saw Joel comment and went back to change my title tag the way it was, but Google already had cached the page and now I went from first page of Google to second page for all my keywords...This is bad guys, don't ever do that....

I hope my site doesn't slip down even more... I'm starting a very aggressive backlink campaign to see if I can bring it back t first page... this is very upsetting... If I just had read Joel the comment before...

DLBory

[Joe118]

If anyone feels insulted by me, I apologize. I am not trying to insult anyone. If I did, it's entirely un-intentional and through badly worded postings.

[4morereferrals]

I did it ... as my dexcription meta was not all that hot and the keywords I was optimizing for where not that hot for traffic volume ... either.

Made some minor changes to improve the On Page [ i think ] ...

kept building links ... google danced me around a bit - yes ... but ... kept building links and came back even stronger.

Certainly Sub Optimal to do this - but "may not" be the end of the world.

YMMV ...

Originally Posted by djbory

'WHAT JOEL SAID IS very much TRUE - IT JUST HAPPENED TO ME'

One of my sites was on first page of GOOGLE for several KW’s. Last night I changed the title metta tag to include one more keyword I wanted to optimize the site for...

I came to this thread as every morning, saw Joel comment and went back to change my title tag the way it was, but Google already had cached the page and now I went from first page of Google to second page for all my keywords...This is bad guys, don't ever do that....

I hope my site doesn't slip down even more... I'm starting a very aggressive backlink campaign to see if I can bring it back t first page... this is very upsetting... If I just had read Joel the comment before...

DLBory

[4morereferrals]

Who are best SEO experts? Answer me this question. Who you think out there are best SEO experts? I mean webmasters that are involved into what niche?

If you can rank terms in the insurance niche's - I think you gots some chops

Car Insurance / Auto Insurance / Life Insurance / Health Insurance

Info I rec'd indicates GEICO spends $475k a DAY across the net. That does not include their TV media ad spends.

But hey ... they cut out the middle - man and 15% ! [ evil agents ] LOL

And ... replaced them with less knowledgeable order takers and a only slightly lessor evil Ad Agency.

Im not biased ... or bitter ....

[jendoe]

*blink* Wow.

I'm sorry to have to say this, but... I find it ironic that some of the "more experienced" folks honestly don't seem to realize how bad their posts sound to us "less experienced" folks (yes, newbs!). There are people replying in this thread that, honestly, I had considered buying from - and now won't. Sorry if it sounds harsh or rude, but it's the truth...

Angela, I actually think that your responses so far reflect well on you - you must have an infinite supply of patience and after all this, I like you even more.

It's really a shame this thread has gone down this road. It's become un-usable for its original purpose of comparing results (who has time to read through 25 pages of vitriol) and whether or not you think Angela's service is good, it would have been really useful, especially for us newbies, to be able to see what kind of results people were getting and to have actual tips on how to do better.

I also think some of the more experienced people may be forgetting how tough it can be to just be starting out, to feel completely overwhelmed and clueless, to be bombarded with a million offers, many that cost hundreds of dollars (but "how can you afford not to buy this! You'll make so much!"), and worse - to spend months (or years) trying, trying, trying and just not getting "it" and not seeing any results, despite spending money and every free moment of your time.

What is *great* about Angela's method is that it's very cheap and easy to test. $5 to sign up is nothing (sandwiches in my neighborhood cost more!). You can see if it works for yourself with very little investment of time and money.

And, even better, for us new people - it's easy to understand. I can see the whole process from start to end, and it takes me a couple days, rather than months or years to get it in place and see results. That's really really really helpful.

If it turns out it's not *optimal* - so what? I'm just starting out, I'm not expecting perfection! I'm expecting this will be a learning process, and that I'll learn something from going through all this with the backlinks, and whereever I end up with the next project, this will be another little piece of the puzzle in my head.

If I get even ONE sale from this method, it will be totally worth it. If you're not brand new to IM, then that's probably not true for you. But from where I am, 1 sale is EVERYTHING. One sale means - it IS possible. One sale would give me a ridiculous amount of hope right now, which, again as an exhausted newbie, I desperately need.

Sorry for venting. But, there ya go. Cheers! I'm off to go work on the backlinking some more and see if I can boost up my little article. Right now, I don't think it's anywhere in the top 100 or so (and I didn't look further than that!)... but I started just this morning, and haven't gotten too far yet. So, if you don't totally hate me after this post, send me a little lucky energy Thanks!

[askloz]

You're missing the point jendoe. It has nothing to do with how good Angela's service is, I'm sure it's good, I don't think anyone is denying that. She comes across as a very nice lady and I'm sure all of us can agree.

It's also got nothing to do with the price she's charging either.

It's all about in the manner of getting these links and giving them out. Someone said on this thread that backlinking isn't all about SEO? Well, if backlinks aren't just the answer, what else is, ok, onpage optimization, very possible, yes, but takes a long time to rank for a phrase that's hard to rank for without any back links, long tailed keywords, very easily done.

What else is there? There isn't. Onpage and Offpage, that's all there is.

Tell me this. Is it ethical, honest, to jump on a site and blast your links on without permission? That's link spamming in anyone's book.

Forums don't ask you to place a link, yet many join a forum and place a signature with a link in it, make a post, then move on to the next one. I've seen it happen every day on Brad Callen's forum that I moderate. Most just leave worthless posts or dig up really old posts and say "thanks for the information", or they try their best to ask a question, then a few days later, someone else will join the forum and answer it who also has a link in their signature file. And the most posts they make is 3 and they're not to be seen again - amongst other strategies I've seen. I wasn't born yesterday I know all the tactics people use. I was guilty of doing it myself. Until one day it started happening to me with 100's of people joining my forum every day that I had to delete. It pissed me off. So i started putting myself in others shoes.

But it's not just about that, publicly offering a service to get back links may seem a honest business. But what about these poor sods who own these sites who have to remove all those nonsense posts? Is our time more valuable than theirs?

What about all the people out there who do get backlinks who keep it to themselves where they get them from, then later to find all their links are now worthless because the major search engines have devalued the links? EDU and GOV sites are now devalued, they used to hold a LOT of value, not any more, all domain extensions are treated the same now.

Take a look at Traffic Geyser where he offered a service to send out your video to numerous video social sites, like Youtube, who now have put nofollow attributes on all the 3rd party links. It's having services like these that just ruin it for everyone else in the business of getting high page rankings.

Boasting or either offering a service where you get links from is like burying your business six foot under before it's even been given the chance to succeed. It makes it harder for everyone else to find alternatives to get those high rankings.

Stuff like this should be kept to one's self. Angela will be better off just SHOWING people how to do it, rather than giving all these links out there for people to use. Make the Search engines work harder to find these links, don't make their job easier.

[Carl Pruitt]

Originally Posted by djbory

'WHAT JOEL SAID IS very much TRUE - IT JUST HAPPENED TO ME'

One of my sites was on first page of GOOGLE for several KW’s. Last night I changed the title metta tag to include one more keyword I wanted to optimize the site for...

I came to this thread as every morning, saw Joel comment and went back to change my title tag the way it was, but Google already had cached the page and now I went from first page of Google to second page for all my keywords...This is bad guys, don't ever do that....

I hope my site doesn't slip down even more... I'm starting a very aggressive backlink campaign to see if I can bring it back t first page... this is very upsetting... If I just had read Joel the comment before...

DLBory

I have more than a few sites where I have changed titles/tags and rankings have gone up or stayed the same. Some where the rankings dropped. Just out of curiosity, what would be Google's rationale for completely ditching a site over such a small change? Common sense would indicate that if the new title and the content were still relevant to each other, and the change didn't change the meaning of the title as Google's algorithm saw it, then other factors were at play.

[Jeremy123]

yeeeaaaah let's git her guuuuyyyys lol ha ha, ha ha

sorry had to say that when I saw the title of this thread

it cracked me up

seriously, these backlinks work, just keep it simple

[hommi_16]

ALL GOOD THINGS COME TO AN END

Let me just start off by saying that my dealings with Angela have been great. I contacted her last months because I didn't get my packet via e-mail and she responded to me both on the forum and as to me e-mail as well. She is a pleasure to deal with.

I'm going to say that for the past few months I've only been using her backlinks. At first my sites had a very good jump in the SERPS then they got buried deep (for over a month) and just a few days ago they came back although not as strong as before but better then before I used her links.

I have the same concerns as many people here are expressing and I do think it needs some serious thought. As more and more people are getting these links it is inevitable that something will go wrong. You maybe right Angela! The sites you offer are high traffic sites which probably do get a ton of people joining on a daily basis. But realistically, how many of those people who are finding those sites naturally are actually doing so for backlinking? Heck, I find it even strange that those people will leave any type of signature/bio... never mind links!

I know that sometimes we can get blindsided when something we did has been such a success but I really do think that at one point or another we will all have to move on. Until then I will continue using your backlinks. It's your business and you run it the way you want to but I really think you should heed the advice which many have expressed.

[lyrickat21]

I don't know if this is relevant to this question, but did you submit your url to google manually in order for them to index your site? That is the best way to get your site indexed. Your backlinks should start working after your site has been indexed, but be patient, at the beginning stages of a new website your results can fluctuate. Believe me I know!

I am not allowed to post links yet because I just joined the site, but do a google search for google site submission and you should find the page you need to manually submit your site.

[Jeremy123]

The packets work though it would be nice if there was a limit,
now a new service is coming out which will automate this process even more.

People will really have to make sure they add value to where they post
their links, whether it is a blog, comment, or edit profile, otherwise your wasting time.

I personally only use the packets that have a blog and a blog roll, then I add
content to the blog and add links to the blogroll. I don't see how a webmaster
would not like this, spam comments I can understand, 1 or 2 links in a profile

I think are ok, but if the webmaster checked them and saw the user never came back
then I'd be suspicious, though what webmaster has the time to check.

there is a lot of software that help you find sites for blogging and commenting,
people could spam those to, and no one is complaining.

also these packets should be a part of your overall link building process,
not the entire process

people lets not get too bend out of shape about this stuff,
you can just cancel, and build links another way

[daveshu]

I have the same problem Franco.

I used the packets on some of my sites & a customers site. At first all was good, all the sites performed well.

Now my customers site is gone. It disappeared for a week, came back for 1 day, and has now been gone for another week.

He isn't best pleased & I'm cacking my pants in case I've killed it.

I can search for site:www(dot)hisdomain(dot)com keyword1 keyword2 & it appears in the results - so it isn't de-indexed, but it isn't showing in the results anymore & it's costing him money - & might be costing me money too before long - eek!