Thanks for the heads up on the software. Ideally id like to be backlinking my backlinks and using things like backlink energizer. So much stuff to learn

[DELETED]

Well, that's ONE way to do it, why not? There is no one single formula for this stuff, you need to experiment and see what works for you, for your niche, for your level of competition. But why create the Web 2.0s AFTER you submitted the articles? Are you going to go back and edit the links in the articles afterwards. I mean, that can be done usually, but personally I would create a few web 2.0s FIRST - they are my first-tier, "quality" backlinks. Then I would gradually link back to those from article sites etc., thereby basically gradually increasing the "authority' of my web 2.0s. So I usually only have these higher quality sites linking to my main site, especially if it is an important site.

The low-PR submissions, how to link to web 2.0s...? Not sure what you mean - different people have different ideas of low quality, but as I described above, a lot of people create relatively high quality web 2.0 pages in their first tier of links, and then spam the crap out of those with all kinds of backlinks - blog comments, forum profiles, mass-article submissions (I personally only use the latter) etc., all pointing to one or more of those web 2.0s.

Not sure what you mean by 'find all the URLs'. What I do is collect the URLs of the pages on which I created backlinks to my web 2.0s and then do something with those too, like I might create an RSS feed out of them, or rotate them through one of the backlink energizer type tools, or even do another whole run of article submissions backlinking to the backlinks to my backlinks! That gives you a huge great wibbly-wobbly tower of backlink goodness - it IS a little time-consuming but it does directly impact your ranking over a period of weeks. I am using a variation of this right now and have moved a site from about no. 20 to about no. 10 - it has taken 3 weeks, but I don't care: slow and steady wins the race, and it doesn't take that much time to do this stuff. In fact, once I set it up, most of it is automated if you use the right tools

You haven't done anything wrong in backlinking your site And no, it's not too late at all, on the contrary, I like a fairly random approach. Sometimes I create a web 2.0, like a Squidoo lens, on a related subject, do some backlinking to it, and then only add a link on the lens to my money site after a few weeks or something. You just have to keep track of it all so you don't get lost or waste time building something and then forget to use the backlink And this approach can seem to take a long time to yield any major results (well, depends how aggressively you do it), but SERPS rises seem to happen more smoothly, without all the jumping around and Google-dancing this way. Also, this way you do not get discouraged thinking that your site has been 'sandboxed' or whatever, but you can actually gradually see the results happening for your main site.

But you have to be persistent, for a low competition site you might need five or six different "buffer sites" (like web 2.0s, articles on high PR sites etc.) and then I find I need to backlink those quite a lot, preferably with an automated tool like AMR. Maybe you don't need THAT many backlinks to these - but I guess progress might be slower. Some people blast them like crazy, I don't like that too much either. Like I say, slow but steady wins the race...