12 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
12 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

How does this SEO strategy sound to you?

by Ambassy
10 replies
  • SEO
    • |
Basically I'm building tier 1 links to my website through web2.0 blog sites such as blogspot, blogster, areavoices etc. with unique content of around 300 words each; all manually written and posted.
However the difference is the fact that I create lots of pages on each of my tier1 domains; each page has 1 link to the relevant page on my money site.

For example:
Say I have a site about video games where each post is about a different video game.
Now I would create around 20 tier1 web 2.0 sites, each having around 10 pages or more that each links to the corresponding money site page.
For instance if I had a page on my moneysite about Battlefield 2 I would create posts on the tier1 sites about Battlefield 2 and link each of them to my moneysite page about Battlefield 2.

I hope you understand this example. What I wonder is whether google would "like" the fact that certain domains are having multiple pages exclusively linking to my site?

On a sidenote I blast the tier1's with senuke etc.
#seo #sound #strategy
  • Profile picture of the author Nicola Lane
    It sounds awful.

    It sounds like the sort of thing that might have worked a couple of years ago - pre panda and penguin.

    I don't see anything about well written quality content on a site that people want to visit and bookmark.

    You do realise that SEO is about more than just backlinks don't you - hence the difference between the terms "SEO" and "backlinking"

    I hope you also realise that the part of SEO where backlinks are useful relies on more on quality and relevance and not quantity.

    Hope this helps.
    Signature

    I like to keep an open mind, but not so open that my brains fall out

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6558478].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
    Strategy : A strategy is a plan of action designed to achieve a vision.

    Guesswork : The process or results of guessing.

    Sounds more like the latter.
    Signature

    BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6558487].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Ambassy
      Originally Posted by Nicola Lane View Post

      It sounds awful.

      It sounds like the sort of thing that might have worked a couple of years ago - pre panda and penguin.

      I don't see anything about well written quality content on a site that people want to visit and bookmark.

      You do realise that SEO is about more than just backlinks don't you - hence the difference between the terms "SEO" and "backlinking"

      I hope you also realise that the part of SEO where backlinks are useful relies on more on quality and relevance and not quantity.

      Hope this helps.
      I don't quite think you understood my point. What I'm basically making is a bunch of web2.0 sites that acts like a blog network where I post related and quality content to each of the pages which links to the corresponding page on my money site.
      I mean the backlinks will be quality and all, however my concern is whether google will dislike the fact that the each of the pages in the blogs are linking to my money site pages (multiple backlinks from different pages of the same domain).
      My main site got quality content as well btw.
      Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post

      Strategy : A strategy is a plan of action designed to achieve a vision.

      Guesswork : The process or results of guessing.

      Sounds more like the latter.
      I don't quite get your point. Kindly expand your comment.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6558610].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Ambassy
        I'd apprciate any additional opinions on this matter people.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6561958].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Nguyen
    In my opinion, web2.0 sites are rubbish. No "authority/credibility" whatsoever. Think of it like this. If you wanted a doctors advice, who would you go to? The trainee doctor that only graduated this summer vs the doctor that's been doing it for 20 years and is a specialist in the field? This is how Google views links, all about trust and relevancy from the domain.

    So when you're building web2.0 sites it's kinda like setting up a brand new blog, no credibility whatsoever even though you might have "good content". Worse if you have a subdomain web2.0

    Invest your time and money on already established websites. My rule of thumb, if it's easy or cheap to get the link, in most cases the link will be of low quality.
    Signature
    FREE Cold Calling Course: >>> Looking for Serious & Aspiring Cold Callers to Train for FREE <<<
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6562050].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Ambassy
      Originally Posted by Michael Nguyen View Post

      In my opinion, web2.0 sites are rubbish. No "authority/credibility" whatsoever. Think of it like this. If you wanted a doctors advice, who would you go to? The trainee doctor that only graduated this summer vs the doctor that's been doing it for 20 years and is a specialist in the field? This is how Google views links, all about trust and relevancy from the domain.

      So when you're building web2.0 sites it's kinda like setting up a brand new blog, no credibility whatsoever even though you might have "good content". Worse if you have a subdomain web2.0

      Invest your time and money on already established websites. My rule of thumb, if it's easy or cheap to get the link, in most cases the link will be of low quality.
      But in that case; what kind of links reflect authority then?
      Also; I'm building links to the web2.0's thus giving them authority.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6562150].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Michael Nguyen
        Originally Posted by Ambassy View Post

        But in that case; what kind of links reflect authority then?
        Also; I'm building links to the web2.0's thus giving them authority.
        Links from sites that have lots of links going to them.
        Use Internet Archive: Wayback Machine to see how far the website goes back and use your judgement. I like sites going back at least 2 years.

        I wouldn't call the use of 2nd tier links as giving authority. The only way you build authority (all subjective) is if you build authority links yourself.
        Signature
        FREE Cold Calling Course: >>> Looking for Serious & Aspiring Cold Callers to Train for FREE <<<
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6562190].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author J3thro M
    NO, web 2.0s are not rubbish! I have seen a lot of web2.0s ranking for competitive terms. But of course, don't rely on them. You might also want to do some guest posts plus acquire some links with higher Pagerank. Btw, you can throw some links (tier 2) on the web 2.0s and they might rank or get higher page rank after a google pagerank update. Also, if your web 2.0s have a lot of page and only have external links going on 1 website only, it might look a bit suspicious. So maybe sacrifice some juice by pointing to relevant authority sites. Just my opinion. Lastly, don't do article directory submissions, because that's the rubbish one.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6562251].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jetsetter883
      Originally Posted by J3thro M View Post

      Also, if your web 2.0s have a lot of page and only have external links going on 1 website only, it might look a bit suspicious. So maybe sacrifice some juice by pointing to relevant authority sites. Just my opinion.
      Completely agree. Don't only link out to your money site from web 2.0s. create some additional outbound links so it looks natural. like it says above, you're going to have to sacrifice a bit of link juice.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6562437].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author nerbie
    We have different opinion here and the best one is if its working base on the experience. Here's mine. I have also some mmo gaming sites with news content and personal reviews. The only different with Ambassy's plan is that I dont use web2.0 sites to boost my own money site rather I use my own domain names. I have like 12 domains related to gaming right now and I already did what ambassy's wanted to do which is to create content from one domain then link to the top money gaming that is related to that content as well as creating content from the non performing gaming sites going back to the money site. I have lot of outbound links pointing from my domain names to some pages on money site which are ranking high though I see to it I use different anchor link title like what they suggested. I also agree to the above suggestion that once in a while link out to other sites that are not yours just to spread or increase the number of sites which your sites are linking to. So far the results works like a charm and been doing this for two years now. I also applied the same strategy to my other niche sites like travel and deals blogs. So far I survived panda and penguin. Honestly my adsense earning went up from like $600 monthly to almost 2k usd monthly since I applied it 2 years ago.

    I believe this strategy wont work if you have only few sites to link with each other as that would make a redflag for google
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6562542].message }}

Trending Topics