The END of Angela's Backlinks?

[ryandales2000]

I am a subscriber of Angela's backlinks-packet. I was about to register at The Netscape Unofficial FAQ when I read this! I am afraid that this is the beginning of the end for this type of link-building. What do you Warriors think?

No Free Advertising - ATTENTION SPAMLINKERS The Netscape Unofficial FAQ does not allow FREE advertising. Posting an ad-link (commercial) in our forums,in a signature or anywhere in your profile information, etc., is strictly prohibited and will lead to termination of account and removal of the post that includes the link. If you wish to advertise on The Netscape Unofficial FAQ or do not understand this policiy, please contact The Webmaster for more information and/or rates. Also note that any user violating this agreement and the account terminated will be listed in our forum for all to see. Your IP and domain will also be listed on several of the major BlackLists such as SpamCop and Spamhaus..

A violation of the above "No Free Advertising" will result in the forfeiture of your private data as well as posting your violation on our public forum.


Also Note: If you purchased a 30-site list from ANGELA EDWARDS at angelasdiscountmarket, you got ripped off. Do not even THINK about attempting to post a link in our forum as you may be included in legal action.

[The Copy Nazi]

Uh-oh. You think the party's over?

[Okane]

Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...

[SaSeoPete]

Geez that's crazy they even mention the backlink package.

[yonaswedo]

Is this a case of hoax? I hope Angela dive a clarification on this.

[stevenh512]

This is a case of one site having a problem with people posting links, most likely because of the fact that the backlink packets are being given away for free on a number of forums and it's led to people spamming these sites like there's no tomorrow. Angela has already stopped including sites like this in her backlink packets (forums where you have to make a post to include your link, and blogs where you have to leave a comment to include your link). Considering that you get 30 sites a month, and I've gone through 3 month's packets (that's 90 sites) and have only found this one site publicly stating that they have a problem with people leaving links there, personally I'd say it's far from "the end" of Angela's backlinks.. lol

edit: It's also worth pointing out that the same post on the same forum says "If you signed up and paid for CLICKBANK you may have been ripped off big time, we believe it to be a SCAM!!!!!" (do they even know what Clickbank is?), has ezinearticles and goarticles (oh, and hubpages too) on their "blacklist" and recommends buying paid links (from their "link manager firm" of course) even though everyone knows what Google thinks about paid links that aren't nofollow.

[ryandales2000]

This is NOT a HOAX or a JOKE..Try registering at The Netscape Unofficial FAQ and try leaving a link at your profile page of that website and you will read the above warning.

See for yourself.

[Jimerson Farveez]

oh my god, Me too checked it, It is dangerous think, If we got banned then there is nothing there at all. However, I don't think all the sites are like that, may be this one only, I am getting some good results from her package....... however, If we would have seen these kind of notices from a site, we have to OMIT that site, that is it..... we cannot put our blame on her, she had helped us to get good links.......
Think like this, the guys not only following her package but there are millions of guys all over the world, then they too can check this and wanna add links, on that case what those forums guys will do, Ok whatever, if they want to STOP this, they just have to remove that option over there in their forum....... have to disable it...... Very simple in their views and our views.....(In their views, they have to disable it, otherwise, in our views we have to omit it...

[Mickm]

Only one non-responsive site out of 90 isn't bad going by any means. That's an amazing success rate.

I don't think it's the end of this type of backlinking, it's just an over protective site. Links are what make the web.. the web.

[stevenh512]

BTW I absolutely love how the admin at that forum sets such a great example for the rest of his community by violating the same terms of service he expects everyone else to follow (his sig links to a commercial site, by his own definition it's a "spam link").

[webmatic]

Lol great idea but hope they don't do it the same for you too

Originally Posted by Okane

Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...

@ OP .. I don't think its the beginning of the end as Angela's Backlinks are working good for most of my friends and i am going to try it myself too so will get back to you with recent updates about it but i am not trying it right now as it must be dangerous as mentioned in above posts lol
Thanks
PHYza

[CTABUK]

I know linking is a pain in the butt, I wrote this here in Warriors a few weeks back -
'I am not certain what Angela's link system is, but let's suppose it's a linking system that aims at the market in general. Now, if, 200 people sign up for that linking programme and she begins to link those sites, then Google will suddenly see 200 sites all with the basic link format. The bot's will say 'blackhat - possibly and down rate sites using the system'.

Now, this is not me trying to be clever, I try to help out - so the next time you see a multi link system, think carefully before beginning.

[dddougal]

This is just a pointless waste of time worrying about it, so one site is whining, let them whine, Just submit to the other sites and forget all about them.

[ryandales2000]

Personally, I never thought I was ripped off by Angela. Far from it. I maintained that her WSO is still the best WSO I ever bought from this forum. Especially considering the price of her WSO.

I was just thinking of what will happen if many webmasters will do the same as I experienced INCREASING number of warnings from webmasters. The first time I tried this backlinking method it was sooo easy...Encountered no warnings. But now there are already many webmasters who are wary of people doing this type of links on their websites.

[Okane]

With an increasing number of people using Angela's backling packages, it might become a bit obvious for webmasters that something's going on at their site.

I tried to find similar high PR websites myself by basically googling for "public profile" and checking the top results. I found one PR6 site and was able to leave my links in the public profile... without hundreds of Angela's backlinkers doing the same.

BUT... it took me ~15 minutes to do all this. Using Angela's backlinks is way faster, so I will continue to use them, too.

[4morereferrals]

Whats the magic number? 200?

There are 1,000's of sites with super high PR giving out 200 links per minute, and google hasnt "downgraded" their link value.

Go Articles / EZA / CNN / The BBC / Google / come to mind.

I think this theory is just a guess, based upon nothing more than an opinion.

Originally Posted by CTABUK

I know linking is a pain in the butt, I wrote this here in Warriors a few weeks back -
'I am not certain what Angela's link system is, but let's suppose it's a linking system that aims at the market in general. Now, if, 200 people sign up for that linking programme and she begins to link those sites, then Google will suddenly see 200 sites all with the basic link format. The bot's will say 'blackhat - possibly and down rate sites using the system'.

Now, this is not me trying to be clever, I try to help out - so the next time you see a multi link system, think carefully before beginning.

[4morereferrals]

This style linking is a chess match ...

Use what the webmasters give you

They take something away

You find another way to capitlize

Its not death but evolution ...

[CTABUK]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

Whats the magic number? 200?

There are 1,000's of sites with super high PR giving out 200 links per minute, and google hasnt "downgraded" their link value.

Go Articles / EZA / CNN / The BBC / Google / come to mind.

I think this theory is just a guess, based upon nothing more than an opinion.

The pagerank either internal or the foolbar (no typo ) has no bearing on SERP - I don't guess. I deal in facts. Anyone who believes in a high pr page link obtaining a higher serp is deceiving themselves.

[Okane]

Originally Posted by CTABUK

Anyone who believes in a high pr page link obtaining a higher serp is deceiving themselves.

This is contrary to my own experience. I am not interested in opinions, only in facts, experiments, tests.

If you can bring an article for a keyword with lots of competition on page one of the SERPs within 8 hours (as I did with just 10 Angela's backlinks), I'd be very interested to know how you do that.

[CTABUK]

If a site gets seen and SERP'd within 8 hours then it will be down to new content. It will stay high in serp for maybe one or two days, perhaps longer, then drop back.
PR has ne bearing on SERP, and I guess someone is going to say, how do you know. I helped set this section up in Warriors and moderated on SEO here. Many people know me.

[4morereferrals]

Lets be clear ...

1. No one is so far is saying that a sites PR will increase its SERP.

2. What I was eluding to earlier is ... since you discussed a links "value" or devalued value ... you must believe certain links have different value levels - else how can it be devalued? Or is it a Zero value and then some other value that is set - like a switch - On/off .... value/no value ....

Opining that google has some arbitrary algo that looks to see if a site starts pumping out backlinks ... and then associates that site now with a "lower" or devalued value - seems ... arbitrary, and like guesswork.

I'll stay focused on this issue for now.

Originally Posted by CTABUK

If a site gets seen and SERP'd within 8 hours then it will be down to new content. It will stay high in serp for maybe one or two days, perhaps longer, then drop back.
PR has ne bearing on SERP, and I guess someone is going to say, how do you know. I helped set this section up in Warriors and moderated on SEO here. Many people know me.

[4morereferrals]

Quite an accomplishment .... how do you define "lots of competition" ?

Originally Posted by Okane

This is contrary to my own experience. I am not interested in opinions, only in facts, experiments, tests.

If you can bring an article for a keyword with lots of competition on page one of the SERPs within 8 hours (as I did with just 10 Angela's backlinks), I'd be very interested to know how you do that.

[Okane]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

Quite an accomplishment .... how do you define "lots of competition" ?

(search volume per month / results for search in quotes / without quotes)
A: (12.000 / 35.800 / 200.000)
B: (12.100 / 26.200 / 2.310.000)

I posted more details in the "Angela Experiment" thread / page 3 (sorry, can't post links, yet).

[4morereferrals]

Thank you for posting your details.

I believe you would get some rather lively debate as to whether your example are "competitive" terms. Its really hard to know.

You could have 10 sites really working hard for that term/phrase, armed with 1,000's of articles, hundreds of site pages and even more backlinks already in place.

Originally Posted by Okane

(search volume per month / results for search in quotes / without quotes)
A: (12.000 / 35.800 / 200.000)
B: (12.100 / 26.200 / 2.310.000)

I posted more details in the "Angela Experiment" thread / page 3 (sorry, can't post links, yet).

[CTABUK]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

Lets be clear ...

1. No one is so far is saying that a sites PR will increase its SERP.

2. What I was eluding to earlier is ... since you discussed a links "value" or devalued value ... you must believe certain links have different value levels - else how can it be devalued? Or is it a Zero value and then some other value that is set - like a switch - On/off .... value/no value ....

Opining that google has some arbitrary algo that looks to see if a site starts pumping out backlinks ... and then associates that site now with a "lower" or devalued value - seems ... arbitrary, and like guesswork.

I'll stay focused on this issue for now.

You need to think 'wikipedia' that is crammed with outgoing links. If you can show me that Google does not make reference to searches based on anchor text that have wiki connections, then you will have proved your point. However, the simple fact is that wiki is an authoritive site.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by Okane

Oh, great news... then all I have to do is place my competitors backlinks in that forum and they will be banned...

Exactly. I'm sure they got spammed because of all the "black hatters" giving the packets away for free (even after I told them NOT to). But if getting someone banned from Google was as simple as placing them on a "black list" on your website, we'd have TREMENDOUS power against ALL of our competitors. It doesn't work that way.

They are "blacklisting" ANYONE who had ANY link at all on that forum, too. I only had my "Angela" link and a link to my article, which is NOT a 'sales page' and therefore could NOT be considered "spam". Forums, for the most part, just don't like links. ANY links.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by mikeong88

That is actually the NORM...No forums would allow their members to post their links on any threads..unless its a ghost forum

I was puzzled with your May package...so many of them are blogs and forums ...

Was wondering how do I post a respectable link behind like you mentioned

Most of us are not using "non-commercial" backlinks like Angela or Backlinks...

Yeah, I hear you. With May's packet, those sites were SUCH High Page Rank that I WANTED you to be able to get a link from them. Obviously, that's not possible with some of those places; usually because of the spamming. I have 2 more Page Rank 9 sites, a Page Rank 8 site and a handful of Page Rank 7 sites that I can't give you for this reason. That's just sad to me as I want the customers to get the best backlinks.

I guess I just keep those sites for my own stuff and give the customers the sites that can't be ruined. There IS a way to get a "sales" backlink on a forum without it being removed, but it requires time and patience and the spammers don't have that.

[sagasu44]

Originally Posted by Angela V. Edwards

Yeah, I hear you. With May's packet, those sites were SUCH High Page Rank that I WANTED you to be able to get a link from them. Obviously, that's not possible with some of those places; usually because of the spamming. I have 2 more Page Rank 9 sites, a Page Rank 8 site and a handful of Page Rank 7 sites that I can't give you for this reason. That's just sad to me as I want the customers to get the best backlinks.

Ok, I only just bought angela's package and started on the number one site in the list following the instructions, set account and wrote a blog post which was a kind of introduction and placed a very simple anchor text link to my homepage which has no affiliate product, it does have some adsense though, still I was suprised when I was told my post was removed due to spamming. I wonderred if I had got something wrong but then decided to just move on to the next which I have had no problems with.

So, I'm only onto the third one, but don't feel phased as the net is evolving constantly.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by sagasu44

Ok, I only just bought angela's package and started on the number one site in the list following the instructions, set account and wrote a blog post which was a kind of introduction and placed a very simple anchor text link to my homepage which has no affiliate product, it does have some adsense though, still I was suprised when I was told my post was removed due to spamming. I wonderred if I had got something wrong but then decided to just move on to the next which I have had no problems with.

So, I'm only onto the third one, but don't feel phased as the net is evolving constantly.

Most of these types of sites will be fine, but there WILL be a few of them who will do this sort of thing. Remember, this has NOTHING to do with you or your own website; this is a result of the actual spamming they DID get from the folks who got the packets from a "black hat" forum. They have an 'alert' set up for ANY link at all and anyone who puts a link there will get the same message.

There are still a great number of really GOOD sites in the packet; if you come across one of these, just move on. My packets have been "known" for longer than Paul's but the same thing with the "black hatters" is now beginning to happen to Paul's links. I don't know WHY people would want great links ruined, but obviously they don't care.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

The Netscape Unofficial FAQ is upset! Oh no, woe is me.

Who really cares?

[Angela V. Edwards]

LOL, I've actually had people write to me because they were worried because this site "blacklisted" them. If getting someone removed from Google was as simple as creating a "blacklist" on your site and adding them to it, competitors would be "blacklisting" each other all over the Internet. Can you imagine the mayhem this would cause?

[boris s]

there's no way i can say for sure it's linked to using angela's backlinks, But i've used the may and june packages and after an initial steep rise in the rankings, google has just killed my site in the rankings of late (lots of pages are gone). :/
Again, can't say it's related to me linking on these high pr sites but it's the only new component i've added to my seo in the past 3-4 months

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Check the supplemental index, boris.

[Steve Peters Benn]

Hi Boris,

If you go and add a load of links suddenly to a site that doesn't have many links then Google will get suspicious and start penalising you.

The sad thing is so many things like this get ruined by people who just hammer them with no patience or regard.

This is not the end of Angela's backlinks at all. What nonsense!

[dvduval]

Let me just make one general comment...

Let's suppose you are a google employee doing a manual review of a website, and you pull up a list of clickable urls of all the links pointing to the website. What will you find?

Will you find that there is a large volume of quality links?
Or will you find something that seems odd or of low quality?

I don't know much about Angela's Backlinks, though I would probably be willing to try it and give my review, so feel free to PM me Angela, and also Angela, it might be cool to think about including some one-way directory links in your services if you haven't already. We have consistently found that backlinks from directories, even small ones, can help considerably in building rankings.

[Black Hat Cat]

Originally Posted by CTABUK

The pagerank either internal or the foolbar (no typo ) has no bearing on SERP - I don't guess. I deal in facts. Anyone who believes in a high pr page link obtaining a higher serp is deceiving themselves.

This is why no one should pay any attention to you.

[The Expert]

I saw this exact warning message on that site when I was making my second round of backlinks for a site I am promoting.

Didn't phase me too much, I just didn't drop the link on that site anymore. If they have made it their own personal war to keep people from posting links on their site in any way/shape/form then let them have it.

I remember Angela saying that she has sites for packets already stacked for a few months...so there will be more where that came from. If you get Paul's links as well then I don't think you'll have anything to worry about.

[boris s]

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

Check the supplemental index, boris.

I tried with a "cade" i found on seobook but i get exactly the same results as if i just type "site:www . domain . com"

[Steve Peters Benn]

The supplemental index was merged into the regular index a long time ago, so those codes / operators don't work anymore.

[boris s]

Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn

The supplemental index was merged into the regular index a long time ago, so those codes / operators don't work anymore.

thanks Steve ; so how can i check the supplemental index ?

[Steve Peters Benn]

It's gone - it was merged in - just like when I merge my tomatoes with lime juice making salsa - it's not feasible to get back the original data. There are ways to guess if it is there, but the concept is not really viable anymore, so I wouldn't be trying to figure it out as there isn't much of value to be gained.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn

If you go and add a load of links suddenly to a site that doesn't have many links then Google will get suspicious and start penalising you.

I disagree completely. In fact, such an idea really doesn't make sense.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn

The supplemental index was merged into the regular index a long time ago, so those codes / operators don't work anymore.

Can you explain when this happened?

[Fernando Veloso]

Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn

If you go and add a load of links suddenly to a site that doesn't have many links then Google will get suspicious and start penalising you.

Any data to back this Steve?

Cause what you're saying is: I can penalize any site I WANT placing lots of links in 3 days.

You're not a complete newbie so, i'll wait for your reply before jumping on the "man, you're nuts" wagon

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso

Any data to back this Steve?

Cause what you're saying is: I can penalize any site I WANT placing lots of links in 3 days.

Exactly. It doesn't make any sense. Otherwise, not only could you bring down your competitor's site, but sites that get popular very quickly with some sort of breaking news would be penalized for being popular, which is exactly what Google DOESN'T want to do.

[franchiseshop]

Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso

Cause what you're saying is: I can penalize any site I WANT placing lots of links in 3 days.

Hate to say it but I kinda agree that penalties are given for over linking. I have had 1 page de-indexed due to over zealous linking and the home page of a differing sites PR nulled and de-indexed due to over zealous linking. It does sound nuts but i'm afraid it may be / IS true.

There is a lot of info on the net about this, supporting your argument and supporting the penalty argument, however from my own personal experience i would err on the side of caution and say that you need to start gradual and build up. Going in with 2000 links in a week for a site that has zero it likely to give you a headache with Google.

The good news though is that both pages of mine that did get their PR nulled and de-indexed (and when i say deindexed I mean one day they were #2 for their chosen term and the next day they were gone, not there, not on page 100, not on page 10,000, gone) both gained their PR back and rankings back after a few weeks.

Angelas backlink packets contain 30 each, this is not going to harm anyone. Even if you bought all her packages, all Pauls packages and another package, it is unlikely harm would be done. The penalties are there for those people who go out and get several hundred per day for sites which previously had virtually no links at all.

[Steve Peters Benn]

Hi Stephen,

The supplemental index was merged into the main index over a year ago. I think there is something about it on Stompernet. However Stephen if you can point us to an operator to get to it, please let us know as that would help.

I don't seem to be the only one who think's the supplemental has popped it's cloggs:

Original Content vs Duplicate Content

As for excessive back linking it can trigger the sandbox - I would have thought most people know that.

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and I'm just giving mine.

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by franchiseshop

The good news though is that both pages of mine that did get their PR nulled and de-indexed (and when i say deindexed I mean one day they were #2 for their chosen term and the next day they were gone, not there, not on page 100, not on page 10,000, gone) both gained their PR back and rankings back after a few weeks.

Actually, this is the "Google Dance" and it happens to EVERYONE, regardless of the speed of building links. It normally doesn't take quite that long to come back, but I HAVE heard instances where it did.

You are right, though, about people needed to be worried only if they have added hundreds and hundreds of links in a day; usually this sort of thing has been 'automated' somehow by software and usually all the links come from the same source or the exact same "type" of site.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by Steve Peters Benn

As for excessive back linking it can trigger the sandbox - I would have thought most people know that.

There's a lot of mis-information and bad assumptions among most people.

[franchiseshop]

Hi Angela

The Google dance some some crazy things, this was not the Google dance though ;-) My sites are very well established and the pages were not new pages, neither did they jump up and down the rankings. They vanished. From PR4 to greyed out. From Rank #2 in Google to de-indexed. The Google dance affects the SERPS not the Toolbar PR. It also tends to do it's tricks on new pages and websites not established ones (although not always the case of course)