Has ranking in Google become harder or is it just me?

by pampoen 53 replies
I don't know if it really is happening, maybe i'm just being to paranoid:confused:, to many people complaining how Google wronged them, but since the EMD Domain change has it become harder to rank? Yes i realize that it will be harder to rank EMD's but just normal websites, with a quality link wheel and article marketing.I have heard so many stories of how guys were able to rank there sites within 2 months on number one, is this still possible?
#main internet marketing discussion forum #google #harder #ranking
  • Profile picture of the author WeavingThoughts
    It has become easier to rank EMDs since the update. You just need quality content which is relevant and topic centric. And as long as you supplement that with on page seo you are good.

    The emd update is received wrongly. It has made it easier to rank EMDs which are quality websites. Crappy websites may have gone down though. Talking from experience about my websites.
    Signature
    Looking to hire a Content Marketing service?
    Check out my thread - Get A FREE Sample Article!
    Gaia Internet (Content Marketing) || Aakshey.com (Strategic Consulting)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215511].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author pampoen
      Thanks man, what about SEO,backlinks ETC. Whats your opinion to get your sites on the upward turn?
      Signature

      Looking for good coffee? click here
      Looking for building tips?click here
      Looking for Auto Paint tips?Click Here

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215524].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dinospider
      Banned
      Originally Posted by WeavingThoughts View Post

      It has become easier to rank EMDs since the update. You just need quality content which is relevant and topic centric. And as long as you supplement that with on page seo you are good.

      The emd update is received wrongly. It has made it easier to rank EMDs which are quality websites. Crappy websites may have gone down though. Talking from experience about my websites.
      I second this, all my EMD'S went up and not down, it's all down to

      • Quality Content
      • Gradually built up social profile
      • High quality links
      Can't go wrong with those... haven't had any problems from the google updates.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215543].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author pampoen
        Originally Posted by Seadragon View Post

        I second this, all my EMD'S went up and not down, it's all down to

        • Quality Content
        • Gradually built up social profile
        • High quality links
        Can't go wrong with those... haven't had any problems from the google updates.
        Ok so quality content, obviously, you would either need to be deaf, belligerent or dead if youv'e been reading up on SEO,and still do not do that.But what about high quality links how would one obtain them. Im really battling to get my sites up the G ladder
        Signature

        Looking for good coffee? click here
        Looking for building tips?click here
        Looking for Auto Paint tips?Click Here

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215578].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author pampoen
          So far i have written about 4 or 5 good articles about 1000 to 2000 words each, then setup about 3 or 4 web 2.0 sites with a 500 word article i have written,all linking to my site and not to each other, then i use UAW on these web 2.0's.So far Google has indexed some pages{NOT POSTS} and others not.:confused:I'm not sure why.

          Does this sound like a good system?
          Signature

          Looking for good coffee? click here
          Looking for building tips?click here
          Looking for Auto Paint tips?Click Here

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215616].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
            Banned
            Originally Posted by pampoen View Post

            So far i have written about 4 or 5 good articles about 1000 to 2000 words each, then setup about 3 or 4 web 2.0 sites with a 500 word article i have written,all linking to my site and not to each other, then i use UAW on these web 2.0's.So far Google has indexed some pages{NOT POSTS} and others not.:confused:I'm not sure why.

            Does this sound like a good system?
            I'm afraid it really doesn't at all.

            The backlinks you can get with UAW (and anything similar, designed for automated mass submission) have virtually no value at all. But get enough of them and Google's Penguin update will eat your rankings for breakfast, one day, because of overoptimization.

            Google has been really open about this. Many Warriors have already had their sites heavily penalized, and Google has explained to them that that's the reason. (Take a look for yourself in the SEO folder, where this thread should perhaps have been posted anyway).

            I strongly advise you to stay well away from that (and any of its equivalents) for all the reasons explained in such detail in this thread: A problem with Article Marketing robot

            These threads will also help you ...
            How many articles to submit per month?
            Please suggest me auto article submitter?
            Is this a good 2 year plan?
            Article blasting
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215691].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
    Ranking is harder because there is more competition - everywhere. Each time a gazillion IMers jump on some bandwagon Google tends to whack it due to abuses, so from this corner of the net it could appear ranking is harder.

    .

    .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215522].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
    Yknow the time wasted mucking around trying to 'cut corners' takes longer than it would if you just built decent sites, with good quality content.
    Signature

    BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215707].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author O0o0O
    Yes, it would be harder to rank if your sites have bad content, bad SEO or are over optimized. The Exact Match Domain update mainly penalizes EMD domains with poor quality content.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215767].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pampoen
    Alexa Smith "For the last 2+ years I've submitted all my articles (eventually, after everything else I do with them) to Ezine Articles - and sometimes to one other directory, too - and that's the only article directory submission I do. This is much better for my business and is what I continue to do"

    Are you still doing this? Are you still finding success with Ezine articles? My sites are Adsense,CPA sites, do you think that this is all you need to rank?

    I'm new to this so be nice please
    Signature

    Looking for good coffee? click here
    Looking for building tips?click here
    Looking for Auto Paint tips?Click Here

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215842].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by pampoen View Post

      Are you still doing this? Are you still finding success with Ezine articles?
      Yes, very much so.

      As you can see from a lot of article marketing threads, there are very large numbers of us here having great success with Ezine Articles, but we're using it as a directory, not trying to use it to generate traffic or for its backlinks.

      There's no point at all in using Ezine Articles for SEO benefits arising from the Ezine Articles copy, but that isn't what the Ezine Articles copy is there for anyway, of course.

      Originally Posted by pampoen View Post

      My sites are Adsense,CPA sites, do you think that this is all you need to rank?
      Article marketing isn't primarily about rankings, or SEO, at all.

      It's true that there can be great SEO advantages from article marketing, but not from submitting to article directories. Only by syndication to relevant sites. But the only purpose of submitting anything to an article directory is to get it passively syndicated from there to a relevant site anyway. Here you are: this post will help you - http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5068872

      Originally Posted by pampoen View Post

      I'm new to this so be nice please
      Damn, there's always a catch ...

      Seriously, I don't know whether article marketing is a viable method for CPA/AdSense sites, since I don't do CPA and don't use AdSense, myself. But I can tell you confidently and with certainty that article marketing isn't about SEO.

      To answer your original question: ranking in Google, every time there's a major algorithm change, gets harder for some people and easier for others. It also, collectively, gets a little harder for everyone, perhaps, just as the number of websites grows. Over the last two, two-and-a-half years, ranking in Google has become steadily easier, overall, for article marketers, but much, much harder for people trying to use article directories and Web 2.0 sites as a backlinking way of ranking, because of the Panda updates, Penguin update, and so on. The key point to appreciate is that "linkjuice" is determined by relevance and quality, not by "numbers of backlinks". And these days large numbers of backlinks on non-relevant sites can always be penalized, too.

      All my articles happen to be in Ezine Articles as well as on my own site and on many other people's sites, but the SEO benefits I get don't come from the EZA copies at all. (And neither do anyone else's). They come from the copies on other, relevant sites in my niches. The Ezine Article copies are just a partial stepping-stone to getting those backlinks. Those backlinks are worth a lot (and relatively speaking, they're worth more and more all the time). But in order to get them, you have to have your article syndicated successfully. They don't do your SEO any good at all just sitting in an article directory or on a Web 2.0 site. Nor in 100 article directories or on 100 Web 2.0 sites. So you need a different sort of article in the first place. No point in using shorter, keyword-optimized articles. Nobody's going to syndicate those.

      So, I think the answer from your perspective is probably "Yes, it'll be a lot harder for you to rank sites now", I'm afraid.

      SEO dependent business models aren't going to get any easier.

      Also, a business that depends on Google for its primary traffic can never be more than one algorithm-change away from an big accident. Sorry.

      Originally Posted by pampoen View Post

      my content is perfectly original and unique
      That doesn't make any difference at all to Google, I'm afraid.

      The value of the backlink is determined mostly by the relevance and quality of the site on which it's published, and not at all by whether the content to which it's attached has been published before.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216043].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author PeckhamPirate
        @AlexaSmith
        Great reply Alexa.
        You said it all.

        English speaking markets are getting way too saturated for most people to break into with emds these days.
        Signature
        Stylish, affordable web design, translation and copywriting.
        I'm available for hire...

        EnglishEffect.com
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217096].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author GMD
      Banned
      Originally Posted by pampoen View Post

      Alexa Smith Are you still finding success with Ezine articles? My sites are Adsense,CPA sites, do you think that this is all you need to rank?

      I'm new to this so be nice please
      Anybody, today, telling you that they are having success with Ezine is either not telling you the truth or they're trying to sell you something (like trying to sell you article marketing systems that in reality won't earn you anything).

      As article syndication / marketing was practiced in the past, those methods in today's environment are now dead, dead, dead. NOBODY is making any serious money using the old article syndication / marketing ways. If they say they are, I say show me proof or it didn't happen.

      Did I said "dead"?

      And while you should take your Adsense questions to the Adsense forums and the CPA questions to the CPA forums, the BEST (and only) way to rank those sites is to start with good, solid, original content that's not duplicated en mass throughout the 'net.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216073].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pampoen
    And for everyone else, my content is perfectly original and unique
    Signature

    Looking for good coffee? click here
    Looking for building tips?click here
    Looking for Auto Paint tips?Click Here

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7215868].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author eniggma
    I saw a quote where a rep from google said the best thing to do is to stop worrying about SEO all together. Building quality links by guest posting on relevant blogs and only using the top article sites such as ezine articles although their effectiveness did take a hit is still key. Social Bookmarking works as well.

    You really should just focus on great content with a simplified and toned down linking strategy. You should not just abandon link building all together but Google is really forcing the point that good content will take care of itself.
    Signature

    "Successful people do the things unsuccessful people won't do" - (Somebody successful) :)

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216096].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author GMD
      Banned
      Originally Posted by eniggma View Post

      I saw a quote where a rep from google said the best thing to do is to stop worrying about SEO all together. Building quality links by guest posting on relevant blogs and only using the top article sites such as ezine articles although their effectiveness did take a hit is still key.
      Actually Matt Cutts of Google had this to day about Ezine and using it for SEO purposes:

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216197].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Anybody, today, telling you that they are having success with Ezine is either not telling you the truth or they're trying to sell you something (like trying to sell you article marketing systems that in reality won't earn you anything).
      I suppose that depends on what their goals are, and what they mean by success. I don't personally think much of that kind of article directory, but some people seem to do well with them. But only if their content gets picked up by other publishers.

      Most people either can't write well enough to be worth publishing, or they're in niches that don't get much attention at the directories.
      NOBODY is making any serious money using the old article syndication / marketing ways.
      [chuckle] Define 'old.'

      This is one of those arguments that ends up with people talking past each other because they're using certain key words in different ways. In this case, two of them: article and syndication.

      The majority of people in this industry who claim to be writers couldn't tell an article from advertorial if their lives depended on it. For many, the word means "any extended blob of text into which I can insert keywords, in the hopes of getting some juice from the SEs." The notion that articles should serve a purpose for the reader is entirely foreign to them.

      Marketing using that sort of dreck is pretty much dead, yes. But that's not what serious people mean when they use the word 'article.'


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216278].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author GMD
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

        I suppose that depends on what their goals are, and what they mean by success.
        "Their" goals are monetary success as defined by "their" claims of making tens of thousands per month or millions of dollars per year. You know, "cleaning up" as "they" say.

        Or, in general, folks that define "success" as making a significant amount of money using "method x". In this case, article syndication (or "marketing").

        Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

        Define 'old.'
        There's B.C. ("Before Christ") and then there's after Christ.

        Then there's before Google's "Panda" and "Penguin" algorithm updates and there's after Google's "Panda" and "Penguin" algorithm updates.

        The aforementioned, of course, slapped hard or significantly devalued article directories thus causing a Newtonian reaction of "cause and effect" bumping these sites off their top SERP perches thus cutting off the traffic that these directories relied upon AND in turn traffic that was relied upon by minor sites from the directories themselves.

        So "old" means doing things a certain way BEFORE the algorithm updates (not to mention the Disavow tool as well).

        "New" means how things shall be done now, post-update (which is very much still in flux).

        So here's the deal I see it:

        The "old" way of doing things went something like this (again in context of article syndication):

        A) Advice would be given to set up a website or blog and publish an article(s) on it.

        Sake of argument, let's define an article as this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_(publishing)

        B) Once your site (and it's contents) were indexed with the search engines like Google, Bing, Yahoo!, etc., one would submit the article(s) to countless article directories like Ezine.

        C) At this point, other websites out there would would publish (or "syndicate") your content by getting your content from these article directories.

        And then, PRESTO! Your site is supposed to receive a deluge of traffic from the sites where your content was published. Of course this is due to the fact that you're able to put a link into the "resource" section that all article directories allow writers to utilize. Hence, of course, the whole point.

        D) Then, once the traffic is hitting your site, they see your Clickbank stuff and other affiliate commission stuff and those visitors then become your customers.

        Write articles. Submit them. Syndicate. Rake in the traffic and watch the money roll in from commissions.

        And it did work.

        Did.

        And specifically regarding Google's Links Disavow tool, they SPECIFICALLY mention article syndication / marketing and the use of directories namely Ezine:

        Disavow links - YouTube

        In plain English, the "old" ways won't work anymore.

        The same as the "old" ways of ranking crappy Adsense sites (as opposed to building original, strong, quality content and sites built to last) won't work anymore.

        And the same way "old" tried-and-true SEO methods won't work anymore. It's a new game.

        Hope I cleared things up a bit.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216599].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          "Their" goals are monetary success as defined by "their" claims of making tens of thousands per month or millions of dollars per year. You know, "cleaning up" as "they" say.
          Fair point. I was talking about the mechanical goal. In this case, syndication to an existing audience, rather than for SEO juice or traffic from the directory's visitors.
          In plain English, the "old" ways won't work anymore.
          Hmm. Well, you just keep believing that. Doesn't affect the rest of the world.

          Scattershot syndication isn't a really effective way to get traffic, but it's not the only way to do syndication. If you don't put a whole lot of time into it, it's not a horrible add-on, but it's not where the results are for most people.

          Here's a statement I think is both fair and accurate: Content syndication will not work any more for the majority of people. Not because the model is flawed, but because they don't have a clue what really makes it work: Great content.

          Syndication as an SEO technique is definitely sliding down the ramp to uselessness. As a means of generating targeted traffic, it very much depends on the content creator.


          Paul
          Signature
          .
          Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216773].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author GMD
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

            Fair point. I was talking about the mechanical goal. In this case, syndication to an existing audience, rather than for SEO juice or traffic from the directory's visitors.
            Of course, if one's only goal is syndication of their content, submitting content to a directory and then letting nature take its course from there will work. But don't expect to make much money that way.

            But you're saying it wouldn't work, today, -- as agreed -- for SEO juice or traffic from the directory's visitors.

            Okay. Then if it can't be used to get traffic from the directory's visitors (the case I'm making) how are people making money TODAY attempting to use that old model?

            They're not. The traffic is gone. The rankings have vanished. The links are toxic (in Google's eyes).


            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

            Well, you just keep believing that. Doesn't affect the rest of the world.
            "Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true."

            "Fact" is something that has really occurred or is actually the case".

            It's a fact things have changed because of "Panda", "Penguin", and Disavow. SEO has changed because of it. SERP's have changed because of it. Methods of earning online income have changed because of it.

            It does affect the world.

            It does affect everybody in this forum trying to earn a buck. Not just me.

            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


            Scattershot syndication isn't a really effective way to get traffic,
            True. Yet in many circles online, such belief is not only openly preached, it's sold as gospel to people who don't know any better. It's mentioned a lot around here and nobody seems to say anything against it until you just did now.

            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


            Here's a statement I think is both fair and accurate: Content syndication will not work any more for the majority of people. Not because the model is flawed, but because they don't have a clue what really makes it work: Great content.


            Paul
            Now you're on a roll: Content syndication will not work any more for the majority of people.

            I wonder why you wrote "any more"? Did it work for the "majority" before?

            And no, in theory, the model is NOT flawed. Yet, again, what's changed are the mechanisms to propel that model to success. The circumstances under which it worked previous, no longer exist today.

            And keep in mind that means people making money from syndication and not simply writing content and getting it syndicated for the sake of syndication only.

            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


            Syndication as an SEO technique is definitely sliding down the ramp to uselessness. As a means of generating targeted traffic, it very much depends on the content creator.


            Paul
            "Sliding down the ramp to uselessness". Why? Well, because of the reasons I outlined in threads previous: things are changing and it's not just "my belief" nor will these changes only affect me.

            They affect the entire online world -- from the average web surfer and content seeker right down to us, the people who "put stuff" online and hope people will be able to find it and make us a buck.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217457].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
              Banned
              Originally Posted by GMD View Post

              Of course, if one's only goal is syndication of their content, submitting content to a directory and then letting nature take its course from there will work.
              There's certainly no other viable purpose in submitting content to an article directory. This is history, not news. http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5068872

              Originally Posted by GMD View Post

              But don't expect to make much money that way.
              Speak for yourself. The passive syndication I achieve that way is only a small proportion of my syndication and a small proportion of my income, admittedly but it's still singificant money. As I've said in 100 other threads, though, it's only an afterthought compared with active syndication.

              Originally Posted by GMD View Post

              But you're saying it wouldn't work, today, -- as agreed -- for SEO juice or traffic from the directory's visitors.
              Obviously not.

              Originally Posted by GMD View Post

              Then if it can't be used to get traffic from the directory's visitors (the case I'm making) how are people making money TODAY attempting to use that old model?

              They're not. The traffic is gone. The rankings have vanished. The links are toxic (in Google's eyes).
              For sure. But this is exactly what all the successful article marketers here have been saying so repeatedly for so long. Since I've been online, even just before the Panda updates, that was never a very viable strategy anyway. But that isn't what content syndicators mean by "article marketing" anyway. That's just "article directory marketing", which is stone dead, as so many of us have been saying for a year or so. Yes, it was affected by the Panda and Penguin updates, certainly. The Panda updates were more or less the last nails in its coffin lid. But it was distinctly unhealthy even before that.

              Originally Posted by GMD View Post

              It does affect everybody in this forum trying to earn a buck from SEO traffic
              "Fixed that for you".

              Article marketing doesn't have much to do with SEO, though.

              http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5035794

              The people who are benefitting by using Ezine Articles (and there are many of us here, whether you like it or not and whether you acknowledge it or not) aren't trying to use it to get traffic from it, nor to get backlinks from it.

              For all the reasons explained in this post and 100 others, no article marketers in their right minds want their potential customer traffic reading their article in an article directory.

              Article directory copies are there for publishers to find, not for customers to find: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...marketing.html

              That's why all those Panda updates were such a shot in the arm for article marketers: they made it even easier for us to put copies of our articles in EZA for publishers to syndicate (and that's the first directory in whiche publishers needing content look for it: it's the one they've all heard of just like it's the one you've heard of) without the danger that they might outrank our own sites so that customers looking in Google might also find them. That helped us.

              Again, this is history, not news.

              Originally Posted by GMD View Post

              It's mentioned a lot around here and nobody seems to say anything against it until you just did now.
              Have a look around some time, and you'll find that's far from true. Many of us have been arguing against it for a very long time.

              Best way to submit articles?
              What is the Best site for Posting Articles
              Best sites to submit articles?
              Article Writing & Syndication Explained?
              Really dumb article SYNDICATION question
              Mass Article Submission and Article Syndication. Any Difference?
              A question for Alexa Smith and MYOB
              Does Article Syndication Works Like Wonders?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217711].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author GMD
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                There's certainly no other viable purpose in submitting content to an article directory. This is history, not news. http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5068872



                Speak for yourself. The passive syndication I achieve that way is only a small proportion of my syndication and a small proportion of my income, admittedly but it's still singificant money. As I've said in 100 other threads, though, it's only an afterthought compared with active syndication.



                Obviously not.



                For sure. But this is exactly what all the successful article marketers here have been saying so repeatedly for so long. Since I've been online, even just before the Panda updates, that was never a very viable strategy anyway. But that isn't what content syndicators mean by "article marketing" anyway. That's just "article directory marketing", which is stone dead, as so many of us have been saying for a year or so. Yes, it was affected by the Panda and Penguin updates, certainly. The Panda updates were more or less the last nails in its coffin lid. But it was distinctly unhealthy even before that.



                "Fixed that for you".

                Article marketing doesn't have much to do with SEO, though.

                http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5035794

                The people who are benefitting by using Ezine Articles (and there are many of us here, whether you like it or not and whether you acknowledge it or not) aren't trying to use it to get traffic from it, nor to get backlinks from it.

                For all the reasons explained in this post and 100 others, no article marketers in their right minds want their potential customer traffic reading their article in an article directory.

                Article directory copies are there for publishers to find, not for customers to find: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...marketing.html

                That's why all those Panda updates were such a shot in the arm for article marketers: they made it even easier for us to put copies of our articles in EZA for publishers to syndicate (and that's the first directory in whiche publishers needing content look for it: it's the one they've all heard of just like it's the one you've heard of) without the danger that they might outrank our own sites so that customers looking in Google might also find them. That helped us.

                Again, this is history, not news.



                Have a look around some time, and you'll find that's far from true. Many of us have been arguing against it for a very long time.

                Best way to submit articles?
                What is the Best site for Posting Articles
                Best sites to submit articles?
                Article Writing & Syndication Explained?
                Really dumb article SYNDICATION question
                Mass Article Submission and Article Syndication. Any Difference?
                A question for Alexa Smith and MYOB
                Does Article Syndication Works Like Wonders?
                It's stuff like this that confuses me:

                Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


                As you can see from a lot of article marketing threads, there are very large numbers of us here having great success with Ezine Articles, but we're using it as a directory, not trying to use it to generate traffic or for its backlinks.
                "not trying to use it to generate traffic", and then...

                Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


                The one I use, on which almost my entire business is built, is article marketing, which is a traffic generation method that transcends SEO
                Now it's suddenly a "traffic generation method".

                Is it or isn't it?

                Then stuff like this confuses me:

                Recently, you wrote this:

                Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                I sell many hundreds of ClickBank products every month,
                And in thread after recent thread you glow over the wonderfulness of using Clickbank and how much money you make from it (and agreed, Clickbank IS great).

                However, in the not too distant past you wrote this about Clickbank and your use of it:

                Originally Posted by Alexa Smith;

                Clickbank has had a horrendous year.

                In spite of all their attempts at censorship (in their own forum), all their evasions, lies and ignoring complaints, the truth has now emerged, thanks to conversations in many other forums, that they have really dramatic and major affiliate-tracking problems and many affiliates aren’t getting paid for many of their sales.

                Some of the most successful affiliates have been saying this for many months, and now finally people are realising they were right all the time, and the constant Clickbank denials were simply an attempted whitewash.
                Clickbank are, in fact, losing affiliates at a very considerable rate at the moment, and more than they can replace with new ones.

                It’s the one affiliate network I would certainly not use (not as an affiliate, anyway, and not as a marketer wanting to keep affiliates – there’s no problem at all for customers, as far as I know).
                So I'm having a problem keeping all the facts straight.

                ...Well for those of us that still don't get it then,

                how about giving some practical examples / evidence of your success?

                Could you point to several articles that you've written that's on your site or sites?

                Could you point to several articles that you've written that's on your site or sites that's been widely syndicated?

                Where could I find one of your sites so the rest of us could see what success looks like?

                Could you produce evidence of traffic and where it's coming from?

                Could you share with us just a few of the Clickbank products that you promote -- with hundreds of sales per month, no need to list them all, I'd personally be interested in hearing about a few.

                Learn from the successful I say. So help us all out here.

                Would it be possible maybe to arrange a live video Skype (maybe you and MYOB...as I've heard he's the go-to person for this topic) with as many Warrior's as could be packed into a chat room in order to learn step-by-step from the masters how it all works?

                ...Maybe show up at one of the live Warrior events and host a seminar and highlight your work and your methods as they relate to what you've created in "real life"?

                There's lots of fancy words being thrown around, lots of smilies being sprinkled here-and-there for thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of posts on end, but what's not being shown is:

                Irrefutable evidence of success.

                I think extreme specifics would benefit many, many Warriors that have tried syndication and failed; maybe showing your online real estate would help people see and understand what a successful article syndication set-up really looks like?
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217771].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                  Of course, if one's only goal is syndication of their content, submitting content to a directory and then letting nature take its course from there will work. But don't expect to make much money that way.
                  Of course not, unless you have really, really good content. But that's not how most people I know who've had any success with content syndication do it. Not by itself, anyway. They have other, more direct, channels for distribution.

                  Then there's a whole other form of "syndication" that involves affiliates which is even easier and more effective. You just have the affiliate's ID merged into the content on your site, so they get credit for sales and subscribers that come through your site from their recommendations.
                  It's a fact things have changed because of "Panda", "Penguin", and Disavow. SEO has changed because of it. SERP's have changed because of it. Methods of earning online income have changed because of it.
                  Has nowt to do with it.

                  Real content marketing is aimed at people, not SEs. There will often be SEO benefits to it, but that is never a priority. It's all about attention: getting and keeping it, by presenting material the reader/viewer finds instructive, entertaining, or both. If they like what they get from it, they'll be more likely to respond to an offer to extend the experience, by signing up for a list or visiting a site.
                  True. Yet in many circles online, such belief is not only openly preached, it's sold as gospel to people who don't know any better. It's mentioned a lot around here and nobody seems to say anything against it until you just did now.
                  Ummm.... You do not appear to be reading the same posts I am.

                  The direct distribution part of the model isn't addressed as often, simply because so many people here focus on things that don't require them to effectively interact with other human beings. These are precisely the people who will be most likely to fail with content marketing, because they design their content based on their own desires, and not those of their audience.

                  Still, it's been mentioned quite a few times, and by the very people that are most often attacked for allegedly promoting a form of "article marketing" they never endorsed or defended.
                  I wonder why you wrote "any more"? Did it work for the "majority" before?
                  There was a time when good content was much harder to come by online, and the standards were so low that anyone with an intelligible position could find an audience for it.

                  I've been involved with content marketing since 1996, on both sides of the distribution system. As a supplier and as a publisher. It's the same cycle, over and over.
                  The circumstances under which it worked previous, no longer exist today.
                  Flat out wrong.

                  The model I described has worked in one medium or another for hundreds of years, and will continue to work for as long as there are some people who are better at expressing things than others. The distribution system has changed, and will continue to change, but the basic model itself is the same.

                  EZA started out as a very useful resource. Then the "machine marketers" came along, and did to it what they do to every other channel they can force their way into. They polluted it so badly that it became a dumping ground for every illiterate MLM junky and sleazy SEO spammer that could string together a few sentences. They tried raising the bar and adding systems to enforce a certain level of quality, but that's a hard battle. Especially when the people you hire to judge the content aren't able to write well enough themselves to do it professionally.

                  And, of course, if you raise the bar too high, you have no content coming in at all.

                  The future of effective content syndication will go right back to where it was in the earlier days of the net, and where the most successful content marketers have always operated: Private channels and highly selective publishers.


                  Paul
                  Signature
                  .
                  Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7218649].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author njs7227
                    Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

                    Then the "machine marketers" came along, and did to it what they do to every other channel they can force their way into. They polluted it so badly that it became a dumping ground for every illiterate MLM junky and sleazy SEO spammer that could string together a few sentences. They tried raising the bar and adding systems to enforce a certain level of quality, but that's a hard battle. Especially when the people you hire to judge the content aren't able to write well enough themselves to do it professionally.

                    And, of course, if you raise the bar too high, you have no content coming in at all.

                    Paul
                    Very well put. Don't have anything else to add to that
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7219485].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                  Irrefutable evidence of success.
                  That would be:

                  A. Impossible
                  B. Irrelevant

                  Any evidence one could offer through a forum could be faked. And, no matter how truthful it was, people who didn't want to believe it would claim it was faked. That whole line of argument is pointless.

                  That said, anyone who's paid any attention to the big product launches has seen the power of content marketing. It is most often driven by the affiliate referral method rather than re-publishing, but that's largely unimportant. Where the content is hosted doesn't have as much impact as who's doing the referring and how good the content is.

                  Guest posting on blogs? Submitting articles to online magazines and news sources? YouTube videos? Squidoo lenses? All of that is content marketing, and all of it works when done right.

                  One of the biggest reasons so many new people to the business become disillusioned is the readiness others have to make claims about income. The simple fact is that most people could be good writers, but will not be, because they won't make the effort. Sad, since it takes so little real effort, but true nonetheless. And if you're not a good writer or speaker, you're not going to see much success with marketing your content.

                  That's why "proof" is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with anyone but the person making the claim. It just shows that a thing is possible, and only to the extent that one relies on the evidence presented.

                  I personally recommend against basing any decisions on the income claims of people you don't know, or any income promises at all. Even if they're true, they don't have anything to do with your results.


                  Paul
                  Signature
                  .
                  Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7218699].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author GMD
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


                    Here's a statement I think is both fair and accurate: Content syndication will not work any more for the majority of people. Not because the model is flawed, but because they don't have a clue what really makes it work: Great content.


                    Paul

                    Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


                    Guest posting on blogs? Submitting articles to online magazines and news sources? YouTube videos? Squidoo lenses? All of that is content marketing, and all of it works when done right.
                    The majority of people will fail at "content" marketing; "content marketing" being some of the things that you've expounded upon above.

                    So if the majority will fail (and I honestly can say that I think you're 100% correct about that), why do some people go around "selling the dream" if the "dream" is one that cannot be accomplished because, first, the "majority" will fail, and...

                    Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


                    And if you're not a good writer or speaker, you're not going to see much success with marketing your content.


                    Paul
                    It boils down to something called "talent". Something that a) many people don't have or b) they do have the talent but as you say, they won't put the effort into it thus creating the prophesy of the "majority failing".

                    Again, why push something (I speak of marketers in general) that the majority of people will fail at? That "something" of course being "content syndication" or more specifically within that niche, "article syndication" (when most people can't compose a proper thought on a postcard let alone pen a model article)?

                    Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

                    The model I described has worked in one medium or another for hundreds of years, and will continue to work for as long as there are some people who are better at expressing things than others. The distribution system has changed, and will continue to change, but the basic model itself is the same.
                    Now that I like; it's perfectly worded. A good example are comic strips or advice columns that are created by their respective authors and then picked-up or "syndicated" into the newspapers that we read (thus creating income for the creators and content for the publishers). Of course the same is true for how some content gets syndicated on the world wide web.

                    Regarding the whole discussion I've found it incredibly educational and I mean it when I say I enjoyed reading ALL of what you've written. And I've enjoyed taking a peek into your thought processes and logic.

                    So for that, thank you. I've learned some stuff here that WILL add to my bottom line
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7218796].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                      So if the majority will fail (and I honestly can say that I think you're 100% correct about that), why do some people go around "selling the dream" if the "dream" is one that cannot be accomplished because, first, the "majority" will fail
                      Let's see. Which assumption should we question first?

                      The majority won't try it.

                      The fact that most people will fail at a thing does not mean they can't do it. It more often means they're unwilling to put in the specific efforts required to succeed at it.

                      The fact that most people won't succeed doesn't mean the thing isn't possible.

                      As far as "selling the dream," that's an inaccurate description of what goes on in these discussions. The process is what's described, but there's rarely anyone telling random strangers they should do this particular type of business. Just how to do it if it's something they choose.

                      VERY different things.
                      It boils down to something called "talent".
                      Bollocks. Or, for the more proper of speech... Piffle.

                      "Talent" is a word used by most people to mean "the collection of abilities and awarenesses required to do a thing with an appreciable level of skill." Since most people don't have a clue what all those things are, they treat it like it's a package gift, that some people are just born with, and which can't be explained or learned.

                      Again I say, Piffle!

                      I can teach anyone to write better, if they're willing to make the effort to learn. It's not a difficult thing, except for that whole "thinking clearly" part.

                      "Talent," the way most people use the word, is an excuse used by the unskilled to take credit away from people who've made the effort to become skilled.
                      Again, why push something (I speak of marketers in general) that the majority of people will fail at?
                      Who is pushing it?

                      As I mentioned above, offering advice on how to do a thing to people who want to learn is not "pushing."

                      Is a hardware store to be faulted for carrying tools that most people will never use, and which many haven't a clue HOW to use? Or do they trust their customers to know what they want to do, and then just give them the tools to do it properly?

                      You seem to miss that no-one is selling anything in these threads. It's advice on a specific process, which people with no interest can simply ignore. And, if you watch closely, you'll notice that the people with any real experience will consistently remind folks that you must produce quality content for it to work.

                      There is no monster in this closet.


                      Paul
                      Signature
                      .
                      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7218966].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author GMD
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


                    That's why "proof" is irrelevant.


                    Paul
                    Bahahaha Paul. That's your "Women full of binders" moment

                    Regarding the context from whence the above quote came, I understand your reasoning.

                    Mind you, I strongly disagree with it, but that's the nature of healthy discussions.

                    If somebody tells me that 1 + 1 = 2, I don't ask them if they're a mathematician in order to accept their conclusion.

                    However, when it comes to money and somebody is pushing a method that they claim they're wildly successful at (and want to encourage others to join them / purchase their "system"), I want "proof" they're actually making money with it.

                    I mean you know what? Anybody who knows anything about real estate will tell you that it's indeed possible (and it's been done on occasion) to purchase or control real estate with little or no money down. It is possible. But know what? If you're gonna sell me your system for it, I want "proof" that what you're selling to me worked for you.

                    Wanna sell me that bar of soap you made? Fine. Bend over and let me smell that whistle fresh, ocean breeze smelly butt of yours. If you want to sell me soap, I want proof that it cleaned you as nicely as it's gonna clean me.

                    However, in the end, seems to me that if Smith wanted to show up somewhere live or make a video and show us some of her great websites, great articles, great Clickbank products, etc., that's Smith's decision to make ultimately.

                    Again, many people would be interested in seeing some of the successful apparatus (websites, articles, syndicated content, etc.) Smith's uses/used to make so much cheese. I don't see the harm in that. Otherwise...

                    ...Agree or not, the issue doesn't need to be pushed further on my end. It's "Happy Trails" for me at this point.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7218832].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                      However, when it comes to money and somebody is pushing a method that they claim they're wildly successful at (and want to encourage others to join them / purchase their "system"), I want "proof" they're actually making money with it.
                      Which of the people who regularly discuss this are selling products on the topic?

                      Hint: There are only two that I can think of offhand. Alexa ain't one of them. They're both very clear on what's required, make no promises of specific results, and aren't going to be seen pitching their products in discussion threads in this forum.

                      You're focusing on something that simply isn't there. Calling Alexa on this based on what you've just said is particularly ill-considered. As far as I know, she has never offered anything for sale in this forum, and doesn't have any products available on this (or any related) topic. Other than her artwork, which isn't currently for sale and wouldn't be relevant to this discussion anyway, I'm not sure she has any products of her own at all.

                      All of which has nothing to do with the fact that "proof" of the kind you demand is both impossible and irrelevant, for the reasons previously outlined


                      Paul
                      Signature
                      .
                      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7219047].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by GMD View Post

                      Bahahaha Paul. That's your "Women full of binders" moment

                      ...However, when it comes to money and somebody is pushing a method that they claim they're wildly successful at (and want to encourage others to join them / purchase their "system"), I want "proof" they're actually making money with it.
                      Consider the fact that Lexy contributes here regularly and is quite verbose on the topic of content marketing. Her posts have changed my whole perspective on what I used to believe was content marketing or more commonly referred to as article marketing, as described by the masses who really know very little about it and only parrot the same old thing that everyone else parrots.

                      Alexa doesn't make a dime on this forum and never has had a "money signature" item. She makes her money via Clickbank via content marketing and she makes a lot (a bit of inside knowledge).

                      I have on numerous occasions tried to con her into writing an ebook, but she is not interested in creating a WSO on her methods. She shares them freely. In my pursuit for a pdf that goes into the kind of detail that I wanted, since I couldn't convince Lexy to create one for me, I stumbled upon the fact that Paul Myers indeed sells exactly what I was looking for and got that.

                      Now ... can you explain to me why someone here would divulge so much of their methods of making a lot of money when they aren't making a single dime by telling you?
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7222002].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Lucian Lada
                  Originally Posted by GMD View Post

                  "not trying to use it to generate traffic from EzineArticles directly", and then...



                  Now it's suddenly a "traffic generation method, because publishers take these articles from EzineArticles, publish them in their ezines, on their websites, etc., and people follow the link embedded in the resource box".
                  Fixed that for her (and for us).

                  Article syndication is not that hard to grasp: you write a great article, ditch it in EzineArticles so you it might get picked up by some publishers (passive syndication), and then venture into the World Wide Web in a quest of finding publishers who will take your articles (active syndication). Most won't, some will. When it gets published, people will read it. Some of them will enjoy it and click through your link. Some of those people will then subscribe, and so on and so forth.

                  About the talent required: if you really can't do it, you can buy articles from professional writers, and still use the system to its full potential.

                  Originally Posted by GMD View Post

                  Again, many people would be interested in seeing some of the successful apparatus (websites, articles, syndicated content, etc.) Smith's uses/used to make so much cheese. I don't see the harm in that.
                  Ooohh, but I see! Nobody will want to disclose their website(s) in which so much hard work has been invested. And what will she, or the others who do this, have to gain after revealing her/our website(s)? A single Google search with a small chunk of the article serving as the string will reveal the publications we try so hard to get in, and all of that will be served on a silver plate for the competition.
                  Thanks, but no thanks.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7219290].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by GMD View Post

                  It's stuff like this that confuses me:
                  As you can see from a lot of article marketing threads, there are very large numbers of us here having great success with Ezine Articles, but we're using it as a directory, not trying to use it to generate traffic or for its backlinks.
                  "not trying to use it to generate traffic", and then...
                  The one I use, on which almost my entire business is built, is article marketing, which is a traffic generation method that transcends SEO
                  Now it's suddenly a "traffic generation method".

                  Is it or isn't it?
                  Article marketing has always been a traffic generation method. Nothing sudden about it. But the purpose of putting articles in Ezine Articles has never been to generate traffic from the directory. It's always been to generate pre-targeted traffic from the relevant niche sites and ezines to which the article is syndicated as a result of having its syndication-availability announced by having been published in Ezine Articles (that being the sole purpose of an article directory).

                  Article marketing isn't "part of SEO". It's a traffic generating method in its own right, which transcends SEO. And the purpose of publishing articles in EZA isn't to generate traffic from EZA (but from elsewhere, EZA being merely a stepping-stone). Article directories are merely stepping stones, as so many of us have been explaining here for so long.

                  No conflict at all, you see? All entirely logical and consistent after all. Clearer, now?

                  Originally Posted by GMD View Post

                  However, in the not too distant past you wrote this about Clickbank and your use of it:
                  That is simply untrue.

                  It was not "in the not-too-distant past". I wrote that nearly 4 years ago, when I was 19 and had been online only for a few months, wasn't yet earning a living from ClickBank, didn't know what I was doing at all, and still imagined that article marketing was a "way of doing SEO". Which was why I wasn't earning so much, of course. :rolleyes:

                  The whole forum knows how much you love to follow me from thread to thread, seizing on my posts and nitpicking with them, trying to find any inconsistencies, making barbed, snide and snarky comments about "people selling systems that don't work" (I'm selling/promoting nothing in this forum and never have done!), questioning how much people are earning (I no longer disclose how much I'm earning, precisely because I'm fed up with hostility and resentment from anonymous trolls attacking me) and dredging up obscure comments I've made 4 years ago, but I think on this occasion people can see for themselves the extent to which you're scraping the barrel.

                  I replied to you at such length above, last night, because (as always, as I commented to you the other day) it struck me that we agreed about much more than we disagreed about. Clearly we're both fully aware that trying to use Ezine Articles for its own traffic and/or for its own backlinks is a complete waste of time. I appreciated that you knew that. You seemed not to appreciate that I (and large numbers of other successful article marketers) have also been saying that here for such a long time. I posted again simply to point that out to you. I was saying to you, in as friendly and polite a way as I could muster, after your rudeness to me over the last few days, "Hey - we actually agree about most of this!".

                  I'm selling/promoting nothing here. I have never sold/promoted anything here. I'm one of the many people here who write posts about article marketing which other people seem to find helpful. If you don't like what I have to say about it, I suggest you put me on "ignore" so that you don't have to read it. That's all.

                  The rest of your nonsense (or "Piffle", as he calls it) has been very fully replied to by Paul above, and I agree with every word he's said about it.

                  As Paul says:-

                  Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

                  As I mentioned above, offering advice on how to do a thing to people who want to learn is not "pushing."
                  You're talking to me (and about me) as if I'm selling something, and I'm just not.

                  I just make a lot of posts about article marketing. If you don't like them, the remedy is simple and obvious: don't read them.

                  I have an inbox full of p.m.'s (and a profile full of "profile messages" you can see for yourself") from people who weren't earning anything, started doing article marketing after reading what I (and others) have said on the subject and are now starting to earn some money as a direct result of that. I don't actually CARE whether you acknowledge that or not. I'm not in the "IM niche" at all, and never have been.

                  But every time you continue to make snide, snarky and totally dishonest remarks about my selling/promoting something, I will continue to report your posts (just as I did with some of them the previous day, ALL of which I see have now been removed by the moderators). So don't imagine that just because I'm young, and female, you're going to be able to push me around, inhibit me from posting, or stop me from trying to help other people here. That isn't how this forum works.

                  Clearer, now? :rolleyes:
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7219806].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author GMD
                    Banned
                    I think if you calmed down a bit, you might be able to express yourself better.

                    Just because somebody disagrees with you on certain points, doesn't mean it's an "attack". :rolleyes:

                    I know you're not used to people openly disagreeing with you with, but there's no "rule" against it either.

                    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                    , now?



                    It was not "in the not-too-distant past". I wrote that nearly 4 years ago, when I was 19 and had been online only for a few months, wasn't yet earning a living from ClickBank, didn't know what I was doing at all, and still imagined that article marketing was a "way of doing SEO". Which was why I wasn't earning so much, of course. :rolleyes:
                    You were online for only a few months. Wasn't earning a living from Clickbank, didn't know what you were doing and yet your were sill dishing out advice with an overt an air of authority, anyway?

                    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


                    dredging up obscure comments I've made 4 years ago,
                    If you consider your comments from four years ago "obscure" what will you call your comments, today, four years from now?

                    It's totally fair to ask the question when today you promote Clickbank and yet in your recent past was foaming-at-the-mouth against it?

                    Don't take it so personally because it's a legitimate question and you've answered the question.

                    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


                    The whole forum knows how much you love to follow me from thread to thread, seizing on my posts and nitpicking with them, trying to find any inconsistencies, making barbed, snide and snarky comments
                    "The whole forum knows"? Melodramatic don't you think?

                    Last count, 492 members viewed this thread. Hardly the "whole" forum.

                    "Follow you from thread to thread"?

                    Really?

                    I've got 639 posts to my name as of this writing. I've never directly or indirectly made any contact with you. In fact, amazingly, you made first contact WITH ME.

                    source: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post7198885

                    Yup. That was you communicating with me starting on 10/19/2012; not the other way around as you would like others to believe.

                    The "victim" card doesn't work when the stats can be checked and show your claims to be false and misleading.

                    And since that date when you first contacted me, do you know how many posts you've made?

                    I do. You've made 97 posts since you first contacted me.

                    Of those 97 posts you made, do you know how many I directly replied to because I disagreed with what you were writing / or because you were were willingly replying to me?

                    I do. Ten (10).

                    Is somebody feeling a little paranoid today? Nobody is "following" you or trying to "stop" you from "helping" people.

                    Help away I say. But I can help to by disagreeing with others should I believe it's warranted; ditto for agreeing with others and adding to their statements.

                    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


                    (I'm selling/promoting nothing in this forum and never have done!),
                    Yes you are. Here's a little something on "promoting":

                    "Promotion is one of the market mix elements. The specification of five promotional mix or promotional plan. Fundamentally, however there are three basic objectives of promotion. These are:

                    1. To present information to consumers as well as others.
                    2. To increase demand.
                    3. To differentiate a product."

                    You're actively promoting "article syndication", "content marketing", and all other variations of this (which is fine, by-the-way).

                    You're presenting information to consumers

                    You're increasing demand by making more and more people aware of the subject and "helping them".

                    You're "promoting".

                    So the statement that you're not promoting anything is also misleading and bordering on the dishonest.

                    Are you "selling" anything directly? I don't know what you do in your PM box. I don't know if you are PMing people telling them (this is an example):

                    "Hey! Alexa here! tee-hee! Go to my friend Annie Potts where she'll hook you up with The Content Cash System!"

                    or

                    "Hey! Alexa here! tee-hee :-) I helped you all I can but there's a great product that I want to turn you to!"

                    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


                    I'm selling/promoting nothing here. I have never sold/promoted anything here.
                    False. You are "promoting" here (which again is totally fine); just don't say you don't when you do.

                    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


                    I have an inbox full of p.m.'s (and a profile full of "profile messages" you can see for yourself") from people who weren't earning anything, started doing article marketing after reading what I (and others) have said on the subject and are now starting to earn some money as a direct result of that.
                    Well, the inbox full of p.m.'s we'll just have to take your word for it. Just like we have to take your word that you're being constantly "followed", that mere disagreement is "attack", that hammering the same message home about a niche whose result is to inform people and create demand for something is not promotion.

                    I could check out your "profile messages." So I did. At your invitation.

                    You have 183 "visitor messages".

                    Of the 183 messages, I found ZERO that stated they weren't making any money and now that they tried "your way" they are making money.

                    I found ZERO. Not one message. All I found was people commenting on your "hotness", on your "looks", on your "great forum advice", and so fourth.

                    So you're statement, quoted above, is also false and misleading. False and misleading based upon you telling me what I would find there and based upon what I actually did find.

                    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                    I will continue to report your posts (just as I did with some of them the previous day, ALL of which I see have now been removed by the moderators).

                    Clearer, now? :rolleyes:
                    You mean report posts that disagree with you?

                    As for any posts being "removed" by the moderators as of you writing the quoted section, and myself writing this, nary a post of mine has been removed.

                    Logged in today with the same number of posts that I logged out with last night.

                    Again, false and misleading.

                    I don't "report" posts when people fairly disagree or question me. Why should you?

                    I would think the moderators here would be fair and impartial. No Warrior gets special treatment or preference over the other. The rules apply equally to everybody, don't they? Nor should any one Warrior expect that.


                    I sincerely wish you the best.

                    P.S. Thank you for the advice about the WF ignore list. I've graciously added you.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7221904].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by GMD View Post

                      Just because somebody disagrees with you on certain points, doesn't mean it's an "attack".
                      That wasn't the attack.

                      The attack was in the lies you told about me, the snide and snarky references that you've made about me, your untruthful accusation that I'm selling or promoting something, and all the many hostile posts you've made about me over the last two or three days (mostly deleted now).

                      I suggested above that you should put me on "ignore" and I'm suggesting it again. If you don't like my posts, don't read them.

                      But to try to dredge up a post in which I've apparently said something inconsistent with what I said yesterday, and to have to go back nearly four years to find one, when I've made over 15,000 posts since, and when (in complete contrast to what you untruthfully claim) I wasn't "advising" anyone there at all, hadn't been here long and was only 18 or 19 at the time, is just ludicrous nonsense.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7222022].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author andrewm
                    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


                    I'm selling/promoting nothing here. I have never sold/promoted anything here. I'm one of the many people here who write posts about article marketing which other people seem to find helpful.

                    I have an inbox full of p.m.'s (and a profile full of "profile messages" you can see for yourself") from people who weren't earning anything, started doing article marketing after reading what I (and others) have said on the subject and are now starting to earn some money as a direct result of that.
                    GMD,

                    Alexa is correct . Her posts are all helpful to me and others. I for one have pm her so many times for assistance, and she has so freely answered me.

                    Because of what I have learned from her, I no longer jump "around and around" like I used to.

                    In the pass I have always thought that the "grass was greener" on the other side with other systems, but not after learning about article syndication..

                    As a result of what I have learned from her and many others here at the forum about article syndication, I now know that IM works.

                    I will be honest with you. I am not making the income I would like to make in IM, but I have reached a milestone as a result of what I have learned here about article syndication.

                    The traffic in this model is not depending on Google. Traffic comes as a result of webmasters picking up your articles from the article directories, and posting to their site. The Webmasters or Syndicators already have their following, so they do not depend on Google either for traffic.

                    In this model back links are automatically created, if you care about back links, but that is not our intention. We write for people, not the search engines.

                    One of the reasons we use an article directory like Ezine Articles is to build our database of articles to showcase our work to other webmasters and syndicators.

                    After we have established ourselves as someone to be trusted, we do not even post to the article directory first. Article directories are only used later to further syndicate our work.

                    Andrew
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7223393].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author betterwtveter
    The internet is so overloaded with content that you need to be more specific in your writings in order to get the targeted traffic that you are seeking for. The more unique targeted content you create, the more google will place you on the front page.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216383].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pampoen
    Awesome guys! a while ago a guy called UK Carl posted on his adsense niche sites.He used Micro Niche Finder(just like market samurai) to find niches and once he finished a Wordpress site with 4 to 5 unique articles he would run a campaign on Unique Article Wizard.I did some research and those sites are still ranking within the top 5 for there keyphrase. My personal opinion is that if done correctly and with the idea of giving to the community and to your readers by writing good stuff and not keyword trash you can still succeed using tools like UAW to help you get those backlinks.

    Any comments?
    Signature

    Looking for good coffee? click here
    Looking for building tips?click here
    Looking for Auto Paint tips?Click Here

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216388].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author johnben1444
    I'm afraid SEO and ranking has not changed much, if you build a natural back link porfolio, less spam and crappy content you should be fine.

    Well, i still use article directories for diversification of links and anchors.

    For the EDM, Google has finally do away with the special attention their algo has for EDM sites.
    EDM are now a floor member like every other domain name....

    So if you have been able to rank a non-EDM site in the past you should be able to rank EDM now. Remember, you need quality links and stay clear off over optimization.

    I implore you learn about the rules.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216413].message }}
  • The best way to do is optimize your website code, write a good quality content for your readers and not for search engines. Don't over optimize your keywords. Make use of social media.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216578].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author newrepublic
    I read somewhere that there's like 200,000 new sites online every day so I think high growth of competition on one site like Google is expected.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7216817].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tomtommarketing
    I think ranking on Google has become more difficult simply because of the competition. Even the nichest of niche markets don't stay small for long before someone comes around trying to make a buck. Staying on top of your niche is crutial to Google ranking.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217012].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author markwilson4074
    After Panda, Penguin and (especially EMD) updates its an up-hill task to get rank easily. SEO is getting more challenging as it should be.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217086].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Willing2Learn
    I don't think it's any harder to rank in google than it ever was. It's just that the focus has continued to move towards quality content. Anybody who insists on trying to game the system or shortchange potential site visitors will see the reality of doing that reflected in lower rankings.

    Provide quality and put your readers/customers first and you'll be fine. Also, and this is very important, if you do the above 2 things you won't need to rank in google after a while. You'll build a following that will grow by word of mouth and that's better than having rank.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217129].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author UltimateFaqih
    and do not forget about social signals,
    Signature
    INSANE, Need SEO Services ? Like Press Release (Google News),EzineArticles,Social Bookmark,Wiki, High PR Web 2.0 Contextual Backlink Article Backlink, Forum Profile Backlink ,etc, Just PM or Comment http://www.warriorforum.com/members/ultimatefaqih.html
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217384].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Zend
    Most website get down and not ranked at all is because their content sucks and they deserve to not be ranked. A genuine website with honest and helpful article with many social link in their site will definitely stand on top of the world. Keep the website helpful and not "spamful"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217686].message }}
  • all you need to have for a better ranking is to have a long UNIQUE ORIGINAL content about 600 - 700 words or more than that the better. be informative to your readers. have a user friendly site... and then share ur site to social media...like twitter, FB, pinterest, etc.... and u will have a good ranking..

    note: be sure you dont over optimized your content like keyword stuffing it..
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7218810].message }}
  • in addition, ranking in Google will depend on the competition of the target keywords... just a less hardwork to build backlinks...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7218812].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author buzzingstreet
    It Is harder now to improve the ranking faster due to new google updation.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7218853].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lenovo
    Originally Posted by pampoen View Post

    I don't know if it really is happening, maybe i'm just being to paranoid:confused:, to many people complaining how Google wronged them, but since the EMD Domain change has it become harder to rank? Yes i realize that it will be harder to rank EMD's but just normal websites, with a quality link wheel and article marketing.I have heard so many stories of how guys were able to rank there sites within 2 months on number one, is this still possible?
    Mate, only EMD sites with low quality content were effected. I have few exact match domains, they are ranking well, beacuse the content is quique. Just remeber Content is King.
    Signature
    >>>>> Grab My FREE 300 $ Daily CPA Method <<<<<
    Caution: Particularly for those who think that they cant make money online
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7219972].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Just because somebody disagrees with you on certain points, doesn't mean it's an "attack".
    Maybe not, but if you're following someone around and going after their posts the way she just described, it does look like stalking. I can assure you, if I look at your posting history and see that kind of behavior, you won't be thrilled about the outcome.

    I was picking up a rather creepy vibe from your responses to Alexa last evening, but wrote it off to your use of her last name, and confusion about the fact that she's not selling anything here.

    I think it would be a very good idea if you put her in your Ignore List. You'll find it on your profile page, in the column on the left.


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7221992].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author techbul
    It's definitely become harder, but if you adapt the way Google wants you too, it's not yet an impossible game.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7222056].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TheArticlePros
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7222165].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MissTerraK
      I agree Jason.

      I have been stalked before and know what it not only feels like, but what it looks like as well. I did get that same creepy feeling when reading GMD's posts following Lexy's.

      I'm glad for his sake though, that he did follow his "Plan B" and put her on his ignore list as per his edit on post #50.

      Terra
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7222217].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        Terra,
        I'm glad for his sake though, that he did follow his "Plan B" and put her on his ignore list as per his edit on post #50.
        Indeed. He was doing that while I wrote the post above.

        A good indicator that it was a genuine objection, if somewhat misinformed, rather than the ugly kind of obsession we see occasionally here. And, given the general usefulness of GMD's posts, something of a relief.


        Paul
        Signature
        .
        Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7222312].message }}

Trending Topics