14 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
14 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Just When You Think You Have a Handle on SEO...

by rhab
12 replies
  • SEO
    • |
I tell ya, I do my best to incorporate a diversified linking strategy. I feel I do have a good handle on SEO in general. I try to stay up on all the current trends with my focus being on solid tried and proven methods.

Today while doing some keyword research I came across a 3 word term with broad search results being 8,130,000. The topic is quite popular currently and can be found regularly on tv, news, and advertising.

Sitting at position #1 to my surprise is a .info domain. I'm not fond of .info domains and I'm aware of the discussion surrounding the use of .info. We all prefer .com of course, but there is a camp that would debate .info is terrible to use and doesn't rank well. This site also has an indented listing so it's #1 and #2.

The site has like 700 back links to the domain and shows about 450 to the page ranking for the term I was looking into. After checking out the back links, almost every single back link is from a directory. The majority of these are from sites classified as link bid directories. I'm aware of course of paid directories, but this is the first time I've come across this type of site. Basically looks like the setup is you bid for link placement on the site. The higher the bid the more your link is shown I guess. Is anyone able to comment in detail about these link bid directories? Many of the directories I looked at were nothing special, most with no PR and many seemed to be brand new with only a small number of apparent users.

So this brings up the discussion of a diversified linking strategy. Here I am trying to include links from web 2.0, unique blogs, articles, directories, profile sites, rss, etc... This site is ranking #1/#2 for a very good keyword term with respectable competition numbers, and the back links are nothing but "junk" directory links.

On top of this, from the description of many of the links, it would appear that these sites are all running the same type of script as they all show the same wording.

We all know back links are the true king. But after finding sites like this and other examples of sites ranking with elements that go against the "norm" of what is generally accepted within our community, I really think to myself if we're all just putting too much into the whole SEO thing and and the simple truth is staring at me from this site, don't get fancy, just build links. From the look of this site, junk links will do as long as you have enough of them.

One of the other quirks about this site that got me is it's one of those sites where the keywords are each a link in the menu. Each page has no real quality content on it, just a few paragraphs with some basic info, anchored keyword link and that's it.

A guy I really like is Grizzly Bears, or just Grizz as most of us call him. Grizz is all about staying basic, build links and build as many of them as you need to get your rankings. Many of you may know him, if you don't he's the guy who ranks in the top spots on google page one for the "make money online" terms... with a free blogspot blog.

Anyway, thought I would throw this out for food for thought and to hear your opinions on the matter. We all analyze so much about every element of linking, when all it probably boils down to is much less involved.
#handle #seo
  • Profile picture of the author tjcocker
    A lot of people selling domains will tell you the .info is just horrible. I have many of them ranking in the top 3 for their keyword. It just takes longer, that's all really. They have no trouble ranking once the "waiting period" is over. Why would you not test this? People in general have no patience and will give up on .infos before they realize what's happening. I have a .info that went from PR0 to PR4 in the last update, and a few others that went to PR2 and 3 from 0. So yes, Google still loves them and no they don't care about the TLD. If you make a good website, everything will be fine.

    And people selling link packets, SEO work, etc will tell you that SEO is like magic and can't be understood by all of us regular people. Yawn. Just build diversified links, don't worry about them, and it all works out.
    Signature
    Initrode Consulting -Boulder SEO, Copywriting, Editing, Website design, etc...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1644908].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by tjcocker View Post

      And people selling link packets, SEO work, etc will tell you that SEO is like magic and can't be understood by all of us regular people. Yawn.
      I sell a "backlink packet" myself and Have never said any such thing. In fact I can't think of anyone who has. All the sellers here spend a lot of time explaining things precisely because we think it can be understood.

      In regard to this post theres just too much that we don't know for the rest of us to draw conclusions. The amount of results a term gives back is all we know and that is worthless and means nothing. Even saying mostly directory links doesn't tell us much because that means there were other links and we know nothing about them.

      Was this a primary search term for the niche a long tail one? Again - don't know

      Sorry but before we throw everything out and say we are sweating things and it will all work out in the end we need something concrete and most of the time the person posting for various reasons doesn't want to post the data.

      Worse this whole thread is based on ONE SOLITARY non specified example. I've never subscribed to the idea that certain domains couldn't be ranked so its of no consequence to me and I will continue to avoid directory backlinks because in just about any search I've done I don't see many pages in the top ten that rely on them.

      So its number one now. SO what? Will it be next month or the month after that? at any rate no data no change for me.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1645100].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tjcocker
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        I sell a "backlink packet" myself and Have never said any such thing. In fact I can't think of anyone who has. All the sellers here spend a lot of time explaining things precisely because we think it can be understood.

        Worse this whole thread is based on ONE SOLITARY non specified example. I've never subscribed to the idea that certain domains couldn't be ranked so its of no consequence to me and I will continue to avoid directory backlinks because in just about any search I've done I don't see many pages in the top ten that rely on them.

        So its number one now. SO what? Will it be next month or the month after that? at any rate no data no change for me.
        I wasn't really singling you out, so please don't be defensive. Nobody is actually going to come out and say "finding backlinks is magical, and you can't do it", but the entire backlink packet industry is built on the foundation that people can't figure it out/won't waste their own time/don't know where to find their own backlinks. My wording may have been outrageous, but it's still correct. If people took time to find and suss out their own links, then your product would lose value. I'm not saying there isn't a market for link packets, but I don't see any packet sellers telling people exactly how/where they find the links. So they guard their knowledge. Secret knowledge... perhaps even magical? Yes, I'm being funny.

        At any rate, I also completely agree with you. This one .info site with all the directory links may lose its ranking tomorrow, and we don't really know why it seems to be doing well, so we can't draw any conclusions. But, like the OP said, this still brings up a lot of questions. This doesn't change my strategy, but it opens my eyes to the fact that we don't really know why some sites rank and others don't every time. There's still a mystery random element. I'll admit some of my sites rank for reasons I don't know, and others won't rank when I throw everything I have at them. Generally I can say some things work and others don't, but there's never 100% certainty on anything.
        Signature
        Initrode Consulting -Boulder SEO, Copywriting, Editing, Website design, etc...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1645177].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author mrizos
          I make a killing off .info domains and adsense....but....they are 2 years old.

          Year 1 yielded about $2/day. Year 2 is yielding approx $20/day (3 domains). I have 5-10 backlinks pointing to each domain, that's it. Domain age definitely plays a huge part in any extension.
          Signature
          Can't Rank? Find out why!
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1645241].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author rhab
            Yeah Mike, I actually plan to look into this a little more in detail. My intention was not to strike up an in depth analysis really but to point out that no matter how many acceptable methods of seo and linking we discuss within our community, I always see examples that go against the grain so to speak. It just makes me think that all of the content is king, link diversity, this type of link vs. that type of link jazz may just be a tad more than we really need to worry about. I'm not trying to start up any kind of movement or suggest I've stumbled upon any kind of "find". In fact I subscribe to many common seo linking beliefs. "I've never subscribed to the idea that certain domains couldn't be ranked so its of no consequence to me and I will continue to avoid directory backlinks because in just about any search I've done I don't see many pages in the top ten that rely on them." Again, I'm not attempting to advocate directory links nor is this post trying to suggest to anyone how to do their seo strats. This was one of my points in how no matter what we discuss, there is always an example that will pop up that goes against it, where google and seo just throws you for a loop. I feel that whatever domain extension you choose and whether or not you use dashes, or whether or not you use a keyword domain, whatever else, if you use proper on page seo and then develop a strong back linking campaign, I see no reason why any particular combination of the above mentioned wouldn't rank well. I also don't feel that directory links, especially the kind I'm seeing, are valuable. Nor would I rely upon them for top rankings. But again, this site goes against that common belief. When I said most, I meant the majority. The majority of links per each page I checked were directories. Every here and there I found blog links, some relevant some not. Again, I know I'm not giving you exact figures, all i can say is try to relate to "most" =p. But anyway, I felt it was interesting to note. I plan to look into it a bit more and see if it drops anytime soon. But for all the strategies most of us incorporate, it's times like this that make me wonder if some times we make mountains out of mole hills. There are plenty of other factors to consider and some that will just go unknown, but again, when you think you've got it, the monkey wrench appears.
            Signature
            http://about.me/davidmiranda
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1645480].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
              Originally Posted by rhab View Post

              But for all the strategies most of us incorporate, it's times like this that make me wonder if some times we make mountains out of mole hills. There are plenty of other factors to consider and some that will just go unknown, but again, when you think you've got it, the monkey wrench appears.

              Okay Rhab but don't you think you are drawing a shaky conclusion? You are focused on this one monkey wrench

              Its just one example. With millions of other search results that show the rule. Let me put it like this -

              Its like one guy gets rich from ignoring bathing and personal hygiene so maybe this personal hygiene thing for all of us is over rated? See my point? So he got noticed for being stink? Whats the odds thats going to last as an example for us?

              Furthermore I have a sneaking suspicion if I could actually look at the site and term I would be able to see why its ranked where it is. Either that or its an example of QDF - quality demands freshness and the site will drop like a rock in a week or two.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1646312].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by tjcocker View Post

          If people took time to find and suss out their own links, then your product would lose value. I'm not saying there isn't a market for link packets, but I don't see any packet sellers telling people exactly how/where they find the links. So they guard their knowledge. Secret knowledge... perhaps even magical? Yes, I'm being funny.
          Umm dude. Are you kidding me? the fact that I don't hide how to find backlinks from people is staring you right in the face. LOL! Now if you are requiring me to share it with everyone so that we can have thousands of trained spammers - no thanks.

          and no if I didn't sell a backlink packet myself I would buy packets even though I know how because finding a hundred good ones takes quite a bit of time. Its outsourcing and saves marketers the time of doing it themselves - one of the keys to IM success. At any rate I don't know how link packet sellers come into this. the site in question was ranked by backlinks. Wheres the contradiction to what any backlink seller has said?

          Sounds like you just have a beef. Not offended at all just pointing some things out.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1645970].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author tjcocker
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            Umm dude. Are you kidding me? the fact that I don't hide how to find backlinks from people is staring you right in the face. LOL! Now if you are requiring me to share it with everyone so that we can have thousands of trained spammers - no thanks.

            and no if I didn't sell a backlink packet myself I would buy packets even though I know how because finding a hundred good ones takes quite a bit of time. Its outsourcing and saves marketers the time of doing it themselves - one of the keys to IM success. At any rate I don't know how link packet sellers come into this. the site in question was ranked by backlinks. Wheres the contradiction to what any backlink seller has said?

            Sounds like you just have a beef. Not offended at all just pointing some things out.
            Sounds good. We don't need an army of spammers, which is why I won't share my methods either. No beef, just pointing out how some SEO experts and link sellers sell their products to people totally capable of learning how to do these things for themselves. If any Joe or Jane can plop down a few bucks and get a ton of links they are more likely to spam them then someone who spent their own precious time finding them. That's just my opinion. In the end there are a lot of things nobody knows for sure, like how that page got ranked with cruddy backlinks. It's all related somewhat... :confused: I'm boring myself, time for a beer.
            Signature
            Initrode Consulting -Boulder SEO, Copywriting, Editing, Website design, etc...
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1646372].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by zoneinfinite View Post

      No backlinks (according to SEOQuake). It's been there for weeks already since I first checked. I have no f-ing clue how it got there! I swear the owner did some BlueFart magic. And the niche is moderately competitive.
      I'm betting with no content and no backlinks (that you can see anyway) that your definition and mine might be a little different for "moderately competitive"
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1645110].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dseisner
    Originally Posted by rhab View Post

    I tell ya, I do my best to incorporate a diversified linking strategy. I feel I do have a good handle on SEO in general. I try to stay up on all the current trends with my focus being on solid tried and proven methods.

    Today while doing some keyword research I came across a 3 word term with broad search results being 8,130,000. The topic is quite popular currently and can be found regularly on tv, news, and advertising.

    Sitting at position #1 to my surprise is a .info domain. I'm not fond of .info domains and I'm aware of the discussion surrounding the use of .info. We all prefer .com of course, but there is a camp that would debate .info is terrible to use and doesn't rank well. This site also has an indented listing so it's #1 and #2.

    The site has like 700 back links to the domain and shows about 450 to the page ranking for the term I was looking into. After checking out the back links, almost every single back link is from a directory. The majority of these are from sites classified as link bid directories. I'm aware of course of paid directories, but this is the first time I've come across this type of site. Basically looks like the setup is you bid for link placement on the site. The higher the bid the more your link is shown I guess. Is anyone able to comment in detail about these link bid directories? Many of the directories I looked at were nothing special, most with no PR and many seemed to be brand new with only a small number of apparent users.

    So this brings up the discussion of a diversified linking strategy. Here I am trying to include links from web 2.0, unique blogs, articles, directories, profile sites, rss, etc... This site is ranking #1/#2 for a very good keyword term with respectable competition numbers, and the back links are nothing but "junk" directory links.

    On top of this, from the description of many of the links, it would appear that these sites are all running the same type of script as they all show the same wording.

    We all know back links are the true king. But after finding sites like this and other examples of sites ranking with elements that go against the "norm" of what is generally accepted within our community, I really think to myself if we're all just putting too much into the whole SEO thing and and the simple truth is staring at me from this site, don't get fancy, just build links. From the look of this site, junk links will do as long as you have enough of them.

    One of the other quirks about this site that got me is it's one of those sites where the keywords are each a link in the menu. Each page has no real quality content on it, just a few paragraphs with some basic info, anchored keyword link and that's it.

    A guy I really like is Grizzly Bears, or just Grizz as most of us call him. Grizz is all about staying basic, build links and build as many of them as you need to get your rankings. Many of you may know him, if you don't he's the guy who ranks in the top spots on google page one for the "make money online" terms... with a free blogspot blog.

    Anyway, thought I would throw this out for food for thought and to hear your opinions on the matter. We all analyze so much about every element of linking, when all it probably boils down to is much less involved.

    This is really interesting.

    I have found much evidence to point that quantity is equally as important as quality. But I did not imagine a bunch of junk links from directories could get you ranking double listing 1 and 2 for a keyword like this.

    It does sound like an anomaly. But I am truly humbled by it.

    The .info thing surprises me but not as much as the other stuff. I think you can rank with .info but I just think people say not to use it because it's associated with spyware and such and also it doesn't lend to remembering the website.

    This is very interested, no matter what is going on.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1647328].message }}

Trending Topics