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

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by lailascott

This thread is fantastic! Lots of the members of this forum responded on this post. I would like to share my thoughts on this subject. Ok, for me, the smaller competitors, the faster you can rank. Choosing the less than 500k result is not a competitive keywords. "Panic Attack Heart Symptoms" keywords are too long so it's really possible for you to rank in a very short time. That is not a good experiment for me and for every one of us here (as I can see on their response).

Thank you for your feedback, Lailascott.

I AM wondering why you don't think it's a very good experiment. Someone took my example and actually DID it and they are NUMBER ONE for a keyword that has 9,810 searches EVERY month; the Clickbank product that "solves" the problem pays $43.10 PER SALE. In my opinion, this is an excellent experiment; it shows people that it doesn't take a guru to rank well for a highly searched, lucrative keyword. If even 1% of the searchers buy this product, it's worth $51,442 a year. That's more than many EMPLOYERS pay people for their full time, permanent jobs.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

LOL ... whos the handsome mofo at Position #6 on page one when you search like this "panic attack heart symptoms" ?

Damn that guys good ...

Nothing like ranking on page 1 #6 with one post! Top That! LOL

How many searches a day does that longtail get? Maybe people are having panic attacks over their backlinks and SEO - maybe it'll get some traction to my WSO ... LOL.

Classic. Sorry - having some fun.

We don't know WHY people search for the keywords they do...we just know that they do.

[Kevin Lam]

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

Yes, but the whole point is that these "human edited", high quality directories are usually No Follow; Google is recommending that to all of them.

The only bone I can pick out is this one. The Yahoo! directory does not use nofollow. I don't care about the rest.

However, Angela, I read one of your posts about solving a huge, life changing problem. I just got an answer for one. It's actually been hitting me in the back of the head for months and didn't even notice it. Holy crap, I've got a huge product to work on and launch next month. This is awesome.

I'm just gonna shut up now. There's so much to comment on! I especially love the break down that Angela's husband did on the time required to view each page.

Anyway, I won't go for "panic attack heart symptoms". It's too easy of a market to tap into so I'll leave that to those who need it. As of right now, I'm ranking #2 for "dallas texas marketing", which has over 50,000,000 resulting pages and #5 for "texas search engine marketing" with over 22,000,000 resulting pages.

I'm breaking it down by ranking for mainly Dallas, then Texas then national. Easy keywords first, so that intermediate will be easier when I go for it. When I have intermediate keywords down, the difficult keywords will then become easier as well. All in due time.

[jitendrakbharai]

Hello,

I think the Angela Experiment is working very well.And ofcourse they are not paid links.You are simply paying $5 to Angela for doing a lot of hard work and great research on your behalf.

jitendra

[belgirl]

At the end of the day, I started this experiment because my background is in web design and not SEO. I wanted to see if an SEO newbie could do something simple that Angela recommended and make money doing it. I work full time and I freelance on the site, plus maintain 4 other sites, so I wanted to try something simple and quick. (who in the world has time to research possible backlinks--NOT ME! Angela's backlinks are a steal) The experiment is not over..so stay tuned!

[Kevin Lam]

I'm already on Paul's list, but I'll go ahead and add Angela to my rolodex as well. I certainly don't have the time to research the links either. Even if I paid someone to do it, I'm better off hiring Angela and Paul to do it all.

[ripsnorta2]

Belgirl, so are you ranking on the first page yet?

I'm interested to know what sort of search traffic your site is receiving. It would be good to correlate the two to see the 'real' effect of using the backlinks to improve your SE performance.

[4morereferrals]

Kinda what was on my mind - at the end of the day - this seems more about an experiment about Warrior tactics - like keyword research mainly, not angelas links or pauls or bobs or willies et al. But its more about...

Finding terms via tools, that :

A. - Get X amount of monthly searches
B. - Have a Clickbank product available that generates X per sale
C. - Has a clickbank product with between X and Y gravity
D. - Has < X number of pages in the results for the keyword in quotes
E. - Using Go Articles

This thread is titled the 'Angela Experiment" Being synonymous with "backlinks" - I would have thought that this would be a bit more about the power of backlinking and anchor text focus, and perhaps deep linking.

Not having peered into the competitors too closely - I cant say for 100% postivity - but I get the impression most marketers are saying - this isnt really proving much - due to the ease with such a niche should be able to be dominated.

This one is going to be more about keyword research, conversion and copy - not backlinks.

Originally Posted by ripsnorta2

Belgirl, so are you ranking on the first page yet?

I'm interested to know what sort of search traffic your site is receiving. It would be good to correlate the two to see the 'real' effect of using the backlinks to improve your SE performance.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Actually, the test IS about backlinks, because it is the backlinks that get the Goarticles to position number one. Like I have been saying, someone took the VERY keywords I gave in my example, wrote a Goarticles optimized for those keywords, did backlinks to it, and it is now in the NUMBER ONE spot for those keywords.

Without the backlinks, the marketer is back to the write-a-few-dozen-articles-and-pray-to-the-Google-gods-that-one-or-two-will-"stick" marketing plan.

This "experiment" without the backlinks would be a dismal failure. Sure, someone could take the keywords and write an ezinearticle or 20 and MAYBE they MIGHT be on Page One of Google. But the Goarticles article is not ONLY on Page One. It's in the number one spot!

I don't see how this could be seen as simply a "keyword research" experiment. I actually did the keyword research myself and then used that for my example. Just because the niche is rather easily dominated doesn't mean it wasn't the backlinks that did it. The idea was to show newbie marketers that they COULD dominate a niche quickly and start making money RIGHT NOW.

[Ryan6]

One of the problems with this experiment is that the key phrase that is being gunned for is uncompetitive and you also have the benefit of GoArticles, who have a PageRank of 6. All of these backlinks that are being built are only benefiting GoArticles in the long term; a worry is that it is this site that has full ownership of your article and can take it down or restrict affiliate links at any such time. Perhaps a better experiment would be to test the value of these links from using a personal blog, not an article submission site.

[zoobie]

I agree research takes time and I have no problems someone are providing the links
but as loz said Angela's links are only good for her "angela edwards" little competitions kind of web pages. How many people search for "Angela Edwards" in Google? and how many people will be interested in buying her stuff? I can easily rank top 10 in Google for my name "Proson Cheng" but how many people are searching for those words per month?

Well we are marketers we want those high ranking in money making terms rather than low competition not so making money terms.

One thing if you want to check on how many competiton in Google use Allintitle: keywords or allinanchor: keywords to check rather than some crappy long tail keywords.

That's my opinion and you don't have to listen to me..

[Okane]

Short update on "my" Angela experiment. I stopped last week after using 20 of her backlinks pointing to my GoArticles submissions.

"lose weight XX" (25.000 competition with quotes / 5.900.000 competition without quotes)
This article climbed to #4 of the first page in Google. Nice!

"XX sweat" (34.000 competition with quotes / 730.000 competition without quotes)
This article is at #8 on the first page in Google.

I think that's impressive.

But it's also true that this is not a real "scientific" experiment. The way to do that would be:
1. Submit two articles A and B to GoArticles.
2. Use Angela's technique to push article A
3. Use another technique (e.g. Linkvana) to add the same number of backlinks for article B
4. Evaluate the results.



...Marc...

[Barry Walls]

Originally Posted by Ryan6

One of the problems with this experiment is that the key phrase that is being gunned for is uncompetitive and you also have the benefit of GoArticles, who have a PageRank of 6. All of these backlinks that are being built are only benefiting GoArticles in the long term; a worry is that it is this site that has full ownership of your article and can take it down or restrict affiliate links at any such time. Perhaps a better experiment would be to test the value of these links from using a personal blog, not an article submission site.

Earlier in the thread, a guy got onto page one with the keyword sunglasses with 50m competitors. This is definitely worth testing on your own Ryan. How else are you going to know if it works for you?

Im doing a test right now. Submitted 30 links...most went through, with 6 backlinks from each site. I made three 500 word articles and 3 500 word blog posts...3 links go to goarticles and 3 go to blog posts under 3 different keywords. Heres the numbers...

The competition for the three keywords with no "" were as follows...

12m - Needs more links
22m - Needs more links
390k - The easy one

The goarticles link points to my blog post in all cases. I will continue to add links each day for the high competition terms. Theres no way I will get to the front page with 30 links if I have 12m competitors....so will be doing about 300 links from Angelas back catalogue. This will cost less than $200 in man power/links.

Aaron Wall says that there simple is no shortcut to industrial strength link building for SEO.

Will keep you updated on the results.

All the best

Barry

[Splinter]

some of my kewords have a around 50 million and more searches on google. Anyone care to comment on how their ranking have changed using Angela's packets when competing with this type of competition?

[Ryan6]

Originally Posted by Barry Walls

Earlier in the thread, a guy got onto page one with the keyword sunglasses with 50m competitors. This is definitely worth testing on your own Ryan. How else are you going to know if it works for you?

Im doing a test right now. Submitted 30 links...most went through, with 6 backlinks from each site. I made three 500 word articles and 3 500 word blog posts...3 links go to goarticles and 3 go to blog posts under 3 different keywords. Heres the numbers...

The competition for the three keywords with no "" were as follows...

12m - Needs more links
22m - Needs more links
390k - The easy one

The goarticles link points to my blog post in all cases. I will continue to add links each day for the high competition terms. Theres no way I will get to the front page with 30 links if I have 12m competitors....so will be doing about 300 links from Angelas back catalogue. This will cost less than $200 in man power/links.

Aaron Wall says that there simple is no shortcut to industrial strength link building for SEO.

Will keep you updated on the results.

All the best

Barry

This is interesting as you will be benefiting from the traffic and will also be building your blogs authority in the long term. Hope you see some results, as you say, tweaking and testing is a good way to go.

[NikNikAndCauliflower]

Angela,

Is there any minimum subscription term, or is it a month-to-month deal?

Thank you
-Nick

[indie08]

Wow! Yesterday someone deleted my titles of my articles somehow. So, I added like 16 of paul's links to them. This morning 4 articles are sitting at position 5 and 1 article at position 3!! Sweet!

[Andy Fletcher]

Originally Posted by NikNikAndCauliflower

Angela,

Is there any minimum subscription term, or is it a month-to-month deal?

Thank you
-Nick

There's no minimum subscription you can cancel at any time.

Cheers,

Andy

[NikNikAndCauliflower]

Thanks Andy!

I'm trying to help a friend sell his beanies online (that's what inspired me to get into this whole thing), so I wanted to give this a shot for a month or two and see how it goes

If you don't mind, Andy, what else would you recommend I do?

[Andy Fletcher]

Originally Posted by NikNikAndCauliflower

Thanks Andy!

I'm trying to help a friend sell his beanies online (that's what inspired me to get into this whole thing), so I wanted to give this a shot for a month or two and see how it goes

If you don't mind, Andy, what else would you recommend I do?

I'll shoot you a PM with my email address to avoid hijacking this thread.

But an on topic answer ...

Get Paul's links as well!

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by zoobie

I agree research takes time and I have no problems someone are providing the links but as loz said Angela's links are only good for her "angela edwards" little competitions kind of web pages.

Wrong. Dead, flat, wrong.

Originally Posted by zoobie

How many people search for "Angela Edwards" in Google? and how many people will be interested in buying her stuff? I can easily rank top 10 in Google for my name "Proson Cheng" but how many people are searching for those words per month?

Uh, she ranks #2 overall for keyword search on Angela, not "Angela Edwards". In fact, she ranks ONLY behind angela.com and above IMDB for the film "Angela".

And that's just for illustration purposes.[/quote]

[Jeremy123]

wow I read through the whole thread, entertaining and interesting.

First Angela's backlinks work there is more than enough proof, and I have
my own proof with goarticles and my own webpages. Anyone who says different
does not want people to succeed, and wants to mislead them with excuses.

Next all the search engines rank pages not sites. Just because yahoo has more
pages indexed does not mean google ranks entire websites for a keyword. It just
means yahoo has this many pages indexed and google has that many pages indexed..

Google is not going to penalize you if you get 1000 links to your site in 1 hour all with
the same anchor text. What if you have a great article and you syndicate that article
to web 2.0 sites and that article gets passed around to all the other networks.

They will probably link to it using the title of the article, same anchor text.
A webmaster can not control who links to them and how fast, google knows this.
It is more natural to link to the title, hence same anchor text, that is more natural,
not different anchor text. People are lazy and want to link easily, title is the easiest way.

What is your true competition.

We will start from where people left off,

competition results with and without quotes

when you look at the competition results with quotes, you are looking at competition from the perspective of on-page factors, who is targeting that phrase in their title tag and in the body.

when you are looking at competition results without quotes, all of google's factors
are being taken into consideration for rankings, which is too broad for us to do anything
about as a whole.

we can control 2 things though on-page and off-page factors

we know because of backlinks off-page factors are stronger than on-page factors,
so we need to look at the competition in terms of their backlinks

this means our true competition are the top 10 webpages when we type in a keyword
phrase without quotes, Plus those top 10 webpages backlinks, we need to research
how many backlinks those top 10 webpages have linking to them, at the very least.

have you noticed how some people building backlinks with competition of 2,000,000
get a top 10 ranking faster than someone with competition of 900,000

why is that, it is because the top 10 webpages out of the 2 million pages, they only
have a few backlinks to them, so it is easier to beat them

where as the top 10 webpages out of the 900,000 pages they all have 100's of backlinks
to them

ok I should do some work, hope I explained myself clearly.

[belgirl]

Originally Posted by Ryan6

One of the problems with this experiment is that the key phrase that is being gunned for is uncompetitive and you also have the benefit of GoArticles, who have a PageRank of 6. All of these backlinks that are being built are only benefiting GoArticles in the long term; a worry is that it is this site that has full ownership of your article and can take it down or restrict affiliate links at any such time. Perhaps a better experiment would be to test the value of these links from using a personal blog, not an article submission site.

You have already stated this before Ryan. Not the point. Move on.

[AndyBlackSEO]

Jeremy, some of your points are valid but not all of them. Keywords in quotes doesn't mean found in 'title and body'. it means found somewhere on the page.

Intitle:"keyword" will tell you which pages focus on and are optimized for a keyword phrase.

As for you comment regarding the top 10 are you competition, not true. Yes, the top 10 is where you want to be but if page 2 - 7 is also full of pages that have been optimised well and have good, relevant backlinks then they will also be your competition and you'll need to work hard to get past them in the serps.

Intitle: will give you a good idea of the optimized pages you need to beat but then you need to analyze various pages on the first page in order to find out how easily they will be to beat. This varies with all keywords. This is inline with what you said.

[NikNikAndCauliflower]

E-mailed you, mate

We'll now return you to your regularly scheduled program.

Cheers
-Nick

[gmr324]

Hi,

Jeremy and Andy, thanks for clarifying how to analyze competition. Related to your
advice, I've been able to achieve page 1 / position 3 for my Goarticle using
Angela's backlinks thus far. I am determined to get to position 1 and would like to
understand how to measure the work (volume of backlinks) involved. I already
optimized the article content (On-page SEO) for the keywords involved.

I've used SEO for Firefox plugin to look at Yehoo backlink count/PR/Domain Age in the top
2 sites that are above me. The mysterious thing is that even the sites I rank above
have many more backlinks(6 figures) , older domains and higher PR than my Goarticle.
So, according to those standards I shouldn't have even secured the position I already
have. I am comparing their stats to the Goarticle domain stats which my article is
essentially inheriting.

What other tools are out there to help me measure how many more of Angela and
Paul's backlinks would be required to move up in the ranks? The search results are
345,000 no quotes and 16,300 with quotes. So far, I have applied 180 of their
backlinks. Is this even possible to quantify? 200, 500, 1,000?


Many Thanks

George

[indemand]

I started the same "experiment" at the end of May and I'm still waiting to see results. I am using both Steve and Angela's links along with the automation info provided by Fran.

[indemand]

I take that back. I hadn't looked for a few days and I decided to take a look after my last post. I am sitting on page one of Google in the 8th position for the keyword "cure for panic attacks". Cool. I'm gonna keep on keeping on.

[Ryan6]

Originally Posted by belgirl

You have already stated this before Ryan. Not the point. Move on.

People are free to contribute to this thread, you don't own it.

Digital Point is my place and I may not be winning many friends over here, but screw it, there is too much misguided information being thrown about and people need to see both sides of the coin.

You think buying some free links is gonna make you lotso dosho over night, but you seem pretty clueless to be honest. I have lists and lists of high PR sites that I could go and get a link from tomorrow, i.e. Slashdot (PR9) and a fair few Edu sites (PR9), but the point is that Google value relevant links and Google will eventually get wise to all these shortcuts; simply cos you're all going at them like there's no tomorrow. I bet you aren't even building them gradually, do you think it'll look natural when you get a dozen or so high PR links in one day, then non for the next few days? Deary.

It's pretty amateur using GoArticles IF you want to build authority for your own sites in the long run. Do you know how GoArticles make their money? They use Affinity Ads and when people read you're little rant they'll probably go and click on those. I mean, are you even offering incentive for them going through your links? You should be using GoArticles to get a PR6 link to your site and that's it. The key phrase that you have targeted is very uncompetitive and so this experiment is flawed from the offset. You might not like people crashing your little party, but others will be misguided and I don't think that's fair.

The last few messages from you have been quite rude and that is why I am being vocal, but other than that, this is a great thread and I apologise to those about the "outsourcing" jibe. Peazzz.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Actually, if you take a look at the backlinks of 5 BIG NAME websites, you will see hundreds of non-relevant links. Many personal blogs and such link back to websites like this.

Sure, it's good to have relevant links and Google recommends it, but links that are not "relevant" also count.

The Drudge Report was put on the "map" the day he broke the news that
President Clinton was having an...er, indiscretion with a young intern named
Monica Lewinsky. THOUSANDS (maybe even HUNDREDS of thousands) of sites linked
to him that day. Many of them were not in his "niche".

The other day I challenged my Physical Therapist (I have an old ankle injury)
that I could get him on Page One of Google for his keywords. He was at the
bottom of Page 6. I did his links one night and then went to bed. The next
day I got up and checked and he was NUMBER ONE in Google for ALL his keywords.
Not one of the sites I added his link to was "relevant" for Physical Therapy
or even Health and Wellness. Yet they still worked that well that fast.

If you leave out great sites because they are not "relevant" to your niche,
you are leaving a lot of money on the table.

People often talk about "link bait" OR they say to have "such great content" that other sites will want to link back to them. If that's the case, then how is it that only "relevant" links will work? What if a mom who homeschools her kids and has a personal blog links back to the Smithsonian Institute's website? Are you going to say that the Smithsonian will LOSE value in Google because a non-relevant website linked back to it? There is a very GOOD reason for the mom to link to the Smithsonian; she took her kids there on vacation and it was a BIG part of some of their lessons!

Even sites like Jack in the Box have non-relevant links. People talk about Jack in the Box on all sorts of various types of sites and blogs and Jack in the Box also has backlinks from "Yellow Pages" types of sites. That's not exactly "relevant", although you can understand why they would have those types of links. Even directories couldn't be considered "relevant", as they are not theme-related.

Remember that there are more than a TRILLION webpages online. For Google to make a judgement call about whether a backlink is "relevant" or not would take a great deal of human intervention as there are lots of "good reasons" for websites to link back to other websites, even though the "themes" don't match. Google doesn't have the man-power for this human intervention. Remember that in order for Google employees to look at all the webpages on the internet in a year it would take EVERYBODY (from the CEO on down) looking at webpages for only 1.5 seconds per page if EVERYBODY worked the entire year without any kind of meal, smoke, rest, or bathroom break.

Just about every website that has any Page Rank at all has backlinks that make sense to humans, but would not be seen by a robot as "relevant". Google doesn't have the manpower to make this determination about SO many millions of websites all across the internet and it's back to the algorithm. Algorithms can't make 'judgement calls' and if all "non-theme related" backlinks were de-valued for every website, it would RUIN their Search Engine as just about EVERY site would have their results skewered by this.

[bgmacaw]

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

The Drudge Report was put on the "map" the day he broke the news that
President Clinton was having an...er, indiscretion with a young intern named
Monica Lewinsky. THOUSANDS (maybe even HUNDREDS of thousands) of sites linked
to him that day. Many of them were not in his "niche".

Google wasn't really around back then except as the beta 'BackRub' project running on a lab server. Drudge broke the report on January 17, 1998 and Google wasn't even a company until September 4, 1998. They started gaining notice toward the end of '98 when their results came to be know as being much better than those from AltaVista, HotBot, Excite and so forth.

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

Google doesn't have the man-power for this human intervention.

True. It comes down to people having an over-inflated view of the importance of their sites. They think normal search engine result fluctuations are manually applied penalties when it's often just some other sites being better at SEO than they are or the occurrence of the 'Query Deserves Freshness' and 'Query Deserves Diversity' algorithms.

Occasionally there is human intervention in results but it takes the raising of a lot of algorithmic red flags or a lot of publicity to have this happen.

[AndyBlackSEO]

Originally Posted by gmr324

Hi,

Jeremy and Andy, thanks for clarifying how to analyze competition. Related to your
advice, I've been able to achieve page 1 / position 3 for my Goarticle using
Angela's backlinks thus far. I am determined to get to position 1 and would like to
understand how to measure the work (volume of backlinks) involved. I already
optimized the article content (On-page SEO) for the keywords involved.

I've used SEO for Firefox plugin to look at Yehoo backlink count/PR/Domain Age in the top
2 sites that are above me. The mysterious thing is that even the sites I rank above
have many more backlinks(6 figures) , older domains and higher PR than my Goarticle.
So, according to those standards I shouldn't have even secured the position I already
have. I am comparing their stats to the Goarticle domain stats which my article is
essentially inheriting.

What other tools are out there to help me measure how many more of Angela and
Paul's backlinks would be required to move up in the ranks? The search results are
345,000 no quotes and 16,300 with quotes. So far, I have applied 180 of their
backlinks. Is this even possible to quantify? 200, 500, 1,000?


Many Thanks

George

George,

It may be that the two sites above you aren't targeting the same anchor text. Yes, they may have loads of backlinks but if they're not targeting the same or too similar anchor text then you may have a chance.

All you can do is keep doing what you are doing. What I would say is though, if you aren't getting many click thru's from position 3 then it might not be worth persueing this article.

Feel free to pm me with your email address and the two sites in question. I'd be happy to run a backlink report and zap it over to you so you can see exactly what anchors they are targeting. For free of course.

Andy

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by bgmacaw

True. It comes down to people having an over-inflated view of the importance of their sites. They think normal search engine result fluctuations are manually applied penalties when it's often just some other sites being better at SEO than they are or the occurrence of the 'Query Deserves Freshness' and 'Query Deserves Diversity' algorithms.

Occasionally there is human intervention in results but it takes the raising of a lot of algorithmic red flags or a lot of publicity to have this happen.

Exactly. I sometimes shake my head at comments that are made regarding such things as a site having 200 backlinks with the same anchor text being taken notice of by humans at Google who will then apply some sort of artificial penalty to the offending site.

Sorry people, it just doesn't happen. And you're right, bgmacaw, it's probably because people have an over-inflated view of their own site's importance.

[belgirl]

Originally Posted by Ryan6

People are free to contribute to this thread, you don't own it.

Digital Point is my place and I may not be winning many friends over here, but screw it, there is too much misguided information being thrown about and people need to see both sides of the coin.

You think buying some free links is gonna make you lotso dosho over night, but you seem pretty clueless to be honest. I have lists and lists of high PR sites that I could go and get a link from tomorrow, i.e. Slashdot (PR9) and a fair few Edu sites (PR9), but the point is that Google value relevant links and Google will eventually get wise to all these shortcuts; simply cos you're all going at them like there's no tomorrow. I bet you aren't even building them gradually, do you think it'll look natural when you get a dozen or so high PR links in one day, then non for the next few days? Deary.

It's pretty amateur using GoArticles IF you want to build authority for your own sites in the long run. Do you know how GoArticles make their money? They use Affinity Ads and when people read you're little rant they'll probably go and click on those. I mean, are you even offering incentive for them going through your links? You should be using GoArticles to get a PR6 link to your site and that's it. The key phrase that you have targeted is very uncompetitive and so this experiment is flawed from the offset. You might not like people crashing your little party, but others will be misguided and I don't think that's fair.

The last few messages from you have been quite rude and that is why I am being vocal, but other than that, this is a great thread and I apologise to those about the "outsourcing" jibe. Peazzz.

This is the last time I am going to respond to you Ryan--if you have something of value to contribute, that's great. There are plenty of people who have offered opposing viewpoints in this forum in the proper way. However don't go on the attack being rude yourself and then feign a victim mentality when people call you on it. It's not always what you say, but how you say it. And if the experiment is flawed, then why have people already shown they have been successful at doing the very same thing? Or are you not reading the same thread I am? Being condensending is what is not winning you friends.

Your quote to someone in a previous post in this thread:

"Now why is that moron? Do you know what research is? It means finding out this information for free on forums, studying your competitors and seeing where they got the links from. Simple stuff, doesn't cost a dime and will take probably an hour or so."

Moron? Gee,way to be above all the rudeness. Pot meet kettle.

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming..will check later on,everyone, to see where I am at in the Google results!

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by bgmacaw

Google wasn't really around back then except as the beta 'BackRub' project running on a lab server. Drudge broke the report on January 17, 1998 and Google wasn't even a company until September 4, 1998. They started gaining notice toward the end of '98 when their results came to be know as being much better than those from AltaVista, HotBot, Excite and so forth.

And yet, I suspect that the results in Google even then were driven by the sites that had pointed to Drudge on the day of the big "news breaking".

True. It comes down to people having an over-inflated view of the importance of their sites. They think normal search engine result fluctuations are manually applied penalties when it's often just some other sites being better at SEO than they are or the occurrence of the 'Query Deserves Freshness' and 'Query Deserves Diversity' algorithms.

Occasionally there is human intervention in results but it takes the raising of a lot of algorithmic red flags or a lot of publicity to have this happen.

Exactly. People attach too many 'human-like properties' to Google, too...as if it were some sort Zeus in the sky, just waiting to strike them down for any little error that might be perceived as a wrongdoing.

[axleman]

This is a very interesting thread and it has caused me to do my own experiment.

I have an ecommerce site for a very particular niche that I have made my living from for the past several years. Most of the SEO for this site comes from on-page SEO. It generally ranks very well for more specific search terms (i.e. a customer looking for a certain product.), but has always ranked very poorly for what I consider to be the main keyword that covers the niche. Exactly how poorly, I don't know, but it wasn't in the first 12 or so pages of Google for the term.

(By the way, is there a tool that can tell you your site's rank for a certain term without having to go thru page after page in Google?)

A few weeks ago, I decided to pursue different aspects of IM and look into potentially launching several new sites, mostly of the blog/article type that seems to be in favor here. I ended up on this site and in this thread.

I had never really given much thought to backlinks and how they affect my rankings. So I decided my experiment would be to use Angela's backlinks and apply them to my existing ecommerce site for the search term that has always eluded me. (At $5 per month, it's hard to go wrong.)

In less than a week, my home page for my ecommerce site has gone from obscurity to page 4 of Google, using only the initial packet from Angela (a few of which had already blocked new registrations, so I wasn't able to use the full 30).

The search term I am using shows 22000 global monthly searches, over 7 million results without quotes and 149,000 results with quotes.

Time will tell if I can get it to page 1 or even at the top of the listings, but in the meantime, I am convinced that this technique definitely works and is certainly well worth the pittance that Angela is asking.

[anwayne]

When I write my articles I like to look for words that have less then 5000 when you put your keyword in "keyword" in quotations in Google. It make it easier to get listed on the first page.

[4morereferrals]

Ryan6,

Curious as to how youve come to this knowledge you profess in the quote following? There's 100's maybe thousands of people on this forum proving your theory WRONG daily.

Unnatural linking? How many is natural and gradual to the google algo? If you do not have an exact answer then your are just pulling info out of your arse.

Relevant ... LOL - Ok man.

Sorry you just sound like a bitter frustrated blogger who misspent hours and hours trying to generate high value RELEVANT content [ to no avail ] - and are just bitter others dont see it your way and have found a faster methodology - not requiring all the wasted time and efforts.

Good luck to you dude. Keep it RELEVANT

but the point is that Google value relevant links and Google will eventually get wise to all these shortcuts; simply cos you're all going at them like there's no tomorrow. I bet you aren't even building them gradually, do you think it'll look natural when you get a dozen or so high PR links in one day, then non for the next few days? Deary.

[Ryan6]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

Ryan6,

Curious as to how youve come to this knowledge you profess in the quote following? There's 100's maybe thousands of people on this forum proving your theory WRONG daily.

Unnatural linking? How many is natural and gradual to the google algo? If you do not have an exact answer then your are just pulling info out of your arse.

Relevant ... LOL - Ok man.

Sorry you just sound like a bitter frustrated blogger who misspent hours and hours trying to generate high value RELEVANT content [ to no avail ] - and are just bitter others dont see it your way and have found a faster methodology - not requiring all the wasted time and efforts.

Good luck to you dude. Keep it RELEVANT

My blogs are all new, just a few months old. Just building up the empire. I have websites already made that are stuck on page one of Google in competitive niches. One covers Payday Loans and the other covers Contract Mobile Phones. I got these on page one from relevant links and I did this from spending time researching competitors and more often than not these were benefited from links in the same field. There's my experience anyway. Are you competing on page one for anything dude? I have no reason to be bitter, I am just trying to advise people to build authority to their own web pages and to stop spamming the crap out of the poor web sites, which has been the case here. Can you actually contribute anything here or are you just gonna keep on with the petty jibes?;D

[belgirl]

Angela--question for you: why is it that when I did a search for Panic Attack Heart Symptoms this time that it came up with 6,750,000 results? Before it was only showing anywhere from 315,000 - 670,000.

[Angela V. Edwards]

I think that sort of thing is a glitch. Once in a while it will show some of my own search terms with WILDLY different results, too. However, in a day or so, it reverts back to what it always was.

[Izesta]

Askloz, why the need to refer to Angela as "Sweetie?" I bet she loves her name, "Angela." Comes aross as a bit demeaning,

[Jeremy Kelsall]

belgirl,

Did you notice that the other goarticle that is on the first page is also using Angelas packet? So, that does show that the links have some effect.

In all honesty though, you should really pick a different keyword, one that will make you money when you get the ranking you are going after. This one has NO COMMERCIAL INTENT at all and is more than likely going to draw a bunch of info seekers who are not actually looking to purchase anything.

If you look at the adword ads that are running, you will see that most of them are not even selling anything.

[Jeremy123]

Jeremy and Andy, thanks for clarifying how to analyze competition. Related to your
advice, I've been able to achieve page 1 / position 3 for my Goarticle using
Angela's backlinks thus far. I am determined to get to position 1 and would like to
understand how to measure the work (volume of backlinks) involved. I already
optimized the article content (On-page SEO) for the keywords involved.

I've used SEO for Firefox plugin to look at Yehoo backlink count/PR/Domain Age in the top
2 sites that are above me. The mysterious thing is that even the sites I rank above
have many more backlinks(6 figures) , older domains and higher PR than my Goarticle.
So, according to those standards I shouldn't have even secured the position I already
have. I am comparing their stats to the Goarticle domain stats which my article is
essentially inheriting.

What other tools are out there to help me measure how many more of Angela and
Paul's backlinks would be required to move up in the ranks? The search results are
345,000 no quotes and 16,300 with quotes. So far, I have applied 180 of their
backlinks. Is this even possible to quantify? 200, 500, 1,000?

gmr324

you could use seo elite software to analyze the backlinks of the top 10 websites,
it is hard to pinpoint exactly how many backlinks you would need, you are also leveraging goarticles pr

maybe the backlinks linking to your competition have low pr, are not relevant, and are not using the right anchor text, all these little factors play a part and more that google does not tell us.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall

belgirl,

Did you notice that the other goarticle that is on the first page is also using Angelas packet? So, that does show that the links have some effect.

In all honesty though, you should really pick a different keyword, one that will make you money when you get the ranking you are going after. This one has NO COMMERCIAL INTENT at all and is more than likely going to draw a bunch of info seekers who are not actually looking to purchase anything.

If you look at the adword ads that are running, you will see that most of them are not even selling anything.

This is good advice, Jeremy...however, I think that the people who are looking at this keyword aren't realizing that it's a Long Tail version of the keyword Panic Attack. Trust me, there are PLENTY of advertisers making BANK with the keyword Panic Attack. Now...all the people who are searching for information about this issue aren't aware that they have to plug the keyword in exactly as the advertiser set it up, or it's not a "money keyword". All they know is that they or someone they love suffers from this malady and they'd like to get rid of it...NOW!

This is the same reason why some marketers buy domains that are misspellings of other words; people type it in this way, sometimes, and the marketers want to capture that portion of the crowd who needs their product as well. However, you and I looking at it from the outside might think: Pannick? What's pannick? That's not even a real word; NO ONE can possibly make money from it.

Therefore, to make an educated judgment about whether a keyword is valid or not, one would have to know the WHOLE story. WE might not think that someone who is suffering from Panic Attacks might plug in the keywords Panic Heart Attack Symptoms, but they do. HUNDREDS of times a day they plug those words in...to get information on how to stop or to recognize Panic Attacks. And if they're looking for that kind of information, chances are that they or someone they love would PAY MONEY to get rid of the problem they are experiencing.

[Jeremy Kelsall]

Anglea,

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

This is good advice, Jeremy...however, I think that the people who are looking at this keyword aren't realizing that it's a Long Tail version of the keyword Panic Attack. Trust me, there are PLENTY of advertisers making BANK with the keyword Panic Attack. Now...all the people who are searching for information about this issue aren't aware that they have to plug the keyword in exactly as the advertiser set it up, or it's not a "money keyword". All they know is that they or someone they love suffers from this malady and they'd like to get rid of it...NOW!

This is the same reason why some marketers buy domains that are misspellings of other words; people type it in this way, sometimes, and the marketers want to capture that portion of the crowd who needs their product as well. However, you and I looking at it from the outside might think: Pannick? What's pannick? That's not even a real word; NO ONE can possibly make money from it.

Therefore, to make an educated judgment about whether a keyword is valid or not, one would have to know the WHOLE story. WE might not think that someone who is suffering from Panic Attacks might plug in the keywords Panic Heart Attack Symptoms, but they do. HUNDREDS of times a day they plug those words in...to get information on how to stop or to recognize Panic Attacks. And if they're looking for that kind of information, chances are that they or someone they love would PAY MONEY to get rid of the problem they are experiencing.

I understand what you are saying...

But, I doubt that anyone searching for panic heart attack symptoms is doing so to buy a product...they are doing so to see if they have the symptoms or to see what the symptoms are.

If it was a money maker, chances are good that the adword advertisers would actually have something for sale

[Palmeratech]

I know it is obvious, but I've seen this error made by many experts in the field...
When checking the results page in google, make sure you log out of your google account before hand, otherwise your results could/will be affected by your previous searches.

Belgirl, your strategy mentions looking for products with high gravity score. What scores are you using to make your determination? (if you don't mind sharing, of course)

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

A. - Get X amount of monthly searches
B. - Have a Clickbank product available that generates X per sale
C. - Has a clickbank product with between X and Y gravity
D. - Has < X number of pages in the results for the keyword in quotes
E. - Using Go Articles

About the linking, I don't question it for a second, I think it is a proven concept by now. I agree with 4morereferrals, it would be interesting to see the whole process including the keyword research. what parameters are being proposed? Filling out the right values for the Xs in here and back that up with a strong backlinking strategy is golden.

[bobmcalister]

so I should link the site to the article and vice versa?

[belgirl]

Originally Posted by Palmeratech

I know it is obvious, but I've seen this error made by many experts in the field...
When checking the results page in google, make sure you log out of your google account before hand, otherwise your results could/will be affected by your previous searches.

Belgirl, your strategy mentions looking for products with high gravity score. What scores are you using to make your determination? (if you don't mind sharing, of course)


About the linking, I don't question it for a second, I think it is a proven concept by now. I agree with 4morereferrals, it would be interesting to see the whole process including the keyword research. what parameters are being proposed? Filling out the right values for the Xs in here and back that up with a strong backlinking strategy is golden.

Ah...yes that could be it. Thanks for the heads up! Here were my parameters: (I used these according to Angela's formula)

A. - I know this is open to debate, but according to free keyword tracker, the search term gets over 300 searches a day. Ideally you would want at least double digit searches no matter what the term is.
B. - I picked Panic away that I believe generates about $47.00 per sale.
C. - I need to double check, but this product has a gravity score of over 100
D. - Goal is for under 500,000--this facilates between 313,000 and around 600,000
E. - Wrote one Go article packet and then used 30 of Angela's backlinks.

[mikkosant]

So, first page for a keyword that gets hundreds of searches. How are the sales coming?

Great Effort to prove that these links have some effect.