Setting up private blog network - SEO EXPERTS HELP ME! | Warrior Forum - The #1 Digital Marketing Forum & Marketplace

Clyde

13 years ago

inb4 laclear vs. the mike's

and yes, you will lose the backlinks.

Thanks

Signature

Generate Unlimited Number of Micro Niche Keywords, Multi-threaded EMD Finder PLUS More!

50% OFF WSO.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4471777].message }}

IMhunt

13 years ago

instead of buying that many .info and letting it expire and losing all,
buy high pr domains, host them on different ip, you can use and sell links also this way, invest back in more high pr domains for your network.

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4471869].message }}

dburk 13 years ago

Hi ebizman,

The first thing I would like to ask you is why? Why are you building a blog network? What is it that you hope to accomplish from having a network of blogs rather than a single blog or two? Once you answer that question I can offer advice to you.

The fact is a lot of folks think they need a network of blogs when just one will work as well as many. There are legitimate reasons to build a blog network however your post does not indicate that.
- Thanks
Signature

* Get Results - Outsource Your PPC Management |
* Don Burk Advertising & Marketing - www.donburk.com
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4472225].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by ebizman

Any feedback from SEO experts would be nice. If anyone has a PDF guide on setting up a private blog network that would be nice too.

Thanks!

PM me. Would be kind of crazy to get into this again after the last thread was locked.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4475439].message }}

ProfessorSeo

Banned 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

PM me. Would be kind of crazy to get into this again after the last thread was locked.

Lmbo yea i agree mike i followed the last post and it was crazy!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481033].message }}

senukeservices

12 years ago

i would not suggest buying 100 info domains to build such a network. There are other means to build networks, using social networks, forum profiles, articles, web2.0...
I would rather use senuke that doeas all that, and more. It builds links to your links, so that they really pass link juice to your money site

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5129926].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by senukeservices

i would not suggest buying 100 info domains to build such a network. There are other means to build networks, using social networks, forum profiles, articles, web2.0...
I would rather use senuke that doeas all that, and more. It builds links to your links, so that they really pass link juice to your money site

That isn't a network.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5130226].message }}

simonbuzz

Banned 13 years ago

Info domains are not worth it...try purchasing some high pr domains...

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4475475].message }}

Marc_L 13 years ago

We'd need to know the purposes for the OPs desire to create a network of blogs.

What is your budget? If money is no object you can buy aged domains and add private who is, there alot of pitfalls you need to be aware of when you take on this task. So make sure you read up on the process before starting as you're apt to lose PR or buy fake PR if you aren't careful. Also what is your timeframe to get started? It can take months to years to build up a network like this.

If you are on a more shoestring budget or time constraints then you can go with .info domains, which can be as cheap as 50 cents a domain make sure you opt for who is privacy. You can find some multi c class hosting for cheap to get your foot in the door.

If you go the .info route you can develop your domains into hi PR over time.

Personally I get the results I need by going the .info route and having lots of domains, which you may or may not need depending on the amounts of keywords you are working with.
- Thanks
Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476143].message }}
paulgl 13 years ago

Originally Posted by simonbuzz

Info domains are not worth it...try purchasing some high pr domains...

mta.info PR8
prchecker.info PR8

Domain extension is not an indicator of PR or anything else.

PR is PR is PR.

Come on Mike A. You can expect, and handle, a little flame bait, right?
I always thought you were the master at lowering the heat.

You have to read between the lines. Consider this, what is better, a sig
link on the WF, or 100 links on 100 blogs/websites in your niche, all PR 2 or
below? Or even PR n/a, but still indexed? Seems to me you all are going for
something equal to quantity to begin with. And worrying about quality later.

Paul
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481007].message }}
- MikeFriedman 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by paulgl
  
  mta.info PR8
  prchecker.info PR8
  
  Domain extension is not an indicator of PR or anything else.
  
  PR is PR is PR.
  
  Paul
  
  I think what he meant Paul was purchasing brand new .info domains with no PR versus purchasing existing domains with PR. He was responding to someone's comment above.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  SaaS SEO Consultant
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481026].message }}

Oranges

13 years ago

Ask yourself this >> Quantity Vs Quality?

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476014].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

I'm surprise how many people are trying to build their own network while there are tons of ready services to use...

Buying 1000 .info domains without PR or backlinks won't help you rank for your keywords, I would recommend expired domain with PR, Terry Kyle had a guide to aged domain buying here: Download Link For Aged Domains Webinar Here (August 2011)

I had great success with AMA and Elite SEOLV, these 2 networks alone would help me rank for a lot of medium competition keywords, I guess to replace them would need 4,000 PR2+ domains, that's a 60K to 100K investment...

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476116].message }}

timpears

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Buying 1000 .info domains without PR or backlinks won't help you rank for your keywords, I would recommend expired domain with PR, Terry Kyle had a guide to aged domain buying here: Download Link For Aged Domains Webinar Here (August 2011)

Matt LeClear has built up a thriving business using a network of PR0-PR1 .info domains and sells a service where he offers to get you on page one of Google for one of five keywords you give him, for $99. So those useless .info domains you speak of are making $75K a month for Matt.

http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-...ht=page+google

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Tim Pears

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476194].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by timpears

Matt LeClear has built up a thriving business using a network of PR0-PR1 .info domains and sells a service where he offers to get you on page one of Google for one of five keywords you give him, for $99. So those useless .info domains you speak of are making $75K a month for Matt.

http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-...ht=page+google

I can do the same with 1/100 of the investment.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476349].message }}

Marc_L 13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

I can do the same with 1/100 of the investment.

That I'd like to hear.
- Thanks
Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476353].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Buying 1000 .info domains without PR or backlinks won't help you rank for your keywords,

I really hope people are smart enough to listen to these words. 1000 PR 0 backlinks are not going to get you anywhere in a competitive SERP, much less those of you thinking about buying 50-100 of them. Save your money. Please.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478363].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

I really hope people are smart enough to listen to these words. 1000 PR 0 backlinks are not going to get you anywhere in a competitive SERP, much less those of you thinking about buying 50-100 of them. Save your money. Please.

Those could be fighting words amigo and we don't want to go there again.

I had an idea!

I will mentor a couple or more people on how to build a network (pdf request to me just doesn't cover it) . Everything you need. No secrets no secret sauce E V E R Y T H I N G. Keys to the kingdom and in a few months we can put up How us Mike's build Networks to whoever else wants to challenge my newbies.

Thats what the title of the thread is about and if we make this thread constructive with no jibber jabbering straight results for a newb to results for a newb then the thread won't violate any policies or get locked and give the OP what he asked for.

Deal?

only thing is there COULD BE alot of ins and out s and questions and hand holding so how much could be done for free on either side i don't know. Time constrainst etc? I have my own businesses to run.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478433].message }}

MikeFriedman 13 years ago

Not a bad idea.

Only problem I see is you have to have mentees (is that a word?) who are willing to put up some cash to build their network. Then of course there is the time in finding and acquiring domains. It takes some effort. You wouldn't want someone who signs up, and after two weeks gives up on it because they didn't realize the work that goes into it.

If you did it through a series of webinars with them, it wouldn't be too time consuming. It would take far longer to constantly be sending emails back and forth. I would keep it as a small group, probably less than 5. Maybe even only 2 or 3.

I'd volunteer some time to help out too.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478611].message }}
- Mike Anthony 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by MikeFriedman
  
  Not a bad idea.
  
  Only problem I see is you have to have mentees (is that a word?) who are willing to put up some cash to build their network.
  
  Well Yeah but thats going to be the case either way you go. There is no network that anyone can point to that works that only has 100 .info domains. None. So you would have to lay money anyway to buy a couple thousand at least. I think its actually better for cash flow to go the other way with some Pr sites that immediately give your money sites umphh but thats getting into the debate again which I want to avoid. lets make this substantive real and to the point of newbies actually building a network by actually doing it and seeing the real results TO NEWBIES BUILDING THEIR OWN
  
  Ditto on the rest. You would have to have video training of course but frankly I don't think a pdf and even an hour video session is going to do it. People get out there and start building and they have ongoing questions. thats what I was referring to with hand holding. By the way this isn't some idle suggestion. I am ready to go forward now if it is of interest.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478677].message }}
  
  MikeFriedman 13 years ago
  
  No an hour wouldn't be enough.
  
  I would probably do it like this. A 90-minute opening webinar to give the general concepts and ideas behind setting up the network. Then maybe twice a week host a 30 to 60 minute webinar for Q&A.
  
  Maybe put together a PDF that outlines a few of the most important things... like evaluating a domain before buying it. Actually, that is probably the biggest thing. If you buy good, high PR domains, even if you don't know exactly what you are doing from there but can setup a couple of sites with backlinks you will still boost your rankings noticeably.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  SaaS SEO Consultant
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478729].message }}
  
  Mike Anthony 13 years ago
  
  PDf is almost done. I've had so many PM requests for it I went ahead on that rather than covering it all by PM. thats when I realized PDfs and even videos (which could be done in hours) were a joke for this material. Really needs hands on but if theres no test in this thread from the other perspective than I guess my idea would die.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478818].message }}
  
  MikeFriedman 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony
  
  but if theres no test in this thread from the other perspective than I guess my idea would die.
  
  I just sent you a PM about this.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  SaaS SEO Consultant
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478913].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

The only reason to own a huge blog network - you are building a backlink service or you have a large network of sites to rank and maintain the ranking.

If you are not buying expired domains, and using new .info domains are good to rank sites with 1 million quote search, try to rank for higher competition, I bet you'll be having a hard time.

Think about this, what's the investment of building 4,000 expired domains with PR2 and above? 120K?

You can easily access to that number with AMA or Linkvana - $47 or $147 / month?

I'm not saying you can't or shouldn't build a network of sites for backlinks, but are you providing a $75K / month kind of services? If yes then go ahead.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476426].message }}

Mike Grant

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

The only reason to own a huge blog network - you are building a backlink service or you have a large network of sites to rank and maintain the ranking.

If you are not buying expired domains, and using new .info domains are good to rank sites with 1 million quote search, try to rank for higher competition, I bet you'll be having a hard time.

Think about this, what's the investment of building 4,000 expired domains with PR2 and above? 120K?

You can easily access to that number with AMA or Linkvana - $47 or $147 / month?

I'm not saying you can't or shouldn't build a network of sites for backlinks, but are you providing a $75K / month kind of services? If yes then go ahead.

Nah, I buy my PR4s for $30-$35/each. PR2 cost me $15.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Speed Kills Manifesto - The Single Most Overlooked Tactic - Proven to Increase Conversions 100% Overnight, Traffic 240% in 3 Days

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476724].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Grant

Nah, I buy my PR4s for $30-$35/each. PR2 cost me $15.

There you go, PR2 domain alone cost 60K for 4,000 domains. How about hosting fees plus IPs and may be some backlinks to maintain it?

AMA had 10 times more domains for $47/month.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476866].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

There you go, PR2 domain alone cost 60K for 4,000 domains. How about hosting fees plus IPs and may be some backlinks to maintain it?

AMA had 10 times more domains for $47/month.

Yo Yo kkchoon. Good to see you man

On the subject you wouldn't need 4000 PR2s. I know you check serps but others need to do so
. there are ton loads of sites ranking in competitive niches with less than even 500 PRed sites. Shoot even less than a hundred.

plus if you know a "secret sauce" technique. 50 PR sites will will give you the power of 500 easily

So those useless .info domains you speak of are making $75K.

Do we really want to start the successful WSO equals good SEo thing again so so soon. For the record there have been WSOs that made hundreds of thousands and product launches that made millions wihth hundreds of testimonials that didn't work a successfully for those who bought them. anyone watching IM for years has seen that happen

, though no overall conclusion come to.

Thats debatable but no don't want to and won't get into it here again

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4477467].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Do we really want to start the successful WSO equals good SEo thing again so so soon. For the record there have been WSOs that made hundreds of thousands and product launches that made millions wihth hundreds of testimonials that didn't work a successfully for those who bought them. anyone watching IM for years has seen that happen

A successful WSO that is based on results that clients want is good SEO and is good business. A sustained successful SEO WSO has to be based upon results that paying clients want. It's really simple, .info sites do work for SEO or WSOs based on using them wouldn't be having the sustained success that they are. Repeat customers do not buy again and again if they didn't get what they wanted.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479311].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

A successful WSO that is based on results that clients want is good SEO and is good business. A sustained successful SEO WSO has to be based upon results that paying clients want. It's really simple, .info sites do work for SEO or WSOs based on using them wouldn't be having the sustained success that they are. Repeat customers do not buy again and again if they didn't get what they wanted.

Not getting into a debate again on that subject Marc. that thread was closed by the mods and we should respect their wishes without resurrecting the same things. In this thread its easy, simple and to the point. Getting newbies to the point of having their own network

At the end of a fixed period of time people I will put any network I have trained people to build against any network built by who you train. Both of course will have to start out newbies and with around the same amount of cash.

deal? No fussing no tussling. Would end up being a very productive thread without he said she said.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479466].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Not getting into a debate again on that subject Marc. that thread was closed by the mods and we should respect their wishes without resurrecting the same things. In this thread its easy, simple and to the point. Getting newbies to the point of having their own network

Please look at my first post in this thread, I am not interested in getting into those old issues either.

My point is that there is value with .info networks, period. To deny that is just not dealing with facts.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479579].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Please look at my first post in this thread, I am not interested in getting into those old issues either.

My point is that there is value with .info networks, period. To deny that is just not dealing with facts.

If you are not interested in getting into the old issue then lets not. Whats your answer to this -

"At the end of a fixed period of time people I will put any network I have trained people to build against any network built by who you train. Both of course will have to start out newbies and with around the same amount of cash.

deal? No fussing no tussling. Would end up being a very productive thread without he said she said."

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479607].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479832].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479862].message }}

WhosGotMoves

13 years ago

I know you mentioned that you've received a ton of PMs for the PDF but keep us updated. I'm highly interested in studying your addition to this thread. Although some of us aren't chiming in we are watching it closely.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4480305].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by WhosGotMoves

I know you mentioned that you've received a ton of PMs for the PDF but keep us updated. I'm highly interested in studying your addition to this thread. Although some of us aren't chiming in we are watching it closely.

Sorry guys. I thought it would have been a good study comparing the two approaches with a challenge. Would have got back useful data. Without that it really doesn't makes sense for me or really anyone to go into greater depth and detail . Yesterday a product that doesn't do even into half the amount of mentoring I was planning was released at $99 a pop. I guess Only so much is going to be given away for free on a forum.

Plus one of the problems I was having by PM is that it was impossible to figure out who is really serious and who isn't. I even got a PM indicating it would be harmful to just give out too much info and he was right. People who are not serious tend to wreck a good thing. So sorry on my part that kind of mentoring is for those who are serious not an open forum since the study/challenge has been declined (and for fair reasons I think).

Anyway in the last thread we already gave away information on both sides that could have been a WSO

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4480909].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Yo Yo kkchoon. Good to see you man

On the subject you wouldn't need 4000 PR2s. I know you check serps but others need to do so
. there are ton loads of sites ranking in competitive niches with less than even 500 PRed sites. Shoot even less than a hundred.

plus if you know a "secret sauce" technique. 50 PR sites will will give you the power of 500 easily

Hi Mike, good to hear from you again.

My point is - you can do the same or even better with a lot less if you use existing services.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482807].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Hi Mike, good to hear from you again.

My point is - you can do the same or even better with a lot less if you use existing services.

No you can't not if you are talking multiple domains and plenty of different keywords you are trying to rank.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482891].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

No you can't not if you are talking multiple domains and plenty of different keywords you are trying to rank.

Nope, AMA allows unlimited domains and plenty of keywords. Even articleranks allow 100 post per day with unlimited domains, that's a lot for ranking sites.

I can add more accounts if there is any needs, until it hits the limit of my spending, then it is time to grow my own network.

BTW, I do agree with Matt Laclear if massive PR0 blogs works great in ranking 1 million quote search keywords, I might not need a lot of money to set them up, and never had to fear that they get banned or drop in PR.

I'll have to test this out, very interesting information...

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482986].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Nope, AMA allows unlimited domains and plenty of keywords. Even articleranks allow 100 post per day with unlimited domains, that's a lot for ranking sites.

Sorry KKchoon if AMA an article rank solved the problem for every domain and every kind of keyword competitiveness then We'd all be doing SEO that way and articles links would rule all serps. Such is not the case

BTW, I do agree with Matt Laclear if massive PR0 blogs works great in ranking 1 million quote search keywords, I might not need a lot of money to set them up, and never had to fear that they get banned or drop in PR.

who in the world told you that .infos were ban proof. In fact if you stick ten on one IP you stand to lose ten at a time. Plus whats this with losing PR? You an actually use your High Pr domains TO BUILD more HIGH PR DOMAINS and overall (sure you can lose some links but if you follow good techniques you will get back some too) GAIN PR not lose it. Matt and Marc don't have a HIGH PR network. They only just announced they were going to build one.

I'll have to test this out, very interesting information...

You are a serp guy so show me when you find a very competitive keyword ranking with just .info N/As. testing is fine but you can do that for free looking at the serps.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483092].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

You are a serp guy so show me when you find a very competitive keyword ranking with just .info N/As. testing is fine but you can do that for free looking at the serps.

I'd like to see a "competitive" keyword in the top 3 with just blog posts for backlinks as well.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483107].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Sorry KKchoon if AMA an article rank solved the problem for every domain and every kind of keyword competitiveness then We'd all be doing SEO that way and articles links would rule all serps. Such is not the case

who in the world told you that .infos were ban proof. In fact if you stick ten on one IP you stand to lose ten at a time. Plus whats this with losing PR? You an actually use your High Pr domains TO BUILD more HIGH PR DOMAINS and overall (sure you can lose some links but if you follow good techniques you will get back some too) GAIN PR not lose it. Matt and Marc don't have a HIGH PR network. They only just announced they were going to build one.

You are a serp guy so show me when you find a very competitive keyword ranking with just .info N/As. testing is fine but you can do that for free looking at the serps.

Like I said, I will test it out, and I do believe this is true when you have diversify IPs.

I'm open minded on this matter although I have yet had any much good luck with PR0 profile links, the link power is very low but I really want to see what if there is 1000 IP diversify blogs with highly spin unique content, what kind of keywords can they rank for ? How competitive is the keyword ?

I saw Matt's service is a success, but not sure if he only uses pr0, pr1 blogs, if that is true, this is another great way to rank for low competition keywords (or may be medium competition?). From the look of Matt customer's testimonials, this might work, just have to figure out other missing parts.

Thanks

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483227].message }}

libertysridhar 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Grant

Nah, I buy my PR4s for $30-$35/each. PR2 cost me $15.

Hi Mike

This i Sridhar I read one of your posts on this thread quoted above and you where saying that you buy PR4 for $30- $35. Could please let me know how and where you buy that. This would be very helpful. Thanks in Advance.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4533827].message }}

ulcseminary

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Grant

Nah, I buy my PR4s for $30-$35/each. PR2 cost me $15.

From where? It had never occurred to me that I could buy one with PR attached. But if you bought one with PR, which assumes there are links that go with it, wouldn't you end up losing the links because the site the other people linked to is no longer the site?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

I run the Universal Life Church seminary website. I post my Spiritual Bookmarks at this Universal Life Church site.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665431].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by ulcseminary

From where? It had never occurred to me that I could buy one with PR attached. But if you bought one with PR, which assumes there are links that go with it, wouldn't you end up losing the links because the site the other people linked to is no longer the site?

Nope. not if you do your homework and examine the links before buying. there are millions if not billions of pages with links where the webmaster will not be going back and removing links form old pages.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665504].message }}

ulcseminary

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Nope. not if you do your homework and examine the links before buying. there are millions if not billions of pages with links where the webmaster will not be going back and removing links form old pages.

So back to my question of where can you find sites at those prices that are good and how do you do your homework? Check each link?

Thanks

Signature

I run the Universal Life Church seminary website. I post my Spiritual Bookmarks at this Universal Life Church site.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665709].message }}

Fraggler

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Troy if you remember give us an update every now and again with web hosting plex. I like spreading out to as many good hosts as I can.

I missed your message Mike but here is a late update. I have one account on a server performing slowly at the moment but the others have been running nicely. The sites themselves are fine but the WHM is sluggish.

ASeohosting is more reliable and runs quicker and probably a better option for those starting out.

Originally Posted by ulcseminary

From where? It had never occurred to me that I could buy one with PR attached. But if you bought one with PR, which assumes there are links that go with it, wouldn't you end up losing the links because the site the other people linked to is no longer the site?

I'd assume they are not from the regular auctions as for starters, Snapnames and Namejet have a minimum bid of around $70. You are doing well to regularly land PR4s on Godaddy for cheaper than Snapnames and NJ.

The trick to buying good domains is having a process in place to easily check what links are still live; their diversity across domains; the PR of those links; and the likely hood those links will stick.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

- Stop Wasting Time & Money on Traffic!
- You Can't Improve What You Don't Measure
- Why You Should Create Separate Desktop and Mobile Google Adwords Campaigns

Connect with me on LinkedIn

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665544].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Fraggler

The trick to buying good domains is having a process in place to easily check what links are still live; their diversity across domains; the PR of those links; and the likely hood those links will stick.

Bingo! Trying to drill that into my guys wanting to build networks. A couple care more about SEO hosting and content publication which are important but that quote of yours above is whats at the heart of building a solid High PR network.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665613].message }}

Matthew Shelton

12 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

You can easily access to that number with AMA or Linkvana - $47 or $147 / month?

What is AMA?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5062418].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

There isn't a network out there that can rank for super competitive keywords on it's own.

What you meant to say is that there is not a super competitive keyword out there that your type of network can rank a site for.

There are networks out there that are ranking websites for extremely competitive keywords almost entirely by themselves. I can think of one that has grabbed some rankings in the SEO niche, where you obviously have the best of the best going at at it. Not only did this network grab top spots in that niche, the website it ranked got de-indexed, was replaced with a brand new site, and was back in the top 3 within a few months.

Your style of network wouldn't have a prayer of ranking anything SEO related.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

It takes a variety of kinds of links

If it takes variety, then why offer nothing but ultra spun, unreadable garbage on 1000's of PR 0 and PR n/a .info domains? That doesn't seem like variety to me.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Moral of the thread?

Shut up and build links, links from all kinds of sources with all kinds of PR.

Actually, if you do believe that you need PR 0 links to help you to rank, I think the moral of the thread is don't waste time or money building and maintaining a PR 0 network or paying someone else to use theirs. Those links can be found anywhere. It is not worth the cost when you can just blast out the same type of links with AMR, SEnuke X, Magic Submitter, or Xrumer. You can do it for as many keywords as you want and it will cost you a lot less money in the long run.

Originally Posted by boxoun

Having used grammarly.com for school, I think its safe to say Google can and does detect bad grammar.

Whether they punish you is a different story.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

All this means is that it is theoretically possible that Google detects bad grammar.

What this means is you are crapping your pants if Google is going to start judging sites on Grammar because your entire style of a network would fall to pieces. You would actually have to pay writers to write articles that make sense instead of posting gibberish. Then all of a sudden the "quantity" model becomes far more expensive than the high PR network model.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5062540].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

What you meant to say is that there is not a super competitive keyword out there that your type of network can rank a site for.

There are networks out there that are ranking websites for extremely competitive keywords almost entirely by themselves. I can think of one that has grabbed some rankings in the SEO niche, where you obviously have the best of the best going at at it. Not only did this network grab top spots in that niche, the website it ranked got de-indexed, was replaced with a brand new site, and was back in the top 3 within a few months.

I guess we will have to take your word for it. BUT, if the initial site got de-indexed what does that tell you?

Your style of network wouldn't have a prayer of ranking anything SEO related.

OK!:p

If it takes variety, then why offer nothing but ultra spun, unreadable garbage on 1000's of PR 0 and PR n/a .info domains? That doesn't seem like variety to me.

Cuz we post to more than our blogs? Maybe?

Actually, if you do believe that you need PR 0 links to help you to rank, I think the moral of the thread is don't waste time or money building and maintaining a PR 0 network or paying someone else to use theirs. Those links can be found anywhere. It is not worth the cost when you can just blast out the same type of links with AMR, SEnuke X, Magic Submitter, or Xrumer. You can do it for as many keywords as you want and it will cost you a lot less money in the long run.

You may have a point for affiliate marketers ranking their own sites but high PR is harder to scale so we don't do it.

What this means is you are crapping your pants if Google is going to start judging sites on Grammar because your entire style of a network would fall to pieces. You would actually have to pay writers to write articles that make sense instead of posting gibberish. Then all of a sudden the "quantity" model becomes far more expensive than the high PR network model.

NAH it wouldn't be that bad plus we have some stuff up the pike working on the quality of the content. So, even if Google makes these changes we'd be ready.

But hell, do what you think is the best. Although no layman (and that is who we are talking to here) is going to be able to rank for the real competitive search terms anyway with a network that he can actually afford.

So what links rank "make money online" number one aren't attainable for the layman anyway (at least in the quantity required). The keywords they will go after are rankable with a network of low PR sites plus other goodies you can get for free on other peoples sites. Plus, I found this software that can get your sites PR on auto pilot.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5064338].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I guess we will have to take your word for it. BUT, if the initial site got de-indexed what does that tell you?

The site got de-indexed because there is probably no more watched SERPs than ones relating to SEO. Competitors on that first page will file complaints with Google all day long against a new site that comes racing up to the top of the page out of nowhere.

They were greedy. Simple as that.

It's not like the weak keywords you are used to ranking for. Nobody pays attention to those. None of your customer's sites would have a prayer of standing up to a manual review either.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

NAH it wouldn't be that bad plus we have some stuff up the pike working on the quality of the content. So, even if Google makes these changes we'd be ready.

Meanwhile, the customers you have been doing backlink work for end up boned because of the trash you have been pointing at their sites.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

But hell, do what you think is the best. Although no layman (and that is who we are talking to here) is going to be able to rank for the real competitive search terms anyway with a network that he can actually afford.

So what links rank "make money online" number one aren't attainable for the layman anyway (at least in the quantity required). The keywords they will go after are rankable with a network of low PR sites plus other goodies you can get for free on other peoples sites.

You are missing the point. Building and maintaining a PR 0 network or paying someone else to use theirs is a complete waste of money. All you have to do is take SEnuke X and blast away. SEnuke X (which I don't think much of) actually provides a far better service than the PR 0 network you describe because you are not just blasting .info's. You are hitting .com's, .net's, .whatever. Plus SEnuke submits to domains with much more authority so there is a greater likelihood of getting your links indexed.

Why pay someone $99 to rank the weakest of 5 weak keywords when you can pay $147, and rank as many weak keywords as you want for as many URLs as you want?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5064592].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Meanwhile, the customers you have been doing backlink work for end up boned because of the trash you have been pointing at their sites.

Our customers are happy Mike, very happy.

You are missing the point. Building and maintaining a PR 0 network or paying someone else to use theirs is a complete waste of money.

Well you are entitled to your opinion, but how is this not just your opinion? Why should we value your opinion over anybody else's? We have thousands of customers who disagree with you who paid their money and have been ecstatic with the results.

All you have to do is take SEnuke X and blast away. SEnuke X (which I don't think much of) actually provides a far better service than the PR 0 network you describe because you are not just blasting .info's. You are hitting .com's, .net's, .whatever. Plus SEnuke submits to domains with much more authority so there is a greater likelihood of getting your links indexed.

We hit all those domains Mike. SEnuke is a pain to use and alot of our clients are just offloading the backlinking to us so they can scale. Who has time to backlink for 100 affiliate sites? I have one guy who has hundreds of sites and pays me 2k+ a month to do some backlinking. He must be a noob right? He's getting value from his investment.

Why pay someone $99 to rank the weakest of 5 weak keywords when you can pay $147, and rank as many weak keywords as you want for as many URLs as you want?

Mike, I am not pimping my service here I don't know why you and the other Mike keeps crapping on it and bringing it up. If you don't like it then don't buy it.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5066092].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

It's not like the weak keywords you are used to ranking for. Nobody pays attention to those. None of your customer's sites would have a prayer of standing up to a manual review either.

You and the other Mike keep making this claim, BUT you don't have any evidence to back it up. You are both talking out of your arses. You don't know what you are talking about.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5066108].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I guess we will have to take your word for it. BUT, if the initial site got de-indexed what does that tell you?

.

That you know squat about networks. They can be deindexed as can any site that in Google's minds puts up links to manipulate rankings. Thats why you don't like people to share your networks now do you Marc? This is one in a line so long of uninformed things that you have said in this thread that are so obtuse that I can no longer be bothered going through the gibberish and just skirt over your posts with a bored glance. Only in this case you are just being plain disingenious because I have to think that even you would know that your weak old rank my long tail network can be deindexed as can any site.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072344].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

That you know squat about networks. They can be deindexed as can any site that in Google's minds puts up links to manipulate rankings. Thats why you don't like people to share your networks now do you Marc? This is one in a line so long of uninformed things that you have said in this thread that are so obtuse that I can no longer be bothered going through the gibberish and just skirt over your posts with a bored glance. Only in this case you are just being plain disingenious because I have to think that even you would know that your weak old rank my long tail network can be deindexed as can any site.

I don't know why you keep bringing up our service, you lie continually about it whether its on purpose or out of ignorance it doesn't matter.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072518].message }}

faysal969

13 years ago

Buying many .info domain is not a good idea. Mainly .info domains are used by spammers. So, they have very little value in search engines. They do almost nothing for your site. After 1 year you have to pay full amount of money for making live all the domains. If you let them expire then you will loss all the backlinks. Anyway, you may use free hosted domains like blogger.com, wordpress.com, etc. for making network.

Thanks

Signature

Learn SEO, Affiliate Marketing, CPA, and Make Money Online !!!!!!!

Keep your house pest free and be healthy, wealthy, and happy. Get Rid of House Insects. :)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476641].message }}

markowe

13 years ago

Do we really want to get into this again?!

Google for the last Private Blog Networks thread, and read the whole thing in all its gory details, the subject's been pretty much covered, though no overall conclusion come to.

Thanks

Signature

Who says you can't earn money as an eBay affiliate any more? My stats say otherwise

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4476969].message }}

ebizman

13 years ago

im looking to setup this private blog network for my own sites and also to sell links similar to what some Warriors are doing.

thanks for the help...

Thanks

Signature

Restaurant Online Ordering System | FREE 30-DAY TRIAL!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4477567].message }}

Marc_L 13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478963].message }}

hpad06

13 years ago

the private blog network has to be setup for general topic or can it be just for one industry?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4477612].message }}

aanchalsharma

Banned 13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4477655].message }}

Oranges 13 years ago

Originally Posted by aanchalsharma

yes you will lost all the backlinks because those links connect with your website domain name.

!!!???WHAT???!!!:confused:
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478342].message }}

trishseo

13 years ago

Since Panda, autoblogs won't get traffic from Google no matter what you do. You can still get traffic outside of Google but don't depend on the big G to help you monetize. Honestly to me this is a strategy that's outdated and you probably need to rethink it.

Thanks
4 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478830].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by trishseo

Since Panda, autoblogs won't get traffic from Google no matter what you do. You can still get traffic outside of Google but don't depend on the big G to help you monetize. Honestly to me this is a strategy that's outdated and you probably need to rethink it.

I don't build my networks with autoblogs so networks per se are not what networks are about.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478875].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by trishseo

Since Panda, autoblogs won't get traffic from Google no matter what you do. You can still get traffic outside of Google but don't depend on the big G to help you monetize. Honestly to me this is a strategy that's outdated and you probably need to rethink it.

Nobody is talking about autoblogs here. I think you missed the point. Nonetheless, there are quite a few people having success with autoblogs, even post Panda. You just have to know what you are doing.

Thanks

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478916].message }}

russianbear 13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482717].message }}

Rsberg 13 years ago

Originally Posted by trishseo

Since Panda, autoblogs won't get traffic from Google no matter what you do.

So I guess all of us autobloggers who ARE still getting free traffic from Google (post Panda) must have some magic up our sleeves then....
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4486096].message }}
- dburk 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Rsberg
  
  So I guess all of us autobloggers who ARE still getting free traffic from Google (post Panda) must have some magic up our sleeves then....
  
  Hi Rsberg,
  
  You make a good point. Some folks just haven't yet got their head around what the PANDA update was about and how it effects things like autoblogging.
  
  The fact is that a well constructed and managed autoblogging script will benefit from the PANDA update. PANDA does the work for them, filtering low quality from SERP which helps to immunizes the autoblog content from PANDA.
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  * Get Results - Outsource Your PPC Management |
  * Don Burk Advertising & Marketing - www.donburk.com
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4486740].message }}

AshJM

13 years ago

Originally Posted by trishseo

Since Panda, autoblogs won't get traffic from Google no matter what you do. You can still get traffic outside of Google but don't depend on the big G to help you monetize. Honestly to me this is a strategy that's outdated and you probably need to rethink it.

Really? Who told you this? I have not had any noticeable drop off; in fact some of my autoblogs are doing better than ever before.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665978].message }}

IM Ash

13 years ago

Hey guyz,

Sorry to butt in here but I have a question that is partially related!

Will building a network of about 30-50 high PR blogs that only accept unique content be viable? Will a services of this nature that offers guest posts for a fee thrive?

The blogs will be well maintained and all content will have to pass copyscape before it is published. Comments will be moderated and a social footprint can even be added or manufactured

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4478976].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Eleva8

Will building a network of about 30-50 high PR blogs that only accept unique content be viable? Will a services of this nature that offers guest posts for a fee thrive?

The blogs will be well maintained and all content will have to pass copyscape before it is published. Comments will be moderated and a social footprint can even be added or manufactured

Yes very viable . Its already a done practice by some private networks. they get guest bloggers rather than autospin to their blogs. Works great and increases the value of their blogs Much more than one way to populate with content.

[ 2 ] Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479118].message }}

avatar9812

13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479134].message }}

MikeFriedman 13 years ago

Elevan,

Like Mike said, there are a lot of networks out there offering that kind of service and thriving. Many are advertised here. But there are a lot elsewhere too.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479208].message }}

RevSEO

13 years ago

Building a link network like this would be madness if you don't have a clue what you are doing.

Buying 100 or even 1,000 brand new .info's isn't gonna help you rank. These are brand new sites, probably hosted on the same server, and where do you plan to get content, backlinks, and everything else needed for these domains?

Honestly - try other network type link services before attempting to build your own. There's a lot of people that have developed some great services that know what they are doing and have a ton of experience.

Thanks

Signature

★★Panda & Penguin Protection★★

Effective & Proven Homepage Links

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4479301].message }}

ebizman

13 years ago

Guys,

Let's not start a debate on this thread. Only provide feedback on how to setup a private blog network and any tips, BASED on your success.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Restaurant Online Ordering System | FREE 30-DAY TRIAL!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4480756].message }}

Christine2011 13 years ago

Originally Posted by ebizman

Guys,

Let's not start a debate on this thread. Only provide feedback on how to setup a private blog network and any tips, BASED on your success.

Thanks for acting as moderator...That's

Yes I agree...I just love reading wonderful suggestions and success strategies too about
the topic.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665571].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Remember when it comes to seo...high quantity ALWAYS beats HIGH quality. Always has and always will. We have the proof to back it up too.

Edit: Other warriors will also tell you that high quality always beats high quantity. They undoubtedly also have the proof to back it up. Which proves my point that all links radiate link juice.

Thanks
4 replies

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4480840].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Remember when it comes to seo...high quantity ALWAYS beats HIGH quality. Always has and always will. We have the proof to back it up too.

pure Flame bait and showing no respect to the mods by initiating the EXACT same subject as the thread that was closed.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4480918].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

pure Flame bait and showing no respect to the mods by initiating the EXACT same subject as the thread that was closed.

Well that is what the thread is about, isn't it? Which is the better way to build a network.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481100].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Well that is what the thread is about, isn't it? Which is the better way to build a network.

Well a few days ago you announced your were GOING TO BUILD a high PR network as a premium service (which to the normal use of english implies better) so perhaps when you do we can take it seriously that you know which one works better or if you should charge less for the premium service. Looking forward to the substantive comparison at such time. talk to you then.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481270].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Well a few days ago you announced your were GOING TO BUILD a high PR network as a premium service (which to the normal use of english implies better) so perhaps when you do we can take it seriously that you know which one works better or if you should charge less for the premium service. Looking forward to the substantive comparison at such time. talk to you then.

I didn't make any announcements if you recall.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481543].message }}

paulgl

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

I think what he meant Paul was purchasing brand new .info domains with no PR versus purchasing existing domains with PR. He was responding to someone's comment above.

Point taken. My mistake.

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Well a few days ago you announced your were GOING TO BUILD a high PR network as a premium service (which to the normal use of english implies better) so perhaps when you do we can take it seriously that you know which one works better or if you should charge less for the premium service. Looking forward to the substantive comparison at such time. talk to you then.

Well, shoot, Mike. Define high PR.

How about building 50 squidoos, wordpress, blogspots, in related niche,
with all contextual links in relevant content? The PR won't stay n/a
forever. Actually, that's how I got to be a giant squid. Free.

Paul

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481602].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by paulgl

Well, shoot, Mike. Define high PR.

How about building 50 squidoos, wordpress, blogspots, in related niche,
with all contextual links in relevant content? The PR won't stay n/a
forever. Actually, that's how I got to be a giant squid. Free.

Paul

Which is a completely viable form of backlinking, but we are talking about building your own network that you OWN. The advantage is obviously that you own the sites and can do whatever you like with them. There's no fear of Squidoo, Blogger, or anyone else shutting them down with no warning.

Thanks

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481685].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by paulgl

Well, shoot, Mike. Define high PR.

How about building 50 squidoos, wordpress, blogspots, in related niche,
with all contextual links in relevant content? The PR won't stay n/a
forever. l

Well shoot Paul

if you don't backlink or get backlinks then they just magically turn into PR2s right? But sure you can go that route. More power to you. works great if you add many of your own domains though. Why put all your great content and all your ranking power under some one else's control? Makes no sense. So it can go puff in the night if you do something they don't like? So mix it up.

We are not far apart. you are just coming in on the tail end. Do you scratch all your lenses, blogspots and wordpress sites every year and start over? bet you don't so you are on the build PR bandwagon just over time which I have no issues with.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481696].message }}

packerfan

13 years ago

If anyone is serious about the whole "mentee" thing for building a link network I'm extremely interested. I just bought about 100 domain names and got about 25 free .infos in the process. I'd like to use those to start, and add in some high PR domains.

Initially I'd use this network to rank my own sites, and possibly sell a service. Just depends on how it goes.

Anyway, I have some cash, enough knowledge to be dangerous, and willing to work/outsource to get things done.

If one of you experts are looking for a case study for a WSO I'm your guy. ;-)

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Nothing to see here

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481776].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by packerfan

If one of you experts are looking for a case study for a WSO I'm your guy. ;-)

Unfortunately that challenge was not accepted but looks like I will be mentoring a few people who are serious. PM me if you are interested.

Searching for aged domains always is easier to screw up, than it is to set up 50 .infos making sure PR is valid trying to make sure PR isn't lost during the transfer etc etc. So let's take 1 aged pr 4 domain, cost about $50 if you get a good deal on it. Including privacy. You can get almost 100 .info domains including privacy for about the same price (godaddy sale price).

If you don't know what you are doing (as you didn't when you bought that PR5 with one link) then anything is easy to screw up. A Pr 4 is worth far more than 100 .infos if you know how to use them. You will argue with that but thats my point you don't know how to use them but perhaps you will learn when Your build that premium High pr network you announced.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481824].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Unfortunately that challenge was not accepted but looks like I will be mentoring a few people who are serious. PM me if you are interested.

If you don't know what you are doing (as you didn't when you bought that PR5 with one link) then anything is easy to screw up. A Pr 4 is worth far more than 100 .infos if you know how to use them. You will argue with that but thats my point you don't know how to use them but perhaps you will learn when Your build that premium High pr network you announced.

Please find the quote where I said anything about buying that pr5.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482303].message }}

MikeFriedman 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Please find the quote where I said anything about buying that pr5.

It was actually your brother that said it Marc, not you.
- Thanks
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482331].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Please find the quote where I said anything about buying that pr5.

What are you trying to say that I made it up? You requested here it is. If your brother lied on you my apologies

. I registered an expired pr 5 domain at auction of a pretty big rap band who forgot to renew it. It's only backlink (that showed up) was from a record company. As soon as WE took over the domain they dropped the link and you can guess the rest.

So obviously a business move as the We implied. You not a part of the business bro? If not you have my apologies. You routinely speak as if you are. Either way Thats not a way to buy a High Pr domain as you learned the hard way. Never EVER buy a High PR domain with one link . One of many basic rules of buying aged domains.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482531].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

TO ALL: REAL NUMBERS and REAL DATA

Its getting back to being a back and forth and thats been done. So I am going to step back and ask a few questions to everyone reading this thread. I think that will help everyone deciding to get a little clearer perspective

Can anyone point to any N/a or zero .info network THAT PRESENTLY exists NOW that has any evidence to work with only 100 domains?

the cost of this would be $200 and then hosting fees for the 100 domains

Can anyone point to any N/a or zero .info network THAT PRESENTLY exists NOW that has any evidence to work with only 200 domains?

The cost of that would be $400 and then hosting fees for the 200 domains

Can anyone point to any N/a or zero .info network THAT PRESENTLY exists NOW that has any evidence to work with only 500 domains.

The cost of that would be $1000 and then hosting fees for the 500 domains.

Can anyone point to any N/a or zero .info network THAT PRESENTLY exists NOW that has any evidence to work with only 1000 domains.

The cost of that would be $2000 and then hosting fees for the 1000 domains.

Can anyone point to any N/a or zero .info network THAT PRESENTLY exists NOW that has any evidence to work with only 2000 domains.

The cost of that would be $4000 and then hosting fees for the 2000 domains.

So ask yourself a serious tactical question.

If you spent $200 buying .infos what real evidence do you have that it will work. I'd say none. People can't point to a network with 4,000 blogs and say thats proof. They can say it will work but thats not proof that 200 will work. A 4,000 blog network won't prove that even a 1,000 will work. thats still only a quarter. they can say it will work but their network has four times as many so that working isn't proof of 1,000.

I think most people would need more proof than someone on a blog saying it will work before they plunk down $2,000 plus what will be nice hosting fees each month.

Same goes for 500 same goes for 1,000 or even 2,000. So care to spend a $1,000 without proof, $2,000 without proof or $4,000 without proof.

In my next post I will show real proof that a relatively small amount of PR links will rank a site in a truly competitive niche. Heres the kicker. You will get to see the raw proof with your own eyes. Not testimonials, not hearsay, Not I think, Not I say. real data sitting right there in REAL Google. Nothing hid from your eyes.

If YOU are going to build a network should you not have real proof that matches the number of domains that will be in YOUR network?
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482876].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

What are you trying to say that I made it up? You requested here it is. If your brother lied on you my apologies

So obviously a business move as the We implied. You not a part of the business bro? If not you have my apologies. You routinely speak as if you are. Either way Thats not a way to buy a High Pr domain as you learned the hard way. Never EVER buy a High PR domain with one link . One of many basic rules of buying aged domains.

FAIL

I Had nothing to do with that purchase.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482941].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

FAIL

I Had nothing to do with that purchase.

You are a part of the company. No fail in sight. Plus you routinely talk for the company so claim anything you want. Not arguing over it. Still speaks to you guys having no experience building High Pr networks so you can't really objective say which is better . Period.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483012].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

You are a part of the company. No fail in sight. Plus you routinely talk for the company so claim anything you want. Not arguing over it. Still speaks to you guys having no experience building High Pr networks so you can't really objective say which is better . Period.

Amazing! I didn't have anything to do with that purchase, period.

Matt and I have not always worked together and even to this day we have interests totally and 100% separate.

Do you have business partners? Does that mean everything that they ever did is something that YOU even if you had nothing to do with it?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483071].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Amazing! I didn't have anything to do with that purchase, period.

Matt and I have not always worked together and even to this day we have interests totally and 100% separate.

Argue all you want Marc. You speak for the company all the time so a "you' references you with the company no matter what you claim. Buying A PR 5 with one backlink indicates a lack of knowledge in how to buy aged domains . sorry just the truth.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483110].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Argue all you want Marc. You speak for the company all the time so a "you' references you with the company no matter what you claim. Buying A PR 5 with one backlink indicates a lack of knowledge in how to buy aged domains . sorry just the truth.

I wasn't even in the company then! Are you kidding me?

You sir have a problem with reality and the truth. I did not buy that domain, had nothing to do with it, never vouched for it. Does that not sink in? Is that penetrating your skull?

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483133].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

You sir have a problem with reality and the truth. I did not buy that domain, had nothing to do with it, never vouched for it. Does that not sink in? Is that penetrating your skull?

:rolleyes: perhaps somebody else can explain to you how YOU represent the company you work with now no matter when you joined. Next time you get a ticket where a customer said "you said" then you can complain it wasn't you and pretend like that can't refer to you as the company YOU represent.

my last post on that.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I'd like to see a "competitive" keyword in the top 3 with just blog posts for backlinks as well.

a network doesn't have to be built with blogs so thats a false criteria. I can and have shown MULTIPLE TIMES very competitive serps dominated by pages that have HIGH PR domains. I will again shortly. No one in the .info N/A has ever shown their truly competitive serps where Only .info N/A links are used.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483194].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

:rolleyes: perhaps somebody else can explain to you how YOU represent the company you work with now no matter when you joined. Next time you get a ticket where a customer said "you said" then you can complain it wasn't you and pretend like that can't refer to you as the company YOU represent.

my last post on that.

This is exactly why Matt ignores you. You have a problem with the truth, you said that I, Marc_L bought a domain that I never bought had nothing to do with, wasn't even in the business when it was bought! You then use that to try and make the point that I don't know what I, Marc_L, doesn't know what he's talking about. This is a blatant and dishonest smear that you stick with even after being corrected over and over again.

Repeat after me.

Marc_L nor any company he has been involved with had anything to do with buying any aged domain with one backlink.
mattlaclear and Marc_L have OTHER businesses separate from one another.
Marc_L nor any company he has been involved with has never bought a PR aged domain that didn't have real PR.
The domain in question has never been used nor was it purchased FOR any business that Marc_L has ever been involved with.
The term "we" does not equal "mattlaclear and Marc_L" in every usage.
Every aged domain that Marc_L has ever purchased or vouched for has had real PR and plenty of backlinks supporting that PR

If you hint towards or say otherwise again you will be lying.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483318].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I'd like to see a "competitive" keyword in the top 3 with just blog posts for backlinks as well.

Blog network does help me rank for a lot of competitive keywords, the quantity does matters.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483199].message }}

Marc_L 13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Blog network does help me rank for a lot of competitive keywords, the quantity does matters.

Agreed, it helps.
- Thanks
Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483216].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Blog network does help me rank for a lot of competitive keywords, the quantity does matters.

Hey kkchoon I think you misunderstand. I would never say ANY link doesn't help. I just don't think you can say that people wanting to build their own networks are not going to do better than with just an article service.

Its just not true. they can even do both and smoke the guy just using article services.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483291].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Hey kkchoon I think you misunderstand. I would never say ANY link doesn't help. I just don't think you can say that people wanting to build their own networks are not going to do better than with just an article service.

Its just not true. they can even do both and smoke the guy just using article services.

Yes, but it all depends on the quantity. Unless Google change the algorithm later, still the quantity matters...

I had send thousands of articles to few networks out there, and they do help me out rank a lot of sites for some competitive keywords, but I do this automated way, no way I can prepare thousands of articles on my own.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483325].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Yes, but it all depends on the quantity. Unless Google change the algorithm later, still the quantity matters..

Sorry KK show me a truly competitive serp that has a page with only quantity and no quality in the serps. I know you are a fair guy and you believe in showing things in the serps last we regularly talked. can you show me a really competitive serp with just quantity links and no quality?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483362].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Sorry KK show me a truly competitive serp that has a page with only quantity and no quality in the serps. I know you are a fair guy and you believe in showing things in the serps last we regularly talked. can you show me a really competitive serp with just quantity links and no quality?

Why don't you give me a page and keyword, I'll rank it for you?

All I ask is you follow the recommended on page factor here: Guaranteed Website Ranking

Place the order and I'll rank it for you, if I don't get there in the stated time, I'll send you the refund.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483410].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Why don't you give me a page and keyword, I'll rank it for you?

All I ask is you follow the recommended on page factor here: Guaranteed Website Ranking

Place the order and I'll rank it for you, if I don't get there in the stated time, I'll send you the refund.

Sorry KKchoon I don't need you to rank any of my sites. I do quite fine and I am not seeing any of your forum blast hitting down my customers sites down either. I'll take that as your way of saying you can't show it in the serps. Disappointing sarcastic answer old friend. I thought you were so much better than that answer.

I think we can now see why everyone who is into quantity over quality links refuses to show anything in the serps _ they can't show anything really competitive.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483445].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Sorry KKchoon I don't need you to rank any of my sites. I do quite fine and I am not seeing any of your forum blast hitting my customers sites either. I'll take that as your way of saying you can't show it in the serps. Disappointing sarcastic answer old friend. I thought you were so much better than that answer.

I think we can now see why everyone who is into quantity over quality links refuses to show anything in the serps _ they can't show anything really competitive.

How about you give us a "competitive" keyword so we can look at the backlinks of the top 3 to see what is going on.

I still don't know how you quantify "competitive" either. Are you talking dream keywords?

"make money online"? is that the standard?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483522].message }}

Mike Grant

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

How about you give us a "competitive" keyword so we can look at the backlinks of the top 3 to see what is going on.

I still don't know how you quantify "competitive" either. Are you talking dream keywords?

"make money online"? is that the standard?

Oh, you mean the keyword where my client is ranking #1?

Does that qualify me as a "dream seo"?

Thanks

Signature

Speed Kills Manifesto - The Single Most Overlooked Tactic - Proven to Increase Conversions 100% Overnight, Traffic 240% in 3 Days

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483528].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Sorry KKchoon I don't need you to rank any of my sites. I do quite fine and I am not seeing any of your forum blast hitting my customers sites either. I'll take that as your way of saying you can't show it in the serps. Disappointing sarcastic answer old friend. I thought you were so much better than that answer.

I think we can now see why everyone who is into quantity over quality links refuses to show anything in the serps _ they can't show anything really competitive.

Just give me a chance, order it and I'll rank it for you, what more do you want from your old friend? I'm willing to prove it but you have to pay for the campaign.

The risk is still on me, if I can't do it, not only you get the refund, I risk my reputation here.

Anyway, I will be testing the low PR blog network soon, I'm excited to see this happening... !

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483976].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Just give me a chance, order it and I'll rank it for you, what more do you want from your old friend?

Thats easy - an honest answer to a direct question about showing a single truly competitive serp where anyone ranks number one using just N/a or PR 0 links not a continuing pitch for me to buy a service I have stated point blank I neither want nor need.

but since you are so generously offering help and you are in the market for building a network drop me a PM. I 'll try and fit you in to the mentoring program I mentioned earlier on how to build a solid authority network. I'll even teach you how to ultimately multiply your PR domains and links for the price of nothing but a registration fee AND BELOW. completely driving down the long term cost that you have referred to. Shoot I'll even throw in why you can't see Mike's other links (even though he told you point blank why and you guys still don't get it). I mean I am that much of a stand up guy

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4485430].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Thats easy - an honest answer to a direct question about showing a single truly competitive serp where anyone ranks number one using just N/a or PR 0 links not a continuing pitch for me to buy a service I have stated point blank I neither want nor need.

Am I on your ignore list? I just told you that this is a strawman, nobody is claiming this.

In fact I looked at the make money online number one and there are a plethora of types of links used. I didn't see the forum profiles but Grant has indicated that he used them. There are blog comments (no network needed) blog roll links (no network needed) along with stuff that might require a network or it might not Grant has indicated that he didn't use his network.

Please stop with this ridiculous strawman. I'd like to see any decent serp with number one just using any type of particular link.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4486133].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

In fact I looked at the make money online number one and there are a plethora of types of links used. I didn't see the forum profiles but Grant has indicated that he used them. There are blog comments (no network needed) blog roll links (no network needed) along with stuff that might require a network or it might not Grant has indicated that he didn't use his network.

No one asked you ever to show ANY network. Thats a real strawman - implying or stating that someone made a point they never did. You need not have shown any network. Not your own or any one else's. You have been asked however REPEATEDLY to show any serp where someone is ranking using just PR N/A or zero links. Really don't even care about about .info.

Have members of YOUR team (as in Marc) claimed he would only use .info low PR in his networks? You KNOW he has stated so directly so the strawman argument on your side is dead and I need not address it further.

Mike's site among many, many many others shows that High PR links are required to rank at the top of competitive google serps. that is , was and will always be relevant to this discussion.

Please stop with this ridiculous strawman. I'd like to see any decent serp with number one just using any type of particular link.

I realize you think of networks in very limited terms but I don't . You can have a network with any and all "types" or particular links not just blogs. I have HTML sites, WOrdpress, forums, small social network setups and all kinds of sites in my network. I can place or accept blog comments and if I want to leave signature links from my forums I can So the type argument is off point. A network is everything you use to rank sites. I however would want my links to appear regardless of type on a higher authority page than a N/A or zero indicates. Its really quite simple and elementary because the VAST majority of sites ranking in 1-3 have these kinds of links and from what I gather you just came pretty close to flat out admitting it. So why should anyone build a network that doesn't have High PR? Its the preferred way to go.

People only want to build networks to get what they can't get in good supply without a network. You can get N/A and Zero links of all kinds all over the internet for free but you can't get on page High Pr links in constant supply at the drop of a hat so its a no brainer that makes no sense to avoid that when building a network you would want to go with High PR pages to get links from. Its elementary in my book and it causes my customers sites to rank.

You can take this as an answer to your last post as well as it addresses everything brought up in it.

I didn't admit anything that you indicated I did. Anybody building a network is going to be smart enough to know that there are more types of links in the world and that the network will be a part of that.

Good - then tell your people to stop blowing smoke. If you (yes the you as in company again)are going to tell people how to really build a network then give them a realistic view before they drop cash. telling them all they need are .info backlinks with little and no PR and spun content on a blog and they will rank where the real traffic is is highly misleading.

Happy we have finally come to an agreement.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4486605].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I wasn't even in the company then! Are you kidding me?

You sir have a problem with reality and the truth. I did not buy that domain, had nothing to do with it, never vouched for it. Does that not sink in? Is that penetrating your skull?

He is going on about the one domain? He sees our testimonials yet still insists I know nothing about seo.

Btw...I spent $8k on aged domains that month. I mention one domain that got by me and now I know nothing about how to buy aged domains.

This is the same freaking guy who called us scammers and our customers ignorant.

What a sad small man he is. Pity he doesn't have the testimonials to back up any of his attacks.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483243].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Btw...I spent $8k on aged domains that month. I mention one domain that got by me and now I know nothing about how to buy aged domains.

This is the same freaking guy who called us scammers and our customers ignorant.

What a sad small man he is. Pity he doesn't have the testimonials to back up any of his attacks.

You know what? I'm going to pass responding in kind. all of the above are distortions. Anyone following the other thread will see that you state that your last attempt at buying domains didn't go well and that you concluded that High PR networks did not work. then by the end of the thread you reconsidered and announced that you would try again and build a HIGH PR premium network. You even gave me credit for changing your mind (in a backhanded way)

they can draw their own conclusions as to who is sad and small and who always attacks anyone that gets in their way (apparently even if they are a customer which i most definitely am not).

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483346].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Well that is what the thread is about, isn't it? Which is the better way to build a network.

We settled that in the other thread.

If people want to build a network of 50-100 sites with no PR, they are far better off using Magic Submitter or even SEnuke X (MS is better) and they can setup as many of those type of networks as they want and it will be far cheaper.

And as you said...

Originally Posted by Marc_L

A higher PR is always preferable but it's much more time and cost consuming to build this type of network.

Which is mostly right, except that a high PR network is not really going to take more time or more cost because you do not need anywhere near the same amount of sites to have the same ranking power.

Can we move on now?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481321].message }}

Steadyon

13 years ago

Regarding this whole argument about low PR and high PR networks, there is still something I can't quite get my head around:

Assuming you start with brand new domains, even keyword rich .com .net and .org not just .info then surely these will all be PR N/A or PR 0 for a little while at least.

But then over time, won't these sites/pages become higher PR? Maybe not high PR, but at least PR1, PR2 and PR3 within a year or so.

If you go looking for expired domains with existing PR then the domain names may not be quite as relevant as if you bought some keyword rich domains from scratch.

So somewhere along here there must be a compromise to a degree.

Hope you understand my question. Can anyone shed some light on this aspect of the network, especially as it ages a little over time, say a year or so into the future?

My second most pressing question on this whole blog network, is related to how many pages of content is necessary for each blog site on average, bearing in mind the relationship between high PR and low PR pages/blogs etc...

I am thinking that ideally they should be as large as possible in my opinion, but in general terms is there a sweet spot minimum, say 10 pages etc., or are we talking hundreds of pages per site?

Sam

[ 2 ] Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481586].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Steadyon

If you go looking for expired domains with existing PR then the domain names may not be quite as relevant as if you bought some keyword rich domains from scratch.

So somewhere along here there must be a compromise to a degree.

Hope you understand my question. Can anyone shed some light on this aspect of the network, especially as it ages a little over time, say a year or so into the future?

My second most pressing question on this whole blog network, is related to how many pages of content is necessary for each blog site on average, bearing in mind the relationship between high PR and low PR pages/blogs etc...

I am thinking that ideally they should be as large as possible in my opinion, but in general terms is there a sweet spot minimum, say 10 pages etc., or are we talking hundreds of pages per site?

Sam

Sam, you do not need keyword rich domains. You are not trying to rank these sites. You are just using them for backlinks.

As for your second question, most of mine are just a few pages, some are just one page.

If you build too many pages (assuming you are linking to those pages from the home page) you are just bleeding out the PR.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481674].message }}

Steadyon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Sam, you do not need keyword rich domains. You are not trying to rank these sites. You are just using them for backlinks.

As for your second question, most of mine are just a few pages, some are just one page.

If you build too many pages (assuming you are linking to those pages from the home page) you are just bleeding out the PR.

Mike you make a couple of interesting points.

But, I can't agree or disagree, because I don't know, for example:

i) Regarding keyword rich domains, wouldn't this make more sense in terms of relevance to the link etc...

Also, is there any reason why it wouldn't be better to get these ranking in the top few hundred, instead of languishing in the lower few thousands of pages?

ii) I would have thought that more pages, builds up the worth of the network blog sites. Also any PR "leaked" to the other pages on the site, is pretty much transferred back to the home page via the go to home page link on each of the inner pages?

I don't know if this is the case or not. Perhaps I am over thinking it and assuming that each site in my blog network needs to be full of content and have many pages.

Clarification or guidance anyone?

Thanks,
Sam

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481735].message }}

MikeFriedman 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Steadyon

i) Regarding keyword rich domains, wouldn't this make more sense in terms of relevance to the link etc...

I really don't think Google cares about the domain name where the link came from. In fact, I would make the argument that EMD's do not have the ranking power they once had anyhow.

Originally Posted by Steadyon

Also, is there any reason why it wouldn't be better to get these ranking in the top few hundred, instead of languishing in the lower few thousands of pages?

I can't think of a single one.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481763].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Steadyon

Assuming you start with brand new domains, even keyword rich .com .net and .org not just .info then surely these will all be PR N/A or PR 0 for a little while at least.

But then over time, won't these sites/pages become higher PR? Maybe not high PR, but at least PR1, PR2 and PR3 within a year or so.

If you backlink it then yes if not then no. it will not magically become a PR3 or even 2 in a year. plus there are things you can do with a PR site that you cannot do with a a zero or N/a.

If you go looking for expired domains with existing PR then the domain names may not be quite as relevant as if you bought some keyword rich domains from scratch.

First you can get domain names over the course of a month in all kinds of niches so that doesn't really follow.

Second are you trying to rank all the sites in your network? I see nowhere in any serp where a well written article on a subject will not be counted as a great link if the article is completely relevant to the keyword but the domain does not exactly match.

My second most pressing question on this whole blog network, is related to how many pages of content is necessary for each blog site on average, bearing in mind the relationship between high PR and low PR pages/blogs etc...

I think this is over emphasized because people are talking about blogs. many business sites that give fantastic link juice if you get a link on them are ten pages and less. how many pages you have and how often you update them may be a ranking factor if you are looking at your money site but for many sites in a network the main reason to update is to get the pages crawled more often. people nee d to understand the whole world is not about blogs and Google knows it. You do NOT need a hundred pages of content Particularly gibberish spun content for it to be a good place to get a link from.

P.S. It seems to me there is a misunderstanding about ranking factors and networks. the purpose of a network is to create juice for other sites you want to rank. EMD is a ranking factor not a big network factor. I see no evidence that a link from a emd by itself gets you much more clout ranking another site.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481779].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

We settled that

in the other thread.

If people want to build a network of 50-100 sites with no PR, they are far better off using Magic Submitter or even SEnuke X (MS is better) and they can setup as many of those type of networks as they want and it will be far cheaper.

And as you said...

Which is mostly right, except that a high PR network is not really going to take more time or more cost because you do not need anywhere near the same amount of sites to have the same ranking power.

Can we move on now?

You can move on if you like BUT I will give advice based upon my experiences. Searching for aged domains always is easier to screw up, than it is to set up 50 .infos making sure PR is valid trying to make sure PR isn't lost during the transfer etc etc. So let's take 1 aged pr 4 domain, cost about $50 if you get a good deal on it. Including privacy. You can get almost 100 .info domains including privacy for about the same price (godaddy sale price).

1 pr 4 site vs 100 .info new domains. Here's the kicker though, if you go the .info route you can work on these domains increasing pr and juice by backlinking them. So imagine 100 sites that you work on backlinking to hi pr sites and in one years time you've got many of them with good pr. So you can do both, new .infos and build their pr yourself with very little upfront cost.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481643].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

1 pr 4 site vs 100 .info new domains. Here's the kicker though, if you go the .info route you can work on these domains increasing pr and juice by backlinking them. So imagine 100 sites that you work on backlinking to hi pr sites and in one years time you've got many of them with good pr. So you can do both, new .infos and build their pr yourself with very little upfront cost.

And buying those 100 .info domains with no PR is a great idea if you want to build a network with no ranking power for probably a good 6-9 months. If that is your goal, then go for it.

Or you can buy domains with existing PR and start ranking your sites right away, and not in just crappy SERPs, but more competitive SERPs.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481910].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

And buying those 100 .info domains with no PR is a great idea if you want to build a network with no ranking power for probably a good 6-9 months. If that is your goal, then go for it.

Or you can buy domains with existing PR and start ranking your sites right away, and not in just crappy SERPs, but more competitive SERPs.

Define crappy?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482139].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Define crappy?

I've got a better idea. You show me a worthwhile SERP where a site is ranking #1 with nothing but PR 0 and PR n/a backlinks.

I can't find any. I'm trying.

And please don't mention page one rankings. They don't interest me. I'm talking top 3, preferably #1.

But just for ****s and giggles... crappy SERPS would be things like...

facebook blaster pro
california dental insurance
cufflinks
bonsai tool
houses for sale durban

By crappy I mean things that would be easy to rank in the top 3 for anyone with a bit of SEO knowledge. I would include just about any "local" keyword in that.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482238].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

I've got a better idea. You show me a worthwhile SERP where a site is ranking #1 with nothing but PR 0 and PR n/a backlinks.

I can't find any. I'm trying.

And please don't mention page one rankings. They don't interest me. I'm talking top 3, preferably #1.

But just for ****s and giggles... crappy SERPS would be things like...

facebook blaster pro
california dental insurance
cufflinks
bonsai tool
houses for sale durban

By crappy I mean things that would be easy to rank in the top 3 for anyone with a bit of SEO knowledge. I would include just about any "local" keyword in that.

Ok Mike take any keyword that you consider "more competitive" and show me any site in the top 3 with nothing but blog posts of ANY PR.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482322].message }}

MikeFriedman 13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Remember when it comes to seo...high quantity ALWAYS beats HIGH quality. Always has and always will. We have the proof to back it up too.

Billy Madison - Ultimate Insult (Academic...
- [ 4 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4480937].message }}
- Mike Anthony 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by MikeFriedman
  
  Billy Madison - Ultimate Insult (Academic Decathlon) - YouTube
  
  ROLLLING OFL!!!
  
  but seriously lets not get going with that again as per mods direction. Let it die or MATT will just use it to say look at me and my network (ranking for terms like " magic spells for beginners") for the next five pages. I'm out of that.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4481006].message }}

IM Ash

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Remember when it comes to seo...high quantity ALWAYS beats HIGH quality. Always has and always will. We have the proof to back it up too.

Wow, this is an extraordinary comment from an SEO professional. I'm no SEO expert, but I am in a competitive niche and I always achieve a better return after securing a handful of high PR backlinks as opposed to a thousand n/a links. For this very reason I have changed my SEO strategy and I now focus on quality - the results have been tremendous.

What is also peculiar is once I secure say 10 high PR backlinks - my site will jump up the SERPs as soon as the pages the links are on are cached, but if I add a handful of Pr n/a links after securing these high PR links my site falls a few spots.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4480964].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Eleva8

Wow, this is an extraordinary comment from an SEO professional. I'm no SEO expert, but I am in a competitive niche and I always achieve a better return after securing a handful of high PR backlinks as opposed to a thousand n/a links. For this very reason I have changed my SEO strategy and I now focus on quality - the results have been tremendous.

What is also peculiar is once I secure say 10 high PR backlinks - my site will jump up the SERPs as soon as the pages the links are on are cached, but if I add a handful of Pr n/a links after securing these high PR links my site falls a few spots.

Given the fact you admit you're not an seo expert you stand half a chance of learning something.

It is cheaper and easier to set up a low pr blog network than it is a high pr network. Because it is easier it also makes it more scalable.

So you guys invest $100 in a high pr network and I'll do the same with a low pr network. Want to guess who wins?

On low pr blogs you never have to worry about losing the pr of your blog. You just create more and more on a continual basis.

It would be interesting to see if there are any seo vendors selling wso's to high pr networks here on the forum. It would be educational I think to compare the testimonials from each vendor on the forum.

Shouldn't be hard to see who is packing the juice and who isn't.

When it comes to seo there are certainly a number of ways to skin the cat.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482373].message }}

MikeFriedman 13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

It is cheaper and easier to set up a low pr blog network than it is a high pr network. Because it is easier it also makes it more scalable.

I would argue strongly against this. It does not cost more. You are thinking in terms of the same number of sites. Yes if I bought 100 PR 4 domains it would cost a lot more than 100 PR n/a .info domains. I absolutely agree with you there.

The point I would make is that you do not need nearly as many PR 4 sites to get the same ranking power. So if you think of it in those terms, the cost is pretty equal.

And I understand your business model is about selling positions in your network, but I think most people looking to build their own network are looking to do it mostly for their own sites or maybe just a handful of SEO clients that they work with.

Yes, if you are trying to make as much room for as many people as possible, you would probably do things a little differently.

Like I said though, and maybe some of the lurkers will chime in here and agree or disagree with me, I think most people looking to setup a network are looking to boost their own rankings.
- Thanks
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482513].message }}

FunkNugget

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Remember when it comes to seo...high quantity ALWAYS beats HIGH quality. Always has and always will. We have the proof to back it up too.

You are HIGHlarious! This makes me laugh.
Quality content and quality backlinks (rep) located within content not in the foot of the article will always beat bull****.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4645674].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by FunkNugget

You are HIGHlarious! This makes me laugh.
Quality content and quality backlinks (rep) located within content not in the foot of the article will always beat bull****.

What exactly is quality content? Unique? Reads well? Do you think google can differentiate between rough grammar and Ernest Hemingway quality prose? I'm not so sure but do whatever works for you.

Another question, how many "bull****" links would it take to equal one of your "quality content and quality backlinks"? Whatever that means.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4646422].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Originally Posted by FunkNugget

You are HIGHlarious! This makes me laugh.
Quality content and quality backlinks (rep) located within content not in the foot of the article will always beat bull****.

I have the testimonials to prove otherwise Funky Nugget. Do you? Guess who is laughing now.

Thanks

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665414].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

We could avoid a lot of strife if we qualify on threads like this what networks we are actually discussing. For instance a low pr blog really is quite different than a high pr blog. They both obviously radiate link juice. So obviously Marc and I know something about setting up low pr blog networks. It's what we talk about and discuss because it's what we know and is working for us.

I for one am willing to bury the hatchet with the high pr warriors. I'm certain what you do works for you. SO it's what you talk about.

Is it possible for both sides to discuss issues on the same thread? If so we could certainly do some serious brainstorming on the subject.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482445].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

We could avoid a lot of strife if we qualify on threads like this what networks we are actually discussing. For instance a low pr blog really is quite different than a high pr blog. They both obviously radiate link juice. So obviously Marc and I know something about setting up low pr blog networks. It's what we talk about and discuss because it's what we know and is working for us.

I for one am willing to bury the hatchet with the high pr warriors. I'm certain what you do works for you. SO it's what you talk about.

Is it possible for both sides to discuss issues on the same thread? If so we could certainly do some serious brainstorming on the subject.

Hey Matt, thanks for sharing these valuable information, I won't doubt it as you are running a successful service. My question is, when you talk about low quality blog network, what kind of minimum PR are you talking about?

PR0 seems useless in many of my test, are you referring to PR1 to PR2 as low quality network or something else?

Thanks in advance for sharing.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482796].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Hey Matt, thanks for sharing these valuable information, I won't doubt it as you are running a successful service. My question is, when you talk about low quality blog network, what kind of minimum PR are you talking about?

PR0 seems useless in many of my test, are you referring to PR1 to PR2 as low quality network or something else?

Thanks in advance for sharing.

Pr0 .info sites for the most part. They usually become pr 1's over the course of the year though. It's those we renew.

Conventional wisdom dictates pr0's are worthless. My brother and I have proved otherwise mainly because we didn't take anyone's advice on how to set up a network. Had we done so we never would of considered using brand new .info sites with heaps of autospun plr articles as content.

When we saw this system actually worked and was scalable we felt like we died and gone straight to heaven.

Guess what we did then?

Scaled we did.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4482844].message }}

hpad06

13 years ago

kkchoon

can I ask for the thousands of articles you send out, how many unique articles did you use, what software did you use to spin or send out.

thanks

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483351].message }}

kkchoon 13 years ago

Originally Posted by hpad06

kkchoon

can I ask for the thousands of articles you send out, how many unique articles did you use, what software did you use to spin or send out.

thanks

I used to use TBS, but the support sucks, then I found SpinnerChief, seems a much better product.

All articles are syndicate through SEOLV, AMA and ArticleRanks, so each article will give me at least 100 unique posts, that's a 1500 X 100 = 150,000 post with each post 3 backlinks = 450,000 backlinks!

It might be more or less the number, but you get the idea.
- Thanks
Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483419].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

101 Ways To Make Money - Learn How To Make Money Online

Is your client?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483537].message }}

Mike Grant

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

101 Ways To Make Money - Learn How To Make Money Online

Is your client?

Yes.

Autograph?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Speed Kills Manifesto - The Single Most Overlooked Tactic - Proven to Increase Conversions 100% Overnight, Traffic 240% in 3 Days

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483544].message }}

Marc_L 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Grant

Yes.

Autograph?

No

Time to fire up spyglass
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483551].message }}
- Mike Grant 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Marc_L
  
  No
  
  Time to fire up spyglass
  
  Go for it.
  
  You won't find anything groundbreaking.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  Speed Kills Manifesto - The Single Most Overlooked Tactic - Proven to Increase Conversions 100% Overnight, Traffic 240% in 3 Days
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483558].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Grant

Yes.

Autograph?

ROFL. I was just going to pick another one random. I mean its so common to find a serp with high pr links at the top and they pretend like its otherwise.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483559].message }}

Mike Grant 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

ROFL. I was just going to pick another one random. I mean its so common to find a serp with high pr links at the top and they pretend like its otherwise.

Heh, now they'll never take the challenge to the SERPs with me
- Thanks
Signature
Speed Kills Manifesto - The Single Most Overlooked Tactic - Proven to Increase Conversions 100% Overnight, Traffic 240% in 3 Days
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483578].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483581].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483658].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483868].message }}

Mike Grant

13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483912].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Grant

Elaborate on?

I've already told you that you will not find anything groundbreaking.

P.S. You're wrong about profile links. I also didn't need my network for this site. Spyglass also doesn't pick up on shifty redirects :>

I said I didn't see any profiles, did I see some? You might have made them but I didn't see any.

Ok well this site is worthless as far as this thread is concerned now that Mike has told us his network had nothing to do with this ranking. We are talking about building networks for SEO after all.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483933].message }}

Mike Grant

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I said I didn't see any profiles, did I see some? You might have made them but I didn't see any.

Ok well this site is worthless as far as this thread is concerned now that Mike has told us his network had nothing to do with this ranking. We are talking about building networks for SEO after all.

To find anything from my network you have to set your sights much higher.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Speed Kills Manifesto - The Single Most Overlooked Tactic - Proven to Increase Conversions 100% Overnight, Traffic 240% in 3 Days

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483941].message }}

kkchoon 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Grant

To find anything from my network you have to set your sights much higher.

May be Majestic SEO will give us more ideas.

Congratulation on the "Make Money Online" keyword, not easy to rank and it seems like no one is staying there long. Competition all the time...
- Thanks
Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483985].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Mike, nobody is claiming that you can rank sites using only .info pr0 domains. You can STOP asking for this as nobody is claiming this. This is what is known as a strawman..

Thats interesting and I think EVERYBODY should pay attention to this because if this debate was going on in a physical location I would print that quote in BOLD and FRAME IT. theres only three ways to take that statement

A) you are backing off of your repeated claims that first page placements is real ranking (and I'd agree only top three/four get good traffic).
B) You are admitting that people who you claim to rank use MORE than just your network which logically opens the door to the possibility that others things they do are really what is causing the rankings (
you can CLAIM otherwise but whose to say you are accurately depicting the true scenario?)
C) your customers are mistaken that you are the cause of their rankings particularly since some for them take a good deal of time to get to first page and they are doing other things. in fact some people have claimed it was other things they did but of course those are not ones you highlight neither should you.

look its good you admitted this. It is constructive to finally have you say this (although you probably won't like the implications) but people don't want to go through the trouble of creating ANY network if it does not have the power to rank sites

So no it is not a stawman. In order to indicate that yours is the better way to build a network you would have of course to do a test or search in the serps that ISOLATES that one factor other wise whose to say? whats the point? Now if you go over and over in the serps and you keep seeing high pr pages ranking sites then with all the other variables that change from serp to serp then its reasonable to conclude that you might need some of those in a network. Strawman? Objecting to that is straw.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4486306].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

A) you are backing off of your repeated claims that first page placements is real ranking (and I'd agree only top three/four get good traffic).

No, I am speaking to you and you keep bringing up top 3 so I'd like you to find a site in a competitive SERP where there are only one type of link being used.

B) You are admitting that people who you claim to rank use MORE than just your network which logically opens the door to the possibility that others things they do are really what is causing the rankings (
you can CLAIM otherwise but whose to say you are accurately depicting the true scenario?)

Here's a hint we do more than use our blogs. No search term worth anything is going to rank only using one type of any kind of link. There are so many other possibilities but you just can't seem to make your brain work to find them.

C) your customers are mistaken that you are the cause of their rankings particularly since some for them take a good deal of time to get to first page and they are doing other things. in fact some people have claimed it was other things they did but of course those are not ones you highlight neither should you.

Wrong again but that's based upon your faulty reasoning from point B. We rank for customers who don't do a thing to their sites.

look its good you admitted this. It is constructive to finally have you say this (although you probably won't like the implications) but people don't want to go through the trouble of creating ANY network if it does not have the power to rank sites

I didn't admit anything that you indicated I did. Anybody building a network is going to be smart enough to know that there are more types of links in the world and that the network will be a part of that. So I'd like to repeat my challenge, please find any "competitive" Serp where there is only one type of link being used. It would be very instructive to see one where only a network that you advocate is being used since this is what you are asking of us. However I realize that this isn't going to happen because it doesn't exist.

So no it is not a stawman.

It's the very definition of a strawman!

In order to indicate that yours is the better way to build a network you would have of course to do a test or search in the serps that ISOLATES that one factor other wise whose to say? whats the point? Now if you go over and over in the serps and you keep seeing high pr pages ranking sites then with all the other variables that change from serp to serp then its reasonable to conclude that you might need some of those in a network. Strawman? Objecting to that is straw.

The point is that no network alone is going to rank for competitive searches. Having a network isn't a replacement for all the variety of links there are to get. It's an additional resource that you acquire and utilize.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4486488].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Is "make money online" typical of a "competitive keyword"? What is a "competitive keyword" if not. I don't want examples but a method for determining if a keyword is "competitive" or not.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483594].message }}

Mike Grant

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Is "make money online" typical of a "competitive keyword"? What is a "competitive keyword" if not. I don't want examples but a method for determining if a keyword is "competitive" or not.

Completely dependent upon top 3 imo.

Thanks

Signature

Speed Kills Manifesto - The Single Most Overlooked Tactic - Proven to Increase Conversions 100% Overnight, Traffic 240% in 3 Days

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4483604].message }}

dagaul101

13 years ago

Ofcourse if you let your sites expire, you will lose the backlinks, but it will be a gradual process before you start to feel the loss

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4485188].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

LOL

I'm really far too busy to do this.

Mike, I'm out I have paying customers who need my attention.

Good luck on whatever it is you do.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4486731].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Good luck on whatever it is you do.

Good luck to you too. Wish you the best.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4486875].message }}

timpears

13 years ago

These private blog network threads of the past week have been very informative. I think I have learned quite a bit from them. Even amongst all the bickering.

I saw a WSO the other day from a girl who claimed to be able to teach you how to get your sites from PR0 to PR5 in 30 to 90 days. So in theory, you could take Matt's .info domains and build them to PR5 blogs overnight so to speak. That way you would get the cheap domains and also have the high PR as well. Just a thought.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Tim Pears

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4490514].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by timpears

These private blog network threads of the past week have been very informative. I think I have learned quite a bit from them. Even amongst all the bickering.

I saw a WSO the other day from a girl who claimed to be able to teach you how to get your sites from PR0 to PR5 in 30 to 90 days. So in theory, you could take Matt's .info domains and build them to PR5 blogs overnight so to speak. That way you would get the cheap domains and also have the high PR as well. Just a thought.

Tim, I'm glad you picked up some information.

But do you really think that WSO is going to teach you anything you already don't know? The key to building PR is getting other PR links. But anyone selling a WSO claiming to teach you how to build PR5 domains in 90 days... Well, they are full of it. If it was so easy to build a PR5 domain from scratch that fast, they would be building armies of them to sell. Not wasting their time with some $7 WSO. You could make a fortune selling PR5's if they were that easy to build.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4493112].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

But anyone selling a WSO claiming to teach you how to build PR5 domains in 90 days... Well, they are full of it.

actually it can be done but not without utilizing the right techniques and high PR links to begin with

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4493461].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

actually it can be done but not without utilizing the right techniques and high PR links to begin with

Ok, I should have said it cannot be done by someone just starting from scratch, unless they are going to lay out a lot of cash for some PR 5's or PR 6's to start with. Or you need to have some really good, high PR (5+) blogs to comment on that have a small number of outgoing backlinks. But even that is going to limit you on how many PR 5's you can create without finding a lot more blogs.

On top of that Google may not update the toolbar PR for 6 months, so you have no idea if you built up a PR 5 or not. You can use MozRank as a predictor, but it is not 100% accurate.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4494619].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Ok, I should have said it cannot be done by someone just starting from scratch, unless they are going to lay out a lot of cash for some PR 5's or PR 6's to start with. .

No you were right the first time I was just saying if you have PR already working with then it can be done provided you arrange things right.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4494961].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Originally Posted by timpears

These private blog network threads of the past week have been very informative. I think I have learned quite a bit from them. Even amongst all the bickering.

I saw a WSO the other day from a girl who claimed to be able to teach you how to get your sites from PR0 to PR5 in 30 to 90 days. So in theory, you could take Matt's .info domains and build them to PR5 blogs overnight so to speak. That way you would get the cheap domains and also have the high PR as well. Just a thought.

That's actually something we are working on at this very moment. We just hired a staffer to backlink the blogs on high pr blogs via real time blog comments.

That's the thing about us. We have the budget to try everything.

If we're able to raise the pr from 0 to 3 even.

Can you say mega link juice?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4494726].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

blogs via real time blog comments.

That's the thing about us. We have the budget to try everything.

Glad you have passed over to the Pr is great side. I will take a bow. But um When since did it take a big budget to get someone to drop blog comments. Especially when a staffer can be a VA?

Yeah blog comments can work a bit after you go searching down the ones that haven't been OBLed to death but there are FAR better ways to leverage a network with PR - but hey far be it from me to interfere

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4494999].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Glad you have passed over to the Pr is great side. I will take a bow. But um When since did it take a big budget to get someone to drop blog comments. Especially when a staffer can be a VA?

Yeah blog comments can work a bit after you go searching down the ones that haven't been OBLed to death but there are FAR better ways to leverage a network with PR - but hey far be it from me to interfere

Haha...

Not sure why you like to pick on words, who is denying PR has power? I think Matt is trying to give you a point here - both quantity and quality does matters.

You can go and use 200 PR4 sites to rank a keyword while Matt has 15,000 PR0 ~ PR3 sites, who do you think had the ranking power?

If all went well in the test, we can grow the PR using few simple backlink tools, that's the key to minimizing the cost while maximizing the investment, I think that's what we are trying to learn here.

I hope we can still be good friend, I'm sure we can learn more without picking on each other.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4497447].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Haha...

Not sure why you like to pick on words, who is denying PR has power? I think Matt is trying to give you a point here - both quantity and quality does matters.

KK come on man you are late to the game. this is the second thread on this and yeah somebody did say they would pick infos N/As and zeros over PR even with a what was it? a $40,000 budget? cough cough :rolleyes:. We all know that link popularity matters but sorry KK not over quality. but alright we can have fun with this. I can at least. So lets go

You can go and use 200 PR4 sites to rank a keyword while Matt has 15,000 PR0 ~ PR3 sites, who do you think had the ranking power?

drop the PR3s bro. the discussion has been PR 0s so I'll take the PR4s and Matt ain't got no 15,000 nothing so you raise me (poker talk

) 4,000 . You say the 15,000s PR zeros has more juice? then once again KK SHOW ME A COMPETITIVE serp where a page ranks number one with no PR links.. Hey remember this one from the good old days? The one angela made famous

backlinks - Google Search

Guess what? after a long absence - she's back finally (but not at the top) but guess what? She's got PR backlinks

I tell you its scandalous.

BY the way where you at Kman. You know that was THE serp for what you sell (used to sell em myself but I grew up and left the hood

) . Where you at bro.? Wheres the Nuclear Link blaster at?

Be honest dude

Why are you dodging? Show me in the serps and No again I am not interested in your service don't need it, don't want it, don't offer it again. Sure we can be friends . Hope we still are and I want to learn just like you but its got to be real and real for SEO is whats happening on google. Its a big lab sitting there and you can go to it and see what ranks. So why when we look do we see the number 2 guy (where angela used to sit a few years back) with all those Pr links ranking above all the guys like yourself that used to push N/A links?

Do you know what we could be doing thats far more constructive? look at serps that people in this thread who would like to build a network want to rank for. I wonder out of say like ten random serps put up by them how many won't have pages with high Pr links on them?

So why try to emulate what isn't ranking those sites right now? and why should anyone build a network around what doesn't rank most sites number one. You have a good night man (At least its night here on the east coast of the US). and we are still friends I hope

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4497618].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Mixing backlink types are the first and most important thing, after that, we can pick any one of the method to focus on ranking.

I'm pretty interested to see how pr0 blogs are going to rank keywords, may be I'll try 10K, 50K and 100K competition keywords to see how a 200 pr0 blogs going to help in ranking.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4490531].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

I'm pretty interested to see how pr0 blogs are going to rank keywords, may be I'll try 10K, 50K and 100K competition keywords to see how a 200 pr0 blogs going to help in ranking.

Good luck with that just don't think you are going to offer a service with that. My mentorship/internship spots are almost full and if my guys follow through they will smoke you and then some.

Might even convince some of them to combine forces and they can smoke Matt and Marc

So in theory, you could take Matt's .info domains and build them to PR5 blogs overnight so to speak. That way you would get the cheap domains and also have the high PR as well. Just a thought.

Well you sure can build High PR pages. There are a variety of ways you can do it but lets not forget what makes a high PR page - links . So no its not going to happen magically overnight UNLESS you have a source for links (like your own hint hint)with higher PR. Now you can of course try to blast them up with lower quality links but its either time or money and there are limits tohow high you will go with just those.

as for buying .infos to build them up. Why bother. Look around. Netfirms has had a special coupon for months that allowed you to get .coms .net. orgs for $4.95 WITH PRIVACY. You build more equity in your domains with .com .net .org (not talking SEo here but market value). Plus having hundreds of .infos is a dead give away if your money site ever gets manually reviewed that your are up to something. Remember since you are going to be building these up it would make no sense to have the domain expire so you are going to be paying for renewal fees.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4492774].message }}

oogyboogawa

13 years ago

Between the last thread and this one as well as PMs and reading on other sites, I've been absorbing a lot of information about setting up high PR networks for SEO purposes.

Yesterday, I bought 3 PR 2 domains from Godaddy auctions (the transfers will finalize next week). I do plan to buy more once these are set up and to ramp things up as I build momentum.

But I wanted to post this to let people know that you don't have to start out by buying 100 PR5+ domains.

After some digging to make sure the PR was real, the links to the sites looked like they would stick, and to find a coupon code for Godaddy, I was able to grab these three sites for between $70-75 (total for all 3 - average of less than $25/site). That includes domain renewal and privacy.

Three PR 2 sites aren't going to rank me high for "car insurance" but when you consider that I have absolute control over how many links are on these pages and where they point to, they will definitely be worth that price. Not to mention the fact that I will be able to build these to a higher PR over time.

Anyway - I hope that's at least somewhat encouraging to anyone who is on the fence or considering starting this type of network.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4493474].message }}

aymen99

13 years ago

setting up a private blog network is not something that everyone can afford ! is you want to do it you better do it right , because in your case it will be a was of time and money : easy way to do it : first get a c-class hosting with 200 c_class ips , then buy 200 domains (.org,.net,.com,.biz , and few .info ) , create wp blogs for all of those blogs and a nice theme for all of the blogs , then its better to create some kind of server script to allow you to post to your blogs faster than doing it manually !

Cheers

Thanks

Signature

►►►Articles Generations On STEROIDS ◄◄◄

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4494673].message }}

foreignnative

13 years ago

setting up a web 2.0 ring has taken so much time. I've wanted to quite so many times. I thought to myself, if I just would have worked a regular job I would made x amount of money. It takes a lot of patience and dedication. It's easy to start slacking when you're tired too, which is why I'm taking a break and I'm here

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4494846].message }}

seoupdate

Banned 13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4498147].message }}

kkchoon 13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4498198].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by seoupdate

We'd need to know the purposes for the OPs desire to create a network of blogs.

What is your budget? If money is no object you can buy aged domains and add private who is, there alot of pitfalls you need to be aware of when you take on this task. So make sure you read up on the process before starting as you're apt to lose PR or buy fake PR if you aren't careful. Also what is your timeframe to get started? It can take months to years to build up a network like this.

If you are on a more shoestring budget or time constraints then you can go with .info domains, which can be as cheap as 50 cents a domain make sure you opt for who is privacy. You can find some multi c class hosting for cheap to get your foot in the door.

If you go the .info route you can develop your domains into hi PR over time.

Personally I get the results I need by going the .info route and having lots of domains, which you may or may not need depending on the amounts of keywords you are working with.

This looks VERY familiar. hmmmmm

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4498246].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

This looks VERY familiar. hmmmmm

Yah right up to the point where he mentions you can develop your .info domains into High Pr over time.

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Where did you get the 50 cents .info domain? I would love to know...

Anyone know what's the cheapest .info?

why you guys so hard up for cash? Want a loan? $2-$4 gets you some .com .net .orgs at netfirm last I bought. stop making it so hard on your customers or yourself. if you one day do get a top rank in a really competitive serp (it could happen I suppose) its a kind of dead give away when you competitor sees all these .infos pointing at your site. Its even easier to hit the web spam report link now.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4498322].message }}
- Marc_L 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony
  
  Yah right up to the point where he mentions you can develop your .info domains into High Pr over time.
  
  Nope, the whole thing was mine.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4498331].message }}

kkchoon

13 years ago

Hey Mike,

Nice site: SEO Training Opportunities

What keywords have you ranked? How's the traffic? Are you making Tens of Thousands?

You have shown some great points here:

Backlinks is a competitive keyword, not easy to rank and very hard to stay. If you are talking about 94Mil competition, you are right, I haven't ranked for those kind of competition, but if I want, I can.

Terry Kyle forum used to be in the top 5 around last year, and during that time he only uses profile links, I guess his site still not bad, after a year and still ranked on page 1.

Here's something I'm interested:

What kind of competition can a massive PR0 network rank for? Not sure if Matt will share this, but I'm gonna find out eventually.

I believe the low quality network still works great when you have enough trustrank on your site. You see, when your site don't have enough trust, Google will ignore those low quality backlinks, but when your site already had enough trust with many authority links, these spammy links will start to work great!

Anyway, I really interested to see a new site with PR0 network, if they can rank for keyword with 5 mil quote search. Or may be mixing a few high PR links will help? What kind of combination is the best?

Knowing these information would greatly help me plan my keywords, I can target many long tail keywords or even setup auto blog with unique spin content that would generate a lot of traffic - all autopilot.

Kok Choon

P.S. I really hate people pushing me, if you want a competition, let me know which keyword you want to compete, we'll both setup a site and rank for it.

You can use your private network, I'll just use the cheap but effective blog network services like AMA, SEOLV or Articleranks to out rank your site.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Powerful Indexer That Makes Your Backlinks Count ==> Nuclear Link Indexer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4498190].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Hey Mike,

Nice site: SEO Training Opportunities

What keywords have you ranked? How's the traffic? Are you making Tens of Thousands?

Considering the site went up yesterday and hasn't officially launched (like it says there in black and white) actually pretty good.

You have shown some great points here:

Backlinks is a competitive keyword, not easy to rank and very hard to stay.

Sorry been watching it for months. the number two guy has been sitting there for a long time. With his PR5 , 4s and less

Terry Kyle forum used to be in the top 5 around last year, and during that time he only uses profile links, I guess his site still not bad, after a year and still ranked on page 1.

Sorry again KK, He's not in the top five

I believe the low quality network still works great when you have enough trustrank on your site. You see, when your site don't have enough trust, Google will ignore those low quality backlinks, but when your site already had enough trust with many authority links, these spammy links will start to work great!

Actually I somewhat can agree with that because if the site already has good PR links it can get a boost from link s based on popularity but it has to get the Pr links first or well at some point.

You can use your private network, I'll just use the cheap but effective blog network services like AMA, SEOLV or Articleranks to out rank your site.

Thats funny I have never seen any site out ranking my customer's sites with article services. Maybe you have me confused with Matt

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4498301].message }}

Clyde 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Thats funny I have never seen any site out ranking my customer's sites with article services. Maybe you have me confused with Matt

So it's on? kkchoon vs Mike Anthony? :p
- Thanks
Signature

Generate Unlimited Number of Micro Niche Keywords, Multi-threaded EMD Finder PLUS More!

50% OFF WSO.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4498466].message }}

mohd

13 years ago

Originally Posted by uniches

So it's on? kkchoon vs Mike Anthony? :p

I've been following with interest.

I think EVERYONE would LOVE to see a thread kkchoon vs Mike Anthony vs mattlaclear

Instead of chit-chat here and there about SEO, (and I can see a lot of hatred)
why don't you guys compete?

I mean in a good way.

Pick several competitive keywords and rank for them.

Layout strategy and the winner will be determine by speed, position
and how long you guys holds to that ranking.

Wouldn't it be easier to prove who's the REAL SEO Master?
(I mean just among you guys k, others don't get mad)

And that's why you're here right? In WARRIOR forum...lol

No more flaming, nothing to lose, gain further credibility and respected by others.

Just a suggestion.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4499233].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mohd

I've been following with interest.

I think EVERYONE would LOVE to see a thread kkchoon vs Mike Anthony vs mattlaclear

Instead of chit-chat here and there about SEO, (and I can see a lot of hatred)

To all: The party's over

KKchoon and i go back a bit and he is one of my favorite SEO old timers. Don't mistake a little debate as hatred. Like I think we both said we are still friends.

Secondly believe it or not its never been about service vs service and I think at this point its so impossible for people to believe that I will do like Marc and for the same reasons too (time) withdraw to a more quiet stance. Frankly before these discussions my sig didn't have any link at all and for a year had nothing before that so it was never about service. My lowest paying client pays a thousand a month and I wouldn't want too much of those. As you know thats not a good WSO price point but hey I like it

and my business customers are fine with it. So Matt and I are in two completely different markets.

Some of us eat and drink SEo at least a good chunk of our work life and certain statements just seem to be so misleading that we respond especially if like me you've been sharing with newbies in this section and selling NOTHING here in the last year until I got so many requests for what I am offering very briefly now.

I already offered the best thing for a thread like this about building a network. take a newbie from scratch teach them how to build a SEo network without holding back ANY secrets and then see which newbie network emerges as the best. That way its about concept against concept, NOt service against service or Mike Anthony against Laclear.

It was declined FOR VERY GOOD REASONS (not bickering) because doing so would be time consuming and the rewards for it would be nothing but settling a forum discussion. I realized even the data that would come from it would be scant. Last to be completely fair it wasn't a fair request as I look back at it. MY clients are not on Warriors (for the most part) but if they were why in the world would I want to teach Warriors everything I know and potentially create competitors against myself?

So despite our disagreements I think Marc's decline was based on solid reasons. What it means I think is that this thread and others if they should pop up are not going to give any more significant information. The more I have prepared to teach people how to do this the more I have realized that there are just too much ins and outs, too much details, too many questions to arise and too much time to think its all going to be covered in a forum thread. Theres alot in these debates that could have made a solid WSO but theres a limit and we might have reached it.

Thanks to KKChoon, To Matt, To Marc the other two mikes and everyone else. I got work to catch up to, people to teach and some fun things coming up I have to work on. I'll hang around but you will see far less by way of posts from me.

Enjoy whatever discussion continues

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4499766].message }}

Cool Hand Luke

13 years ago

(sigh). Yet another big "My ranking skills are the bestest!" circle jerk threads that strays away from the original topic completely.

In before the mods lock this one too.

[ 2 ] Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4499328].message }}

mohd

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Cool Hand Luke

(sigh). Yet another big "My ranking skills are the bestest!" circle jerk threads that strays away from the original topic completely.

In before the mods lock this one too.

Ops... Sorry if I'm off topic...
just a suggestion.. don't be mad.
I don't usually hang out at warriorforum, so don't know about
"My ranking skills are the bestest!" threads.

Peace.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4499357].message }}

Oranges

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Cool Hand Luke

(sigh). Yet another big "My ranking skills are the bestest!" circle jerk threads that strays away from the original topic completely.

In before the mods lock this one too.

ROFLMAO! Spot on! Bunch of wannabes, nothing else!:rolleyes:

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4499898].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Damnit. I go away for a night trying to get some actual work done, and I miss all the fun.

Anyhow... Let's get some good back on topic info.

How about recommendations on SEO Hosting providers. This just comes to mind because I decided to add a new one to my mix a few months ago (that was getting good reviews at backlinksforum), only for them to be royally pissing me off the past two days.

I've tried or am currently using most of the popular ones. Anyone found any little known ones that are offering great service?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500091].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Damnit. I go away for a night trying to get some actual work done, and I miss all the fun.

Anyhow... Let's get some good back on topic info.

How about recommendations on SEO Hosting providers. This just comes to mind because I decided to add a new one to my mix a few months ago (that was getting good reviews at backlinksforum), only for them to be royally pissing me off the past two days.

I've tried or am currently using most of the popular ones. Anyone found any little known ones that are offering great service?

Take a look at skynet hosting.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500098].message }}

MikeFriedman 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Take a look at skynet hosting.

Thanks Marc. I will take a look at what they offer.

I'm pretty sure if I was offering any kind of service on the internet that the last name I would choose is Skynet.
- Thanks
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500129].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Oranges

ROFLMAO! Spot on! Bunch of wannabes, nothing else!:rolleyes:

Glad I am pulling back as the conversation it seems is about to get real deep and informative
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500101].message }}

NicholasCollins

13 years ago

I spent 3 hours last night reading this whole thread and have 4 pages of notebook filled with tips and tricks I picked up. Despite the Young and the Restless style drama its a great read.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

GIANT end of year WARRIOR sale on Aged, Established sites. Use password warrior to gain access. http://rankedsites.com/warriors-special-sale/

I am a startup guy and a proud 11 year Self Employed Veteran. www.NicholasCollins.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4499681].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by NicholasCollins

Young and the Restless style drama its a great read.

LOL. Glad it was of help to you
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4499814].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

I got a 20 ip package for $20, amazing deal.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500141].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I got a 20 ip package for $20, amazing deal.

Thats as good as it gets. I have heard good things about them.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500164].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I got a 20 ip package for $20, amazing deal.

And no problems with uptime? Do they have any limits on the # of domains per IP?

That is another thing that pissed me off about this particular host. Nowhere on their website did it list restrictions. After I started setting up sites though, I found that it was limited to one site per IP. I only setup one site per IP for my networks, but I will sometimes use extra domains on the IP's for throw away email domains or things I am testing.

That is a pretty damn good deal with Skynet. Most of my packages are in the $2 - $2.50 per IP range at best.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500215].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

I was just checking out Skynet.

I might be missing something, but I can get 20 IPs for $19.95 or I can get 50 IPs for $99.95.

Why wouldn't someone buy 3 of the 20 IP package? You get 60 for $60 instead of 50 for $100.

:confused:

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500382].message }}

Oranges

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

I was just checking out Skynet.

I might be missing something, but I can get 20 IPs for $19.95 or I can get 50 IPs for $99.95.

Why wouldn't someone buy 3 of the 20 IP package? You get 60 for $60 instead of 50 for $100.

:confused:

Then those 3 packs of 20 ips will be same. I mean same 20 Ips X 3 time.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500753].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Oranges

Then those 3 packs of 20 ips will be same. I mean same 20 Ips X 3 time.

No they wouldn't.

They wouldn't keep selling the same 20 IP's to each customer.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4500767].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

No they wouldn't.

They wouldn't keep selling the same 20 IP's to each customer.

I think they do plus I am not so sure you can get 3 of the 20 ip packages on the same account.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4511092].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I think they do plus I am not so sure you can get 3 of the 20 ip packages on the same account.

No, probably not.

But I have a corporation, an LLC, and me.

That could get me 3.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4512544].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

No, probably not.

But I have a corporation, an LLC, and me.

That could get me 3.

FYI, when I bought my 20 ip package and a partner bought 50 the first 20 of the 50 were the same as my 20. We asked them to change the 20 of the larger package and they did with no problems.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4512867].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

FYI, when I bought my 20 ip package and a partner bought 50 the first 20 of the 50 were the same as my 20. We asked them to change the 20 of the larger package and they did with no problems.

Thanks. That's good to know.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4513092].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Thanks. That's good to know.

Yo mike might want to ask them if that applies to the sale package. If it does then let us know. It is a good deal.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4514631].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Yo mike might want to ask them if that applies to the sale package. If it does then let us know. It is a good deal.

I placed an order. I'm just waiting for my activation email and then I'll see what I can find out.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4515077].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

I placed an order. I'm just waiting for my activation email and then I'll see what I can find out.

Thanks Drop me a Pm . I think I will be setting up a bunch more in a few weeks plus I have some people I will be training that might need a few. haven't tried that one because I had read some bad things but I got the heads up by PM from someone I trust that they are OK.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4515108].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Thanks Drop me a Pm . I think I will be setting up a bunch more in a few weeks plus I have some people I will be training that might need a few. haven't tried that one because I had read some bad things but I got the heads up by PM from someone I trust that they are OK.

I have a small network I will be moving to them as soon as everything is activated.

I was using Web Hosting Plex for these particular sites. No problems until the past week. It's been a nightmare. Sites are going down for no apparent reason.

I know they are changing ownership and that could be causing some issues, but I'm done with them.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4515154].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

I was using Web Hosting Plex for these particular sites. No problems until the past week. It's been a nightmare. Sites are going down for no apparent reason. .

yikes. They were one of the decent ones. Approached them about some UK accounts a couple weeks ago but they were out - maybe a good thing.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4515170].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

I have a small network I will be moving to them as soon as everything is activated.

I was using Web Hosting Plex for these particular sites. No problems until the past week. It's been a nightmare. Sites are going down for no apparent reason.

I know they are changing ownership and that could be causing some issues, but I'm done with them.

Almost went with them...

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4515233].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

yikes. They were one of the decent ones. Approached them about some UK accounts a couple weeks ago but they were out - maybe a good thing.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Almost went with them...

Stay far, far away from them.

I went with them a few months ago because some people at backlinksforum seemed to like them and there was someone from the company actually participating in the forum, which I liked.

This week I've been unable to access my sites on a number of occasions. The only answer they had for me was "Well everything looks ok on our end. Did you try clearing your cache?"

Yeah, thanks a lot for all the help.

I only have 2 Wordpress sites with them. One went down yesterday with some kind of database error and I can no longer access it. The other one went down in he middle of my updating to the newest version. It went completely unresponsive after that and they couldn't recover anything. I had to terminate the account and recreate it.

I'm done with them.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4515249].message }}

Oranges

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Stay far, far away from them.

I went with them a few months ago because some people at backlinksforum seemed to like them and there was someone from the company actually participating in the forum, which I liked.

This week I've been unable to access my sites on a number of occasions. The only answer they had for me was "Well everything looks ok on our end. Did you try clearing your cache?"

Yeah, thanks a lot for all the help.

I only have 2 Wordpress sites with them. One went down yesterday with some kind of database error and I can no longer access it. The other one went down in he middle of my updating to the newest version. It went completely unresponsive after that and they couldn't recover anything. I had to terminate the account and recreate it.

I'm done with them.

LOL! I knew its going to happen.
what you can expect for $20??

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4516249].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Oranges

LOL! I knew its going to happen.
what you can expect for $20??

Web Hosting Plex is not $20. The plan I had with them was $40 for 15 IPs.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4518178].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by myleswatts033

Really, the comic thing is, assuring some of your land site down was what caused me go check mine only to detect mine all cheated up.

lol, hmmmmm

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4593284].message }}

gigo6000

13 years ago

This is a great thread, I believe now that blog networks are the way to go to rank a site and I got a study case, I blog was sold recently on flippa ranking #1 for "iphone 5" in about 3-4 months if you check the backlinks they are from a recently created blog network, and apparently he was just experimenting with SEO. I'm not a SEO guy either, I'm a developer and I think that must be a very competitive keyword. Any ideas how this guy got his blog there ? I think this can confirm that blog networks are better than other methods.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4643884].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by gigo6000

This is a great thread, I believe now that blog networks are the way to go to rank a site and I got a study case,

Just to clarify networks are great at ranking sites. Don't really have to be BLOG networks. however blogs are easy to setup and maintain but so also are other CMS - Wordpress can be used as well as drupal. even HTML sites but they are MUCH more difficult to automate content updates.

Just a note - I'm still getting multiple PMs from people reading this thread expecting much more extra free info. Just a heads up - I do not offer extensive free training on this very lucrative subject. No one does. Building a network costs a little money and learning everything to build one costs as well. Its a lot of information and training and you cannot expect if to learn everything for free. Theres alot thats in this thread that could make a WSO so be happy with it for free. Just saving us both the time before you PM.

.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4644685].message }}

gigo6000

13 years ago

Well, I'm not asking you for any "secret" info, I know what's a blog , I'm a developer. Everything is online so no one need to pay to know how to become a "SEO expert". If you don't want to share your superior knowledge just don't write here.

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Just to clarify networks are great at ranking sites. Don't really have to be BLOG networks. however blogs are easy to setup and maintain but so also are other CMS - Wordpress can be used as well as drupal. even HTML sites but they are MUCH more difficult to automate content updates.

Just a note - I'm still getting multiple PMs from people reading this thread expecting much more extra free info. Just a heads up - I do not offer extensive free training on this very lucrative subject. No one does. Building a network costs a little money and learning everything to build one costs as well. Its a lot of information and training and you cannot expect if to learn everything for free. Theres alot thats in this thread that could make a WSO so be happy with it for free. Just saving us both the time before you PM.

.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4650099].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by gigo6000

Well, I'm not asking you for any "secret" info, I know what's a blog , I'm a developer. Everything is online so no one need to pay to know how to become a "SEO expert". If you don't want to share your superior knowledge just don't write here.

Four quick pointers

A) try and at least get into double digits of posts before trying to tell anyone where they can write. Its more credible and for extra credit it might help to write something that people have found useful as reflected in being thanked before implying that plenty isn't given away by me or any other person with hundreds of thanks. Earn your stripes my young apprentice.

B) did you PM me? No. You have not even earned the privilege of being able to use PMs. So how would my note apply to you? Hint it didn't.

C) Books still have their place even now that we have the internets

so people still buy them and no you could Google all day and not know what some of us who have built networks in this thread have learned.

D) If everything is available to become an expert at building SEO networks what are you doing here asking questions about how a site got ranked? Chop chop man go get the answer by doing google searches.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4650499].message }}

JoshuaG

13 years ago

What exactly is quality content? Unique? Reads well? Do you think google can differentiate between rough grammar and Ernest Hemingway quality prose? I'm not so sure but do whatever works for you

Yes, Google can tell the difference.

This, among other things, is exactly what the panda update was designed to do.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4650925].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by JoshuaG

Yes, Google can tell the difference.

This, among other things, is exactly what the panda update was designed to do.

So what you are telling me is that if somebody has a blog and their grammar sucks then they link to a site then google discounts the link because it is in badly written content? I disagree with you, google can't tell the difference and they don't discount links within poorly written content.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4657658].message }}

JoshuaG

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

So what you are telling me is that if somebody has a blog and their grammar sucks then they link to a site then google discounts the link because it is in badly written content? I disagree with you, google can't tell the difference and they don't discount links within poorly written content.

Cool disagreement bro!

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4658819].message }}

guitarjosh

13 years ago

Originally Posted by JoshuaG

Yes, Google can tell the difference.

This, among other things, is exactly what the panda update was designed to do.

That's awesome. You have a direct line in to "exactly what the panda update was designed to do." Care to cite your source? I've never once heard or read that Panda was a grammar update.

Do you know how many websites contain thousands of pages of poorly spun content that have high PR? Google is a text search engine... not a grammar engine.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4661690].message }}

JoshuaG

13 years ago

Originally Posted by guitarjosh

That's awesome. You have a direct line in to "exactly what the panda update was designed to do." Care to cite your source? I've never once heard or read that Panda was a grammar update.

Do you know how many websites contain thousands of pages of poorly spun content that have high PR? Google is a text search engine... not a grammar engine.

Happy to cite:
Official Google Webmaster Tools Blog

The recent "Panda" change tackles the difficult task of algorithmically assessing website quality...

Below are some questions that one could use to assess the "quality" of a page or an article...

Does this article have spelling, stylistic, orfactual errors?
Was the article edited well, or does it appear sloppy or hastily produced?

I'll be the first to admit that it doesn't come right out and say it, but by using the term "well edited" I think google has made is a strong indication that panda knows when basic grammer is being observed.

Text which is said to be "well edited" would have undergone a process to improve/ensure readability. Articles that don' t follow basic sentence structure for example are not readable in any meaningful way and would be considered low quality.

Its the difference between:

1. The moon the jumped over cow.

and

2. The cow jumped over the moon.

Feel free to disagree, but the above, my personal experience, and some good common sense says to me that in order to function as an agent of quality panda needs to be able to tell overly spun spammy trash from informative and "well edited" content.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4663096].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by JoshuaG

Feel free to disagree, but the above, my personal experience, and some good common sense says to me that in order to function as an agent of quality panda needs to be able to tell overly spun spammy trash from informative and "well edited" content.

Well using your logic google can now detect BS since they ask if there are any factual errors in the article as well. Are you going to make that claim based upon those guidelines? To be consistent you'd have to say that google has an anti bs detector as well. This of course is BS

Obviously this is not the case and it isn't the case that bad grammar is going to automatically be detected by the algorithms either. Now, manual reviews on the other hand? Of course, that's a different story but when we are talking about backlinks grammar has no effect.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4663508].message }}

JoshuaG

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Well using your logic google can now detect BS since they ask if there are any factual errors in the article as well. Are you going to make that claim based upon those guidelines? To be consistent you'd have to say that google has an anti bs detector as well. This of course is BS

Obviously this is not the case and it isn't the case that bad grammar is going to automatically be detected by the algorithms either. Now, manual reviews on the other hand? Of course, that's a different story but when we are talking about backlinks grammar has no effect.

I am perfectly happy to remain consistent and I do believe that google has the ability to separate fact from fiction to some degree.

Heres an example...

Lets say google knows 100 000 websites that say:
"JFK was shot on Nov 22, 1963"

Then there are 100 websites that say:
""JFK was shot on Aug 22, 1963"

This comparison would give google a strong indication that those 100 websites are probably wrong.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4664180].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by JoshuaG

I am perfectly happy to remain consistent and I do believe that google has the ability to separate fact from fiction to some degree.

Heres an example...

Lets say google knows 100 000 websites that say:
"JFK was shot on Nov 22, 1963"

Then there are 100 websites that say:
""JFK was shot on Aug 22, 1963"

This comparison would give google a strong indication that those 100 websites are probably wrong.

You give them far too much credit my friend. There is zero evidence to what you are saying and it is you who would need to present the evidence make no mistake. Google has a very sophisticated algorithm but it is no where near advanced to be able to go through text and understand the millions of ways possible to state facts such as JFK's assassination date.

"JFK flew into Dallas on November 21st, the following day he was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald."

As an example.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665380].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Google has a very sophisticated algorithm but it is no where near advanced to be able to go through text and understand the millions of ways possible to state facts such as JFK's assassination date.

I'm telling you people swear Google has Data from Star trek plugged into every datacenter. I could Say JFK was born last week and Google would rank me if I had the links and the on page SEO.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4665515].message }}

Marc_L 13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

And no problems with uptime? Do they have any limits on the # of domains per IP?

You can host multiple sites per ip (I don't know the limit). Sites seem to be stable.
- Thanks
Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4511087].message }}

timpears

13 years ago

Can I ask what is probably a dumb question?

What is the difference between having your own blog network for back links, and posting articles to the hundreds of article directories and places like Facebook, Twitter and on and on.

The links on the blog networks seem to have a much higher value than those on other types of platforms and directories. Or am i wrong?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Tim Pears

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4514777].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by timpears

What is the difference between having your own blog network for back links, and posting articles to the hundreds of article directories and places like Facebook, Twitter and on and on.

From my perspective of building a network my links are not on low authority pages like with an article directory site.

I think from Matt's perspective - not talking for him this was asked before - there is content that you can put on your site that you wouldn't be able to put and keep on a normal blog network and article directory then theres the matter of scale.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4514910].message }}

timpears

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

From my perspective of building a network my links are not on low authity pages like with an article directory site.

But if you are putting a new post on a blog, no matter what the PR of the domain is, that new page is going to be PR0 or PRn/a, isn't it?

That is why I would think the juice from the directory home page would count just as much as the juice from the blog home page.

Yes, no, maybe? I know my newbie is showing here, but this seems a bit confusing to me. I am fascinated by it though.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Tim Pears

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4517016].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by timpears

But if you are putting a new post on a blog, no matter what the PR of the domain is, that new page is going to be PR0 or PRn/a, isn't it?

No not if its a the home page that has PR and in many cases you either acquire domains that have links to interior pages or they get PR from the home page (with good navigation?). So on a few domains I bought two months ago I already have several additional PR pages. Drives down the overall cost of getting domains. If you buy them right then you end up getting several free ones.

So to your question thats vastly difference from those sites you are talking about many of which will never become high Pr sites. Too much you don't control. I get to put links from day one on an authority page.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4518061].message }}

timpears

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

No not if its a the home page that has PR and in many cases you either acquire domains that have links to interior pages or they get PR from the home page (with good navigation?). So on a few domains I bought two months ago I already have several additional PR pages. Drives down the overall cost of getting domains. If you buy them right then you end up getting several free ones.

Then I am more confused than I thought. How in hell many links can you keep getting on your home page or any other page for that matter, before the juice is thinned out so it is negligible?

I thought this was something like guest blogging only that you didn't need to get your article approved because you owned the network.

Oh well, the more I find out, the more I find that I don't know. I am beginning to wonder if I shall ever manage to get the hang of this IM business.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Tim Pears

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4521437].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by timpears

Then I am more confused than I thought. How in hell many links can you keep getting on your home page or any other page for that matter, before the juice is thinned out so it is negligible?

This comes under creating your own PR when I Teach on the subject but I'll give you a quick answer for free - navigation is but one option. Make sure your page has good navigation and you can do things that convey PR to other pages. like I said I have a set up I use and in no time alone with one PR3 page I created two more and even without trying much so the goal is not just a few pages with authority but many . You then can build up and maintain your juice through other means to keep things going.

If you are dropping all your links on one page forever you are doing wrong and yet thats what i see home page sellers doing.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4521485].message }}

yc.ng 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

If you are dropping all your links on one page forever you are doing wrong and yet thats what i see home page sellers doing.

Hi Mike,

Would like to hear the reason on this. I suppose in private network, you need few home page aged PR links to pass the link juice to new blogs in your network.

Thanks in advance.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Online Marketing Tips & Resources
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4538327].message }}
- MikeFriedman 13 years ago
  
  Alright, last update on SkyNet Hosting.
  
  They had all 17 of my domains setup in maybe 5 or 6 hours.
  
  I'm working on moving them all over from my old host. Thankfully, most were HTML sites, which makes it so much easier to move. If I had all WordPress sites, that would be a nightmare.
  
  I did not get a response from them about setting up multiple accounts on the same IP, but I rarely ever do that so I'm not worried about it.
  
  Pretty pleased with their service so far.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  SaaS SEO Consultant
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4543240].message }}
  
  Marc_L 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by MikeFriedman
  
  I did not get a response from them about setting up multiple accounts on the same IP, but I rarely ever do that so I'm not worried about it.
  
  Trust me, they allow it.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4544877].message }}

Chett

13 years ago

I have heard some people suggest using a lot of small hosting companies and hosting a small number of domains on each hosting package. They claim this is more reliable and that overall you can a better spread of geographical location. The main downside I see is that you will have a certain number of domains on the same ip. Has anyone used this method?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4517967].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Chett

I have heard some people suggest using a lot of small hosting companies and hosting a small number of domains on each hosting package. They claim this is more reliable and that overall you can a better spread of geographical location. The main downside I see is that you will have a certain number of domains on the same ip. Has anyone used this method?

I do abit of that with companies that have multiple locations. It works fine for smaller networks but to scale you will want to go with SEO hosting. I saw a question you asked but it seems like you have changed it. Did you get the answer or do you still want me to PM you? getting down to the wire now so let me know. Said you could not Pm me so.......

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4518073].message }}

Chett

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I do abit of that with companies that have multiple locations. It works fine for smaller networks but to scale you will want to go with SEO hosting. I saw a question you asked but it seems like you have changed it. Did you get the answer or do you still want me to PM you? getting down to the wire now so let me know. Said you could not Pm me so.......

Hi Mike. I sent you a visitor message instead, so decided to edit my post. I had a few questions. Thanks Chett

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4518240].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Chett

Hi Mike. I sent you a visitor message instead, so decided to edit my post. I had a few questions. Thanks Chett

Yikes, Nearly missed it. Anyway I got you - check your PM
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4519489].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Just to give an update on what I have experienced with Skynet Hosting so far.
I signed up for the 20 IP account for $20.

After signing up, I received a confirmation and message that I would receive my welcome email within 24 hours.

30 hours later, I contacted their online support. Chatted with someone that said it would be another 2-3 hours.

24 hours after that, I submitted a ticket to their support department and the account was setup 2 hours later.

Small hiccup, but not a huge deal.

Once nice thing I really like about them is the IP's have their own private nameservers setup. You don't have to go through your registrar and setup your own nameservers like some SEO hosts make you do.

On the downside, the 20 IP package does not come with WHM. In order to setup a new domain on an IP, you have to submit a support ticket to them to have the domain and cpanel access setup. For some newbies, they will probably like this. I like the control of being able to setup and terminate accounts at will. They do offer hosting with WHM, but the price jumps up to $2-3 per IP like most other places.

I just sent in a ticket to have 17 domains setup and ask about having multiple domains on one IP. I will let you know when I hear something.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4533542].message }}

Fraggler

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Once nice thing I really like about them is the IP's have their own private nameservers setup. You don't have to go through your registrar and setup your own nameservers like some SEO hosts make you do.

You still need to register your private nameserver with the domain registrar.

The server-side step you are talking about is configuring the DNS for the new nameserver. A lot of SEO hosts automate this step on account creation.

I could be wrong though.

I have a lot of domains with Web Hosting Plex so it was pretty stressful when their previous owner dropped the ball. The new team has got everything of mine up and running great now. It sounds like they had a huge mess to sort out but I'm happy once again.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

- Stop Wasting Time & Money on Traffic!
- You Can't Improve What You Don't Measure
- Why You Should Create Separate Desktop and Mobile Google Adwords Campaigns

Connect with me on LinkedIn

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4544910].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Fraggler

I have a lot of domains with Web Hosting Plex so it was pretty stressful when their previous owner dropped the ball. The new team has got everything of mine up and running great now. It sounds like they had a huge mess to sort out but I'm happy once again.

Actually, the funny thing is, seeing some of your sites down was what made me go check mine only to find mine all screwed up.

I hope the new owner does a better job, but they've lost me as a customer for the time being.

I'm always buying new domains though and looking to spread my hosting out wherever I can. I may give them another try sometime in the future.

Thanks

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4546036].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Troy if you remember give us an update every now and again with web hosting plex. I like spreading out to as many good hosts as I can.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4573427].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Fraggler

You still need to register your private nameserver with the domain registrar.

Actually skynet gives you nameservers with different domain names for each ip. So you don't need to use private nameservers. I haven't setup private nameservers with them so I'm not sure its even possible.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4646446].message }}

Webmastrr

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Actually skynet gives you nameservers with different domain names for each ip. So you don't need to use private nameservers. I haven't setup private nameservers with them so I'm not sure its even possible.

I agree .. skynet has one of the cheapest and reliable SEO hosting services today .. they dont have a control panel like WHM for you manage everything.. you'd need to support ticket them to add a domain .. but they do offer cpanel for individual domains .. For building out a huge network skynet is the way to go..

Thanks

Signature

((RAVE REVIEWS)) MAKE **$20k+** OVER & OVER AGAIN ON FLIPPA - GET THE EXACT BLUEPRINT HERE!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4649126].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

After signing up, I received a confirmation and message that I would receive my welcome email within 24 hours.

30 hours later, I contacted their online support. Chatted with someone that said it would be another 2-3 hours.

24 hours after that, I submitted a ticket to their support department and the account was setup 2 hours later.

small hiccup but not very professional. experiencing the same thing with them. Ordered yesterday still haven't heard anything back. Probably will do a review of all of them for trainees but will post it here as well if I can.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4588830].message }}

LinkVariety

13 years ago

Originally Posted by ebizman

Hey,

I'm looking to setup a private blog network and I've been reading on the forum people setting it up with .info domains. My question...if I register 100 .info domains and and build links from that network. If I let all domains expire will my sites lose those backlinks?

because i've seen .info domains are cheap when you register them first them but after renewal the price jumps.

Any feedback from SEO experts would be nice. If anyone has a PDF guide on setting up a private blog network that would be nice too.

Thanks!

Building networks is not that easy:

1) You want to use caught domains with existing links and age, a crop of new .info domains are not going to pass any value
2) You need to diversify your whois info
3) You need to host on many different ip addresses, SEO hosting is either very expensive or very unreliable
4) Getting content for them all is expensive, gennig stuff usually ends badly
5) Once you have your network linking off it is a pain because you have to diversify your OBL (outbound links).

If google sees 100 sites all linking to the same 5 money sites... it will end badly for you!

Unless you have a lot of sites to promote, and the money to invest in decent domains on which you can also sell links (which will help fund the network and mix up OBL) then forget it. Just get a subscription to BuildMyRank, will be a lot more effective and less painful!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4518641].message }}

Matt.Lake

13 years ago

Originally Posted by LinkVariety

If google sees 100 sites all linking to the same 5 money sites... it will end badly for you!

I'd be interested to hear others opinions on this.

From my own experience and from talking with people more knowledgable of SEO than me, I'm inclined to say this isn't true. Add to this that most homepage backlink networks will all have a bunch of sites pointing to the exact same sites.

Provided you don't interlink your money sites, the footprint would be very small and hard to detect.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4518837].message }}

LinkVariety

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Matt.Lake

I'd be interested to hear others opinions on this.

From my own experience and from talking with people more knowledgable of SEO than me, I'm inclined to say this isn't true. Add to this that most homepage backlink networks will all have a bunch of sites pointing to the exact same sites.

Yeah and a lot of HPBL sites get banned or lose PR... they are churn n burn.

That works ok for them as they are built to SELL LINKS and they can simply replace the casualties. If you are building your own network to rank your own sites its a different ball game.

Furthermore, I use a coupleo of HPBL networks and they are not very effective, certainly many times less effective link for link that a well built network which pays attention to diversity.

I should add that I have built three networks now. The first one got wiped out overnight, literally... I checked the sites one morning and every one of them had been torched.

The other two have held good, the oldest is 2 years, see how many HPBL networks still have their origional sites in 2 years.

Consider also BackLinkSolutions, thier network has been torched and rebuilt at least twice, first time allegedly their links were passed to Google, but second time I think they put down to mass crappy spinners going out to the same sites over and over.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4519186].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by LinkVariety

Yeah and a lot of HPBL sites get banned or lose PR... they are churn n burn. .

Well that is because most HPBL networks have the same look. You can spot them a mile away - too many links, all kinds of varied subjects on the page and links of various long tails. I have pages I put less than 10-12 links on.

They are not going anywhere soon. 10 links certainly do not yell link farm

Generally though people want to spend $40-$60 per month so to make the cash the sellers have to flood the page with a whole lot of links and thats the dead give away. If I tried to sell my low OBL pages here people would say " But I can get this for such and such for $47". Well yeah with a high OBl but people don't realize how that works. Thats why they run around here posting blog comment links on an open forum so that their PR4 comment they found can have a few hundred links on it by the end of the months
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4521209].message }}

oogyboogawa

13 years ago

You don't want all of them to be exactly the same, but if you vary your anchor text and sometimes link to internal pages that can help. Plus if you use a handful for one site and a different handful to link to another site, there will be some overlap but it won't be exact (i.e. don't use 100% of the network to link to every site).

Then you can also build other links to the sites to help cover up your footprint.

Once you factor in all those things, it's not that different from all the cookie cutter article directories out there that link to the same sites because everyone has them in their AMR list.

I'm no expert. In fact I"m just starting to build my own network. But that's my understanding of it.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4518862].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Having a blog network isn't the end of the story. You need to have all kinds of links to rank for competitive keywords. However having a network your competition doesn't gives you a huge advantage.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4644316].message }}

Webmastrr

13 years ago

I saw a PDF guide somewhere over at backlinksforums about setting up Private networks..

Just my 2 cents here, id look for:

1. IP diversity - different Class A blocks - Different geography.
2. Good number of links shown at the homepage.
3. Have a strict quality control procedure - do not accept poorly written content and junk sites.
4. Try accepting unique content like what BMR/linkvana does..

Thanks

Signature

((RAVE REVIEWS)) MAKE **$20k+** OVER & OVER AGAIN ON FLIPPA - GET THE EXACT BLUEPRINT HERE!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4649118].message }}

guitarjosh

13 years ago

Well that sucks. I now fully expect Craigslist will be completely de-indexed soon.

And for all non-native English speaking peoples, creating a quality website is apparently no longer an option.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4663188].message }}

JoshuaG

13 years ago

Originally Posted by guitarjosh

Well that sucks. I now fully expect Craigslist will be completely de-indexed soon.

And for all non-native English speaking peoples, creating a quality website is apparently no longer an option.

I think what you ment was...

For all non-native English speaking people, in order to create a quality website is obviously no longer an option.

Uber Engrish Generator

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4663399].message }}

guitarjosh

13 years ago

Originally Posted by JoshuaG

I think what you ment was...

For all non-native English speaking people, in order to create a quality website is obviously no longer an option.

Uber Engrish Generator

I'm not quite sure what your point was there because your "correction" doesn't read well. (btw, it's "meant" not "ment" - hopefully you don't put that on your blog and get deindexed.

)

In all seriousness, I can assure you that you're giving Panda far too much credit if you think Google somehow managed to completely update the algorithm to start checking for syntax and look for perfectly written sentences. The "proof" that you were looking for in the Google blog (and didn't find because it doesn't exist in the form you were seeking) can be found in millions of spun websites all over the internet that still have high PR, good ranking and a whole lot of indexed pages.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4663483].message }}

JoshuaG

13 years ago

Originally Posted by guitarjosh

I'm not quite sure what your point was there because your "correction" doesn't read well. (btw, it's "meant" not "ment" - hopefully you don't put that on your blog and get deindexed.

)

In all seriousness, I can assure you that you're giving Panda far too much credit if you think Google somehow managed to completely update the algorithm to start checking for syntax and look for perfectly written sentences. The "proof" that you were looking for in the Google blog (and didn't find because it doesn't exist in the form you were seeking) can be found in millions of spun websites all over the internet that still have high PR, good ranking and a whole lot of indexed pages.

It was a joke, you didn't get it.
Your previous response was made up of two sarcastic generalizations.
A figured a joke was appropriate.

completely update the algorithm to start checking for syntax and look for perfectly written sentences.

This is just more generalization.

Google doesn't have to "completely update the algorithm", it just has to add a few more functions to it. Google is always adding more functionality and intelligence to algorithm, this isn't a big deal.

look for perfectly written sentences

This isn't necessary, panda would only have to scan pages for examples of "bad form".

Panda was developed using machine learning. Which means it was given a huge set of data and was expected to extract patterns based on a more generalized set of criteria and learn from them.

It would be incredibly easy to include millions of examples of poorly written content in the data set so panda could learn some basic "best practices" for identifying grammatical issues.

Here are a few possible examples to illustrate:

Run on sentences
Panda could learn that on average in the english language there is a period every 7 words, on scanning a 100 word article it finds a period was only used once. QUALITY SCORE -1

Average Word length
Panda could discover a trend in its "high quality content" data set that its average word length is seven characters. Where as in its "low quality content" data set the words were an average of 4 characters long. Quality Score - 2

As I say, these are just examples to illustrate how it would be possible to assess the quality of the writing. I'm sure google employees people who would know far more sophisticated and elegant examples then what I can dream up in a few seconds.

The "proof" that you were looking for in the Google blog (and didn't find because it doesn't exist in the form you were seeking) can be found in millions of spun websites all over the internet that still have high PR, good ranking and a whole lot of indexed pages.

This actually doesn't support your argument. Panda isn't the be and and end all of ranking. Maybe those sites have tons of backlinks, or an incredibly well aged domain. Maybe better content is not available for the particular keyword in question. Maybe the panda update hasn't accessed those sites yet.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4664101].message }}

guitarjosh

13 years ago

Originally Posted by JoshuaG

It was a joke, you didn't get it.
Your previous response was made up of two sarcastic generalizations.
A figured a joke was appropriate.

This is just more generalization.

Google doesn't have to "completely update the algorithm", it just has to add a few more functions to it. Google is always adding more functionality and intelligence to algorithm, this isn't a big deal.

This isn't necessary, panda would only have to scan pages for examples of "bad form".

Panda was developed using machine learning. Which means it was given a huge set of data and was expected to extract patterns based on a more generalized set of criteria and learn from them.

It would be incredibly easy to include millions of examples of poorly written content in the data set so panda could learn some basic "best practices" for identifying grammatical issues.

Here are a few possible examples to illustrate:

Run on sentences
Panda could learn that on average in the english language there is a period every 7 words, on scanning a 100 word article it finds a period was only used once. QUALITY SCORE -1

Average Word length
Panda could discover a trend in its "high quality content" data set that its average word length is seven characters. Where as in its "low quality content" data set the words were an average of 4 characters long. Quality Score - 2

As I say, these are just examples to illustrate how it would be possible to assess the quality of the writing. I'm sure google employees people who would know far more sophisticated and elegant examples then what I can dream up in a few seconds.

This actually doesn't support your argument. Panda isn't the be and and end all of ranking. Maybe those sites have tons of backlinks, or an incredibly well aged domain. Maybe better content is not available for the particular keyword in question. Maybe the panda update hasn't accessed those sites yet.

Ah well.. we will agree to disagree my friend.

Sorry I didn't get your joke. Maybe you're just not funny?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4664197].message }}

JoshuaG 13 years ago

Originally Posted by guitarjosh

Ah well.. we will agree to disagree my friend.

Sorry I didn't get your joke. Maybe you're just not funny?

Yea, I think we've hijacked this thread enough already

And yes, I'm often the only one laughing at my jokes
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4664220].message }}

boxoun

12 years ago

Originally Posted by guitarjosh

I'm not quite sure what your point was there because your "correction" doesn't read well. (btw, it's "meant" not "ment" - hopefully you don't put that on your blog and get deindexed.

)

In all seriousness, I can assure you that you're giving Panda far too much credit if you think Google somehow managed to completely update the algorithm to start checking for syntax and look for perfectly written sentences. The "proof" that you were looking for in the Google blog (and didn't find because it doesn't exist in the form you were seeking) can be found in millions of spun websites all over the internet that still have high PR, good ranking and a whole lot of indexed pages.

Having used grammarly.com for school, I think its safe to say Google can and does detect bad grammar.

Whether they punish you is a different story.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5059943].message }}

Marc_L 12 years ago

Originally Posted by boxoun

Having used grammarly.com for school, I think its safe to say Google can and does detect bad grammar.

Whether they punish you is a different story.

All this means is that it is theoretically possible that Google detects bad grammar.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5060747].message }}
- boxoun 12 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Marc_L
  
  All this means is that it is theoretically possible that Google detects bad grammar.
  
  That was all it was meant for. Posts above me were suggesting Google couldn't easily do this.
  
  Since I skim through posts I admit I could have misinterpreted a post.
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5061337].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

IF google had the ability to determine gibberish content I would not see half the sites that I do that have poor content. I think theres maybe a case for mispelled words but beyond that until someone actually creates a computer program that totally simulates human intelligence its pretty impossible for them to determine quality. People have a way of dreaming that information technology can solve any issue or duplicate any human capability but thats only in Will Smith movies.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4664425].message }}

Marc Lindsay

13 years ago

I love watching unfounded "I think this" "I think that" comments.

I've learnt some great lessons.... many times in SEO.

1. The data will tell you EXACTLY what is happening
2. The moment it starts with "I think" with nothing to back it up..... dismiss it immediately until you can prove it.

Given we run AMA, and an SEO company, we have ALOT of data to analyze on.

Currently building over 3 million links per month through our networks alone. Then "traditional" SEO would be in 10's of thousands per month as well (excluding AMA network obviously).

Whoever said earlier.... "quantity trumps quality" I've said this for a long time, however this is one other quantifier to add in here.

Given the same amount of resource to invest, 1 for 1, quantity will outwin higher quality every single time.

HOWEVER at a point when the site already has great rankings, some huge authority links will go VERY FAR.

It raises the entire profile of the site, and every link you have built based of what I have seen happen, gets a small but noticeable lift.

Also links built going forward to the site appear to be taken into account quicker by google, based on real sites, real rankings, real tracking.

Autoblogs still work, perhaps trish, there is some rethought here on how its being implemented. I can still think of many ways to monetize.

1. Your own domains, autoblogs through a great network (hehe like ours), use them for link power for your own domains (home page links)
2. Put them into a service like text link brokers selling home page links (one site can easily make between $30 to $70 per month when done right.

I dont advocate #2, but I know it works as have done it in the past.

Autoblogging can also be used to keep PR domains, active, if you have been buying aged domains but have not utilized them properly.

Autoblogging also does not always mean.... 500 posts per day. It can be slow well done drip feeding.

Regarding high quality networks..... I've yet to see one I would fully stand by, half a mind to create my own.

One recent example of a well known network, had people's links going onto a PR4 domain. Ex adult industry domain.

Duplicate posts happening

All into one category called general.....

How well do you think those links would be helping you out? My bet is you dont want that sort of link profile coming in.

Marc

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4679614].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc Lindsay

Given the same amount of resource to invest, 1 for 1, quantity will outwin higher quality every single time.

No offense but that was nonsense when Matt said it and its still nonsense - no specialty treatment

. Your data can show what you do and know how to do. It won't show what others do and the techniques they know how to use. there are plenty of people in this thread that have DONE not thought as you implied. A single PR 3 domain can be leveraged to get a dozen high authority links or more and I can get those sometimes for much less than $50. You might not know how but that doesn't mean I don't and I get far more bang for my buck (plus own a internet property outright) than weak links. I can use it over and over again without a monthly fee as well for several of my sites.

Whenever anyone says something so blanket you can know they are overstating their case. I go even beyond my own data and look at serps and I am not seeing ANY article/low quality network blowing any top competitive term out of the water with quantity over quality. I've seen evidence recently that high PR networks ARE making some waves in competitive serps but then thats quality not just quantity

One of the posters in this thread that believe in Quality over quantity has shown his site (God bless him I never would and never will) ranking for make money online.

Is that enough doing over thinking for you?

Since you made a blanket statement of every time then show us some very top results of the most heavily sought after keywords where quantity has destroyed quality. Remember you did say "every time"

Just a friendly challenge that no one has taken me up on.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4685463].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Since you made a blanket statement of every time then show us some very top results of the most heavily sought after keywords where quantity has destroyed quality. Remember you did say "every time"

Just a friendly challenge that no one has taken me up on.

I don't think Marc (nice spelling :p) is saying what you are thinking he is saying.

Also the page in question...

101 Ways To Make Money - Learn How To Make Money Online

...is over nine years old. So of course there are going to be some high PR links there and what links do the backlink checkers favor? you guessed it, high PR links. There are probably hundreds of thousands links Mike also hinted that he used some xrumer links on that site (low quality links) as well. One may argue that these links are what has given him his ranking on that site, they'd be wrong of course. Or one may argue that it takes all kinds of links to get good results for competitive keywords.

It seems obvious to me that getting a variety of links is the way to go (this includes low PR links). It's pretty easy to find high PR links out there if you know how to look. It's also much easier to buy new domains with no PR than it is to buy aged PR domains, in my opinion. Plus you can build your new domains PR as well.

I've read your challenge about 100 times now but I'd like you to consider mine.

Please find any competitive search term with only High PR links.

Using your logic, if none can be found then we have to consider the option that perhaps low PR links are as important if not more important in ranking competitive keywords. If none can be found then your challenge is rendered pointless.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4685618].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

...is over nine years old. So of course there are going to be some high PR links

Why? Links magically form to a site when the domain reaches nine years old? stop with the excuses. Even a blind man with patches on both eyes can see the quality links that site got to get to where it is today.

there and what links do the backlink checkers favor? you guessed it, high PR links

use a backlink checker one day man you will see they show both.

It seems obvious to me that getting a variety of links is the way to go (this includes low PR links). It's pretty easy to find high PR links out there if you know how to look.

not if you consider OBL and yes I agree link popularity does count for something never denied it but this nonsense about quantity OVER quality is just that - nonsense.

It's also much easier to buy new domains with no PR than it is to buy aged PR domains, in my opinion. Plus you can build your new domains PR as well.

FAR FAR easier to build them when you do have some to begin with. Of course its easier to buy a brand new domain because it comes with little initial value but one could just as well argue and rightfully so that the link building to a brand new domain is far harder than having it from day one on an aged domain no? SO easier to buy a new domain matters only if you never intend on building them up. IF you do its extremely efficient to get them WITH links.

I've read your challenge about 100 times now but I'd like you to consider mine.

Then why should I even consider yours? You've ducked countlessly (as you admit openly) from mine and then want consideration?

Using your logic, if none can be found then we have to consider the option that perhaps low PR links are as important if not more important in ranking competitive keywords.

Sorry you are not using my logic at all - just your own and its not sound. In order for YOUR logic to stand we would have to live in an alternate universe where say a profile backlinks is considered high quality sought after link by Google. Do we live in such a world? Or do you want to claim that each forum profile is a high quality link since its a N/A? Since for your argument to hold true N/As would have to be mor evaluable than high PRs

Your argument is like claiming that sugar doesn't make lemonade sweet because you find it with water in every glass of lemonade. Hint - we already know that sugar is sweet.

We already know PR measures link strength. Does pagerank flow to negative numbers in reverse? NO in our real world a page with no links gets the goose egg. NO PR - then if it gets links it shows a PR1 and then a PR2 etc. Getting the progression? Its not a guess that a PR1 has more value than a PR 0. Its backed up by testing and the every day reality that the more links you put to a site the higher it climbs along with it s Pr if the links getting the PR are also getting the targeted anchor text. PR IS a measurement of overall link strength. Fact PROVEN.

SO given that we don't live in an alternate world where zero is more valuable than 1 why would any sane person make the claim that the low numbers and the zero pr links rank a site over the high number PR links? It would be totally and absolutely silly - skipping over the obvious to choose the absurd. Poor logic and its not mine.

Now have I seen serps with more links WITH PR links than not - Why yes. So sorry the serps STILL don't show quantity over quality even in those scenarios and even with the flawed logic the point would STILL stand.

Now by your count - for the 101st time I ask again. Where is the very competitive term where quantity is beating out quality. Even though I didn't have to I have answered and have shown the huge flaw in your logic and considered your premise.

When can I see the serps that I have been asking for or the rational where the High PR links should be put in the background as an inferior factor on a site that is ranking in a top serp?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4685875].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Why? Links magically form to a site when the domain reaches nine years old? stop with the excuses. Even a blind man with patches on both eyes can see the quality links that site got to get to where it is today.

If a site has value then it will, it's not magic either.

use a backlink checker one day man you will see they show both.

But they show high PR links more readily than low PR, which is my point.

not if you consider OBL and yes I agree link popularity does count for something never denied it but this nonsense about quantity OVER quality is just that - nonsense.

I can find lower OBL high PR links...

FAR FAR easier to build them when you do have some to begin with. Of course its easier to buy a brand new domain because it comes with little initial value but one could just as well argue and rightfully so that the link building to a brand new domain is far harder than having it from day one on an aged domain no?

Do it your way, I don't care but don't act like any other way is wrong.

SO easier to buy a new domain matters only if you never intend on building them up. IF you do its extremely efficient to get them WITH links.

It isn't that hard to build links to multiple sites, I should know.

Then why should I even consider yours? You've ducked countlessly (as you admit openly) from mine and then want consideration?

In science if a test can be argued to support two hypothesis then it is worthless as a test. This is the case for your request. It can be argued to prove both your case and against your case.

Sorry you are not using my logic at all

That much is obvious because you aren't using any.

- just your own and its not sound. In order for YOUR logic to stand we would have to live in an alternate universe where say a profile backlinks is considered high quality sought after link by Google.

More illogical statements. I never mentioned this ridiculous notion. This is another problem with your "test", it assumes what you are trying to prove. That's called circular reasoning.

My point is that because every single competitive keyword has both high PR and low PR links (in volume) which makes it just as easy for me or anybody else to argue that competitive serps require low PR high links to rank well. Your test proves nothing.

We already know PR measures link strength. Does pagerank flow to negative numbers in reverse? NO in our real world a page with no links gets the goose egg. NO PR - then if it gets links it shows a PR1 and then a PR2 etc. Getting the progression? Its not a guess that a PR1 has more value than a PR 0. Its backed up by testing and the every day reality that the more links you put to a site the higher it climbs. PR IS a measurement of overall link strength. Fact PROVEN.

High PR is better than low PR on a one to one basis, point conceded (never contented). Why do you keep this strawman up?

SO given that we don't live in an alternate world where zero is more valuable than 1 why would any sane person make the claim that the low numbers and the zero pr links rank a site over the high number PR links? It would be totally and absolutely silly - skipping over the obvious to choose the absurd. Poor logic and its not mine.

Nobody is claiming this straw-man. Remember I believe you need both!

Now have I seen serps with more links WITH PR links than not - Why yes. So sorry the serps STILL don't show quantity over quality even in those scenarios and even with the flawed logic the point would STILL stand.

But backlink checkers favor the high PR links over the low PR links. Point assumed not proven.

Now by your count - for the 101st time I ask again. Where is the very competitive term where quantity is beating out quality. Even though I didn't have to I have answered and have shown the huge flaw in your logic and considered your premise.

You straw manned me and used crappy logic. You keep trying to use a test that assumes what it is trying to substantiate. This breaks a law of logic. I can just as easily assume that quantity low PR links help rank sites in competitive serps because every single one of them has these types of links.

When can I see the serps that I have been asking for or the rational where the High PR links should be put in the back ground on a site that is ranking in a top serp?

Wouldn't matter as there will be low PR links in quantity as well.

Oh, Mike Grant and us have something in common...:p

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4686028].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

But they show high PR links more readily than low PR, which is my point

You have no point. You believe so because your links are notorious for not showing up in backlink checker most likely by their not getting crawled sufficiently.

Do it your way, I don't care but don't act like any other way is wrong.

Actually its your side that has repeatedly made the claim that others are wrong.

It isn't that hard to build links to multiple sites, I should know.

Said nothing about building to multiple sites. I was talking of each domain separately and no you have no expertise that is evident on the matter. By your partners admission he lets most of his domains go each year to avoid paying for registration . He's already admitted only a few get to Pr1. Sorry thats not good link building.

More illogical statements. I never mentioned this ridiculous notion. This is another problem with your "test", it assumes what you are trying to prove. That's called circular reasoning.

You continue to duck and run for cover because you can't after all this time come up with even one highly competitive term that proves your point. I assume nothing. I look at the serps and draw my conclusions. You run from serps.

My point is that because every single competitive keyword has both high PR and low PR links (in volume) which makes it just as easy for me or anybody else to argue that competitive serps require low PR high links to rank well.

Its easy to argue for you because you don't get the basic logic and it went over your head. Do sites rise in the serps when they get anchor text targeted links? Yes. DO they also raise in PR as they do in many many cases? YES. So is PR a Proven indicator of overall link strength. Obvious. Spin all you want. Thats not an assumption. Thats been proven. live with it. It isn't going away.

Its blathering nonsense to imply that a site with 25 PR 4 links is ranking on the power of its 20 N/A links. Your claim that because a site happens to get a no pr link here or there it invalidates that most sites ranking for top terms have a plethora of high quality links that is the major reason for their ranking is SEO gibberish. You can claim you need both but you continue to object when anyone counters that quantity does not counter quality.

If your premise was correct that either quantity makes up for quality or exceeds quality then you would be able to show it in a HIGHLY competitive serp. You can't. Now since you can't get the basic logical flaw of what you want "consideration" for then we can just prove it by comparative tests. We can examine the serps and then you STILL have a problem. We can find pages where sites are outranked with roughly the same amount of backlinks and the difference is in the quality of their links.

Thing is though you and I know you would still duck on my "test" . If you wouldn't then I'd be glad to show you the obvious but hey by your own admission you've heard it a hundred times and ducked each. I'd just be wasting my time.

High PR is better than low PR on a one to one basis, point conceded (never contented). Why do you keep this strawman up?

LOL What strawman? I've gone way beyond one to one issues. . Stop dodging and doing dances. You can show multiple links for every one PR domain. Just show in a really competitive serp where quantity overcomes quality.

Still waiting

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4686340].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

You have no point. You believe so because your links are notorious for not showing up in backlink checker most likely by their not getting crawled sufficiently.

LOL, you don't know what you are talking about. Our sites get crawled regularly.

Actually its your side that has repeatedly made the claim that others are wrong.

You need to grasp the concept that you are talking to me, not to "my side".

Said nothing about building to multiple sites. I was talking of each domain separately and no you have no expertise that is evident on the matter.

And you do? I've come up with the lion's portion of our system that produces results. What evidence do we have that you know anything about what you are talking about? Who is Mike Anthony? I don't know any of your clients and what their results were. Me on the other hand, just go look at how many people we have produced positive results for. Why should we take you seriously?

By your partners admission he lets most of his domains go each year to avoid paying for registration . He's already admitted only a few get to Pr1. Sorry thats not good link building.

Matt isn't directly involved in this aspect of the business.

You continue to duck and run for cover because you can't after all this time come up with even one highly competitive term that proves your point. I assume nothing. I look at the serps and draw my conclusions. You run from serps.

But nobody is making the claim that you can rank for competitive serps with ANY particular type of link. It takes all kinds of links.

Its easy to argue for you because you don't get the basic logic and it went over your head. Do sites rise in the serps when they get anchor text targeted links? Yes. DO they also raise in PR as they do in many many cases? YES. So is PR a Proven indicator of overall link strength. Obvious. Spin all you want. Thats not an assumption. Thats been proven. live with it. It isn't going away.

If this is true then it should be apparent whenever you search for any term as the higher the PR of the site competing for a term then the higher the position in the SERPS. This is demonstrably FALSE.

Its blathering nonsense to imply that a site with 25 PR 4 links is ranking on the power of its 20 N/A links.

Those proportions aren't very realistic and in this case I'd say you'd be correct. Nobody is saying a n/a link is as valuable as a PR 4 link.

Your claim that because a site happens to get a no pr link here or there it invalidates that most sites ranking for top terms have a plethora of high quality links that is the major reason for their ranking is SEO gibberish.

Another failure of logic! It isn't my claim its logical consistency based upon your "test". Your test assumes what it is trying to prove therefore it is logical gibberish. Why? Because the exact same thing can be concluded about high volumes of low PR sites as well because there hasn't been a competitive SERP shown that doesn't have them.

You can claim you need both but you continue to object when anyone counters that quantity does not counter quality.

I think quantity plays a larger role than you give them credit.

If your premise was correct that either quantity makes up for quality or exceeds quality then you would be able to show it in a HIGHLY competitive serp. You can't.

Show us where there is only "quality" and no quantity and you may have a point.

Now since you can't get the basic logical flaw of what you want "consideration" for then we can just prove it by comparative tests. We can examine the serps and then you STILL have a problem. We can find pages where sites are outranked with roughly the same amount of backlinks and the difference is in the quality of their links.

Anchor text plays a big roll too and remember backlink checkers are incomplete anyway.

Thing is though you and I know you would still duck on my "test" . If you wouldn't then I'd be glad to show you the obvious but hey by your own admission you've heard it a hundred times and ducked each. I'd just be wasting my time.

I'm ducking an irrelevant illogical challenge that proves nothing as it can be argued to support high quantity and high "quality". It's basic logic man.

LOL What strawman?

You are arguing against a position that I do not hold. By definition this is a strawman argument. Look it up.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4687518].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

LOL, you don't know what you are talking about. Our sites get crawled regularly.

Your customer say other wise and you know where too. Want the link again?

I don't know any of your clients and what their results were.

So what you want my client list now? ROFL. okay I tell you what post your serp results of just ten of your customers so I can look your network over and I'll think about showing you my client list. Deal?

Mike grant posted his site and the first thing you did instead of keeping it to yourself you announced to everyone that there were links in there you would be using which pretty much was an invitation for others to look em over too.

Most of the regulars in this forum have known me for years and know I know Seo (even when they disagree with some of my views) . I don't need to expose my client list to prove myself to sellers who only strolls in this section to promote their services in every thread they participate in.

Sorry Man at this point you can't roll back everything. Its already out in the open. Your network is built on .info PR zeros and you let them lapse each year for the most part so no it does not give you any credibility when it comes to building links. lets get back on thread point.

But nobody is making the claim that you can rank for competitive serps with ANY particular type of link. It takes all kinds of links.

Quick point of order - your sales guy has said he would only use .info new domains. so skip the "nobody" affirmation and not pretend like thats made up by me.

If this is true then it should be apparent whenever you search for any term as the higher the PR of the site competing for a term then the higher the position in the SERPS. This is demonstrably FALSE.

Oh my sweet peaches. Someone needs some serious help. Your logic is demonstrably false. Please go and learn some SEO. Theres this little thing called anchor text (along with another thing called on page SEO) and all the sites in a serp for a term are not always using the same exact anchor text or anchor text ratio. The PR of a page is independent of the anchor text .THAT (And the on page SEO) is why you don't always see a progression of PR.

See this is why you and others take me seriously. I actually can demonstrate without exposing my client list that I actually know what I am talking about.

after that I am getting bored. Your ducking and weaving as usual. I'm still waiting on proof in the serps. Not assuming anything. Its circular only in your mind to use proven facts in a test. I'm not calling for results that show that PR links are individually less powerful. You've already conceded that higher PR links individually are more powerful. I am asking for serps where popularity overrides that known factor. You claim popularity matters more than I think then prove it.

The one fact in this thread appears to be

You can't find any top competitive serps where that really is the case.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4687811].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Your customer say other wise and you know where too. Want the link again?

So crawled = showing up in backlink checkers now? lol No need as I answered everybody in that thread (also helped some folks).

So what you want my client list now? ROFL. okay I tell you what post your serp results of just ten of your customers so I can look your network over and I'll think about showing you my client list. Deal?

I at least have some verification that I do what I say I do which can be found right here on this forum. For all I know you don't do any SEO professionally.

Mike grant posted his site and the first thing you did instead of keeping it to yourself you announced to everyone that there were links in there you would be using which pretty much was an invitation for others to look em over too.

Oh come on. You know what's interesting, I saw some very interesting domains in that report on closer look. lol

Most of the regulars in this forum have known me for years and know I know Seo (even when they disagree with some of my views) . I don't need to expose my client list to prove myself to sellers who only strolls in this section to promote their services in every thread they participate in.

Like your blog network class? Get real.

Quick point of order - your sales guy has said he would only use .info new domains. so skip the "nobody" affirmation and not pretend like thats made up by me.

But you are making the absurdly idiotic mistake that this is all we do! You continually do this over and over again.

Oh my sweet peaches. Someone needs some serious help. Your logic is demonstrably false. Please go and learn some SEO. Theres this little thing called anchor text (along with another thing called on page SEO) and all the sites in a serp for a term are not always using the same exact anchor text or anchor text ratio. The PR of a page is independent of the anchor text .THAT (And the on page SEO) is why you don't always see a progression of PR.

LOL, you just demonstrated my point! There is more to it than PR! You are hilarious. I know all this and you finally admitted it!

See this is why you and others take me seriously. I actually can demonstrate without exposing my client list that I actually know what I am talking about.

I don't take you seriously.:confused:

after that I am getting bored. Your ducking and weaving as usual. I'm still waiting on proof in the serps.

But the proof you ask for isn't proof of what you want to prove. Your test assumes what it is trying to prove! It's worthless as a test. Unless you have what you call a competitive serp with something on top with only high PR links and no low PR links.

Not assuming anything. Its circular only in your mind to use proven facts in a test. I'm not calling for results that show that PR links are individually less powerful. You've already conceded that higher PR links individually are more powerful. I am asking for serps where popularity overrides that known factor. You claim popularity matters more than I think then prove it.

You are assuming that the high PR links are what is giving a site it's ranking when you ignore the mass majority of the sites links as being low/no PR. Then you claim that these PR links are what is causing the ranking. Circular. It's clear.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4687904].message }}

onlinecasinodeck

13 years ago

Originally Posted by ebizman

Hey,

I'm looking to setup a private blog network and I've been reading on the forum people setting it up with .info domains. My question...if I register 100 .info domains and and build links from that network. If I let all domains expire will my sites lose those backlinks?

because i've seen .info domains are cheap when you register them first them but after renewal the price jumps.

Any feedback from SEO experts would be nice. If anyone has a PDF guide on setting up a private blog network that would be nice too.

Thanks!

Yes all your backlinks coming from your expired blogging network will be gone since, all your blogging network page will be completely gone, and those backlinks are included on that page.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4685928].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

I still say the best litmus test is the blog network that has pulled in the most testimonials.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4686037].message }}

MikeFriedman 13 years ago
Originally Posted by mattlaclear

I still say the best litmus test is the blog network that has pulled in the most testimonials.

That is silly for so many reasons, but just to point out a few...
- Most of the best blog networks do not give their customers an opportunity to post testimonials in a thread like a WSO does.
- Most of the best blog networks do not run their service through a WSO.
- Some blog networks offer their clients additional services or discounts for ongoing services in exchange for leaving a testimonial in their WSO thread. That brings in an unnatural number of testimonials.
- Testimonials in no way compare PR n/a links with high PR links.
- Thanks
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4686410].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

I still say the best litmus test is the blog network that has pulled in the most testimonials.

You say that in every thread because its self serving. Many people do not solicit testimonials, far more never publish more than a few. Some don't build their networks for WSOs like you do. Still others promise top spots (which you don't and won't)and charge more so of course they have less customers. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that if a SEO charges more for his services he's going to have less customers than one charging less. Some people who do take testimonials are satisfied with quality over quantity but we know where you stand on issues in that regard

Essentially you are saying that any network that does not use your business model is inferior which is downright silly and hopefully transparent to anyone on the fence reading it. Basically its look at me because i use, solicit and promote my testimonials while others don't. Sorry doesn't make you superior because you use your model and someone chooses something entirely different.

All of this is argued for so you can skirt around showing the one place where every real SEO makes his point. the greatest lab for SEO - Google serps.

Still waiting for either you or any of the Marcs to show where Quantity kills quality in any top serp where the competition is really good. Since it ALWAYS is the case it should have been easy to find a really good one but alas several pages and weeks in and no takers.

I wonder why?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4686458].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

You say that in every thread because its self serving. Many people do not solicit testimonials, far more never publish more than a few. Some don't build their networks for WSOs like you do. Still others promise top spots (which you don't and won't)and charge more so of course they have less customers. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that if a SEO charges more for his services he's going to have less customers than one charging less. Some people who do take testimonials are satisfied with quality over quantity but we know where you stand on issues in that regard

Essentially you are saying that any network that does not use your business model is inferior which is downright silly and hopefully transparent to anyone on the fence reading it. Basically its look at me because i use, solicit and promote my testimonials while others don't. Sorry doesn't make you superior because you use your model and someone chooses something entirely different.

All of this is argued for so you can skirt around showing the one place where every real SEO makes his point. the greatest lab for SEO - Google serps.

Still waiting for either you or any of the Marcs to show where Quantity kills quality in any top serp where the competition is really good. Since it ALWAYS is the case it should have been easy to find a really good one but alas several pages and weeks in and no takers.

I wonder why?

I would say that too if I had as few testimonials as you have. In fact I am quite sick of seeing hobbyist such as yourself slamming folks who actually do this for a living.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4687599].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

I would say that too if I had as few testimonials as you have. In fact I am quite sick of seeing hobbyist such as yourself slamming folks who actually do this for a living.

LOL. You don't have one clue about how many testimonials I have because I seldom take clients here. I am not a mass $75 SEO stop when you reach position 10 SEO and quite proud of it. My customers expect me to get to number one not guaranteed to stop when they reach ten. I've tried to tell you I love your ambition but we are not competitors. You wouldn't last a week in real business SEO with your blasting gibberish content to .info blogs. To be honest from what I see you don't even do full SEO which is fine . You rarely touch on page Seo for your clients, most of what you do is run AMR and buy .infos while I do FULL full time SEO. We both know thats amateur /hobbyist stuff to the rest of the SEo world so believe what you want. It flies with Im newbies who unfortunately statistically don't make much money and you have far from reversed those statistics. Lets stay on the subject because anyone with a brain can see you are still trying to make the business model thing float which it can't.

Do you have those serps that prove your point yet?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4687872].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

LOL. You don't have one clue about how many testimonials I have...

Right, we don't know you from Adam, you could be typing from your mother's basement for all we know. With us, people can verify that we have many happy customers doing exactly what we claim in this thread. With you we have your poor logic and your word. Both aren't worth much.

because I seldom take clients here. I've tried to tell you I love your ambition but we are not competitors. You wouldn't last a week in real business SEO with your blasting gibberish content to .info blogs.

If you only knew! LOL Mike I'm loving you tonight!

To be honest from what I see you don't even do full SEO. You rarely touch on page Seo for your clients, most of what you do is run AMR and buy .infos. We both know thats amateur /hobbyist stuff to the rest of the SEo world so what do I care whether you believe I am full time or not?

We do very nicely with our "hobby" Mike. We just don't have any evidence that you are doing SEO full time.

LEts stay on the subject because anyone with a brain can see you are still trying to make the business model thing float which it can't.

Our business model won't float? Mike is on fire tonight!

Do you have those serps that prove your point yet?

The evidence you are asking for proves both points, useless test.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4687934].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Our business model won't float? Mike is on fire tonight!

Learn to read Marc. Never said your business model would not float. I conceded that there are ton load s of IM newbies that will buy your cheap SEO services and yet alas Still not be making any real money. I stated the business model thing won't float - You know where you claim that because the rest of the SEO world doesn't follow your model of selling their services in WSos that they are not real SEos.

ROFL -- I can see your TV ad now (if you ever got out of the WSO section)

SEomoz do you YOU have more WSO testimonials than MATT and Marc?

LOL. No man its you that are on fire with the comedy tonight. Good stuff

.

Bu seriously wheres the serps your customers rank on so I can look them over. I told you I will consider turning over my client list when I get you to expose your network as I would mine. Whaz up? Who cares about the We of you and Marc. You weren't in this section before you offered services and you won't be after.

The evidence you are asking for proves both points, useless test.

I agree for you it is useless because your failure to find even one example speaks loud and clear. What else can you do but try and dance away from your lack of evidence?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4688066].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Learn to read Marc. Never said your business model would not float. I conceded that there are ton load s of IM newbies that will buy your cheap SEO services and yet alas Still not be making any real money. I stated the business model thing won't float - You know where you claim that because the rest of the SEO world doesn't follow your model of selling their services in WSos that they are not real SEos.

How about learn to write? Wasn't obvious.

I agree for you it is useless because your failure to find even one example speaks loud and clear. What else can you do but try and dance away from your lack of evidence?

It's useless because it's useless for the reasons you have failed to refute or even attempt to refute. Every top ranked site in any competitive SERPs will have scores of low PR links as well as some high PR links which makes the exercise DOA as one could just as easily argue that these low PR links (en masse) are the reason for the high rankings. Which makes it useless as it explains nothing, unless of course you found a site ranking with only PR links.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4688127].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

How about learn to write? Wasn't obvious.

I hereby promise to do my best not to make context confuse you again

Originally Posted by Marc_L

It's useless because it's useless for the reasons you have failed to refute or even attempt to refute. Every top ranked site in any competitive SERPs will have scores of low PR links as well as some high PR links which makes the exercise DOA as one could just as easily argue that these low PR links (en masse) are the reason for the high rankings..

I have refuted it but alas it just went over your head. You and perhaps your brother would be the only ones to claim that the low pr links are the reason for the high rankings and skip over the HIgh pr links in great abundance. For no other reason mind you that it suits your business to state so. Your logic is DOA but its so DOA that you can't even think it out.

As I stated you could just easily do a comparative analysis within the serp (but I don't think you understood that either) and exclude for one of the factors (in this case HIgh PR). You see in many serps as you move down through the pages the more PR zero pages you get and many of them have the weak links in abundance that you would be claiming could equally be the major ranking factors - Boom down the tube goes your argument.

Now don't get confused again with progression of PR. there isn't because of the factors I stated but one thing is clear with a PR zero page - it isn't getting good links OF ANY anchor text. So no Marc I am Not assuming that a site gets its ranking from its Pr links. I don't know going in until I look. I unlike you actually study a site that is ranking and research it to see what is making it rank and sorry no matter how you beg on bended knees the existence of high pr links with sites that rank high in real competitive serps compared to the lack of them in sites that don't speaks for itself and is most definitely not circular.

Marc, you should stop and think because You are only proving how little you have studied SEO and the serps. What? That tendency in serps is a coincidence? I'm hitting the sack but if you want to go ahead and rebut that I can post countless examples in the morning and show again that its YOU that don't know SEO.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4688291].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I have refuted it but alas it just went over your head. You and perhaps your brother would be the only ones to claim that the low pr links are the reason for the high rankings and skip over the HIgh pr links in great abundance.

You "refuted" it by assuming what you are trying to prove, circular reasoning. As a test your method is meaningless. You can't say that high PR links are causing the ranking and then go and "test" this by looking in the serps when any competitive SERP is going to have an abundance of lower PR links as well. It's meaningless and your assertion that high PR links cause all high rankings is baseless since the evidence COULD be constructed in a way to support that low PR links in abundance are important in ranking competitive keywords. "Make money online" is a case in point. (like I said I found some very interesting links in the report) I know for a fact that Mike Grant isn't the only SEO working on that site. Lets just leave it at that. lol

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4691143].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

You can't say that high PR links are causing the ranking and then go and "test" this by looking in the serps when any competitive SERP is going to have an abundance of lower PR links as well.

Strawman nonsense. I didn't say High Pr links cause rankings before I looked. I looked and then I found that sites had High Pr that are ranking. Since your are being dense let me put it straight out. My test is done. I am asking YOU to show that the results are wrong and you CANNOT. Sites that do not rank have low quality links in MANY serps and sites that do rank overwhelmingly have High authority links within the same serps. you have no point and never will. comparative analysis you just do not get.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

"Make money online" is a case in point. (like I said I found some very interesting links in the report) I know for a fact that Mike Grant isn't the only SEO working on that site. Lets just leave it at that. lol

LOL. You are stuck on Mike's site studying it to actually learn some SEO. Go for it man. Who cares if Mike wasn't the only one working on it. It actually ranks for something competitive and you can;t show anything on your side that rivals it and we ALL know it. You can go on and on butchering what circular reasoning is while not having a clue.

But I am tired of you and I sure most are tired of our back and forth. You want to make claims about being the real SEO on here (ROFL). I 'll put up another challenge.

Me against you straight up. Published keywords, domain and serps and wide open to the public domain including all our backlinks. battle royale no secrets hidden and in the very forum you sell on.

only I don't want no crappy first page position 10 gets no traffic finish line ranking for "blue berry pancakes with raisin sprinkles" serp. Moderately competitive top two or hush up.

People would love it. Mr testimonials (lol) versus the man from uncle

but hey lets make it better. Instead of pimping services lets try and help out the Joe blow with only a hundred dollars to spend so he can learn to do it himself and open another thread and make it ultra informational.

You up for it? You want the truth?

YOU CAN"T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!

LOL.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4691194].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Strawman nonsense. I didn't say High Pr links cause rankings before I looked. I looked and then I found that sites had High Pr that are ranking. Since your are being dense let me put it straight out. My test is done. I am asking YOU to show that the results are wrong and you CANNOT. Sites that do not rank have low quality links in MANY serps and sites that do rank overwhelmingly have High authority links within the same serps. you have no point and never will. comparative analysis you just do not get.

You cannot show that these competitive SERPS have nothing but high PR links either. They all have bulk low PR links as well. One could argue that the bulk matters just as easily as the high PR links do.

LOL. You are stuck on Mike's site studying it to actually learn some SEO.

It isn't Mike's site.

Go for it man. Who cares if Mike wasn't the only one working on it. It actually ranks for something competitive and you can;t show anything on your side that rivals it and we ALL know it.

I KNOW for a fact that Mike isn't the only SEO working on the site. How might I KNOW that? HMMMMMM Use your brain.

But I am tired of you and I sure most are tired of our back and forth. You want to make claims about being the real SEO on here (ROFL). I 'll put up another challenge.

Me against you straight up. Published keywords, domain and serps and wide open to the public domain including all our backlinks. battle royale no secrets hidden and in the very forum you sell on.

People here know me already, I have no need to prove myself here. You on the other hand....

only I don't want no crappy first page position 10 gets no traffic finish line ranking for "blue berry pancakes with raisin sprinkles" serp. Moderately competitive top two or hush up.

Back to the ridiculous keywords again? Back to the idea that our customers are idiots who only choose crappy keywords? I have no interest in keywords like that either.

People would love it. Mr testimonials (lol) versus the man from uncle

but hey lets make it better. Instead of pimping services lets try and help out the Joe blow with only a hundred dollars to spend so he can learn to do it himself and open another thread and make it ultra informational.

Like I said people on the warrior forum know us here because we work with many of them. You on the other hand are mostly unknown. I have no interest in helping build your reputation.

You up for it? You want the truth?

The truth is we don't need your challenge.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4691633].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

The truth is we don't need your challenge.

The truth is you would lose but I agree you wouldn't want to do it. You very well might lose customers. Perhaps I would duck and hide if I were you too but then I am not. and yeah a pile of your so called ranking (first page) ARE for weak tearms. I have seen them and someone even posted a weak old one that you advertised. You should look around more into the history of WSOs. Buyers have been known to go gaga for total garbage with pages long threads and mucho testimonials and like I said before testimonials are unreliable anyway. Who knows how they came to be? Plenty of sellers even give incentives to get them (extra services, bonuses etc). thats why everyone should show their proof in the serps and those who can't well can't offer real tangible proof - like yourself.

Sorry marc. You run and duck and come up with excuses because you wouldn't have a clue about how to rank without exposing your network and you are totally unacustomed to professional SEO demands of having to rank sites at the top for most of your clients. I know it and you know it. Its kind of like the xrummer profile blasters a few years back. Don't know anything else but the .infos and putting some tired links to it that can't squeeze most to PR1 much less PR2 . newbies gave them testimonials for those killer profile links as well. So many of them are new to SEO they get excited over any serp. I mean seriously how many of them have anything to compare it to? on this board people are still claiming profile links are great. Kkchoon may soon be back in here claiming they are the the bomb if you want to rank.

but of course every SEO is just dying to build their rep on WF. Its as you know THE place where professional SEOs get clients :rolleyes: (seriously delusional) and you and I know you are the only way for them to build rep (literally LOL).

Transparent dodge yet again. Have good weekend man . Make sure you keep studying the site that Mike gave us. Sooner or later you just might figure out who worked on it doesn't matter a stack of figs - its still in the serp at the top where you can't go.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4691803].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

The truth is you would lose but I agree you wouldn't want to do it. You very well might lose customers. Perhaps I would duck and hide if I were you too but then I am not. and yeah a pile of your so called ranking (first page) ARE for weak tearms. I have seen them and someone even posted a weak old one that you advertised.

This is typical Mike Anthony idiocy. You jump to grand conclusions with the tiniest bit of information. We work on THOUSANDS of keywords.

You should look around more into the history of WSOs. Buyers have been known to go gaga for total garbage with pages long threads and mucho testimonials and like I said before testimonials are unreliable anyway.

They can be but in our case we have hundreds. At some point you have to realize that there just might be something to these testimonials.

Who knows how they came to be? Plenty of sellers even give incentives to get them (extra services, bonuses etc).

That isn't allowed here.

thats why everyone should show their proof in the serps and those who can't well can't offer real tangible proof - like yourself.

Mike, you haven't shown us ANYTHING you've done.

Sorry marc. You run and duck and come up with excuses because you wouldn't have a clue about how to rank without exposing your network and you are totally unacustomed to professional SEO demands of having to rank sites at the top for most of your clients. I know it and you know it.

You don't know anything, you are supremely uninformed.

Its kind of like the xrummer profile blasters a few years back. Don't know anything else but the .infos and putting some tired links to it that can't squeeze most to PR1 much less PR2 .

Our blogs are a portion of what we do.

newbies gave them testimonials for those killer profile links as well. So many of them are new to SEO they get excited over any serp. I mean seriously how many of them have anything to compare it to? on this board people are still claiming profile links are great. Kkchoon may soon be back in here claiming they are the the bomb if you want to rank.

You like to insult our clients but they buy over and over and over again because they get value from what we do for them. If you want to say hundreds of our testimonials are only from newbies who have no idea about what value is then that is on you. We still don't know anything about what you do, nothing.

but of course every SEO is just dying to build their rep on WF. Its as you know THE place where professional SEOs get clients :rolleyes: (seriously delusional) and you and I know you are the only way for them to build rep (literally LOL).

As it stands, you are a nobody here and I don't want to build your rep. I have the rep here and you don't.

Transparent dodge yet again. Have good weekend man . Make sure you keep studying the site that Mike gave us.

Listen, I hadn't realized before but I already knew the site. Figure it out.

Sooner or later you just might figure out who worked on it doesn't matter a stack of figs - its still in the serp at the top where you can't go.

I'm saying it does matter. :p Use your brain.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4692045].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

I could respond to you yet again in depth point for alleged point but what would be the purpose of getting into it further? You run away from every challenge like a scared puppy with various excuses for each , can't prove your points and think the only rep a person can have on this board is as a seller (understandable because the only thing you ever do in this section is try and sell your service.)

Do ANY SEO sellers know anything about SEO outside of blasting either with forum links or crap blog .info sites?? apparently not. Sell on to the newbies. I admit there are plenty of them every month but this is the SEo section. You have to prove your point in here. live with it . None of us want to expose our sites of course so thats why we show it in the serps (not our own). Its easy to do if you are not just full of sellers hot air. Almost any real principle can be shown in the serps.

Just two pointers (missed one previously) on an issue that hasn't been trashed to death.

Who knows how they came to be? Plenty of sellers even give incentives to get them (extra services, bonuses etc).

That isn't allowed here.

It happens all the time and I've seen it with my own eyes and communicated with people who do it. It may not be in the rules but its awfully hard for a mod to scrutinize every WSO. It is done and anyone who has been around with half a brain can see it. Many offer the incentive after you buy obviously. Like say an additional months of service or extra product etc.

Listen, I hadn't realized before but I already knew the site. Figure it out.

What you back to that tactic again? You tried that elsewhere,failed and you know where. Some guy used to use your service got nothing out of it said so openly and then months later when they did something else that made them rank you claim it was you. I'll leave it to Mike but oh wait. He already stated it was the quality links and HE knows when the site ranked and why because HE worked on it. That is a nice trick though. I give you credit for that subterfuge that makes you able to CLAIM success even when it isn't yours. You give no time limit on your services effect, people do other things and then months later you step in to imply some credit even when they have tossed up their hands and moved on to a more successful strategy.

cool beans - more ranking success that isn't even yours. sell on.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4692175].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I could respond to you yet again in depth point for alleged point but what would be the purpose of getting into it further? You run away from every challenge like a scared puppy with various excuses for each , can't prove your points and think the only rep a person can have on this board is as a seller (understandable because the only thing you ever do in this section is try and sell your service.)

Your first "test" is crap and the second one is something I have no interest in doing. I have nothing to gain by doing it, and you do. That's why I reject your challenge.

Do ANY SEO sellers know anything about SEO outside of blasting either with forum links or crap blog .info sites?? apparently not. Sell on to the newbies. I admit there are plenty of them every month but this is the SEo section. You have to prove your point in here. live with it .

And with this I'm officially finished with Mike Anthony.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4692201].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Your first "test" is crap and the second one is something I have no interest in doing. I have nothing to gain by doing it, and you do. .

You are right on the second since you could not have competed sufficiently in a top serp (have yet to see you in any truly competitive one I have scoped out even though as you know i have seen your network). If by some miracle you had decided to use different techniques however I might have had as much egg on my face as you.

the first "test" (your challenge not mine. I already did the analysis)? clueless until the end because you haven't studied serps and seen the increase in ratio to PR links to weak links in site that ranks as opposed to the ratio in sites that don't. I have tried to explain it too you several times but alas that wall is too thick. Perhaps one day since you claim it may be the low zero and N/a links that are the primary cause of the rankings we can see a .info network causing ranking at the top of google and not merely one that might have used it in the past given up on it and moved on to real authority links like the ones Mike said CAUSED the site he worked on to rank. Its that absence that tells the tale. Hint if you put n/as and zeros and the site doesn't rank and then you add authority links and it ranks any fool can figure out what made it rank.

I'll also enjoy the ignore. Its worked pretty Good for me with matt.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4693207].message }}

pjohn

13 years ago

Are you going to start SEO services and provide backlinks from these blogs?

Thanks

Signature

GPS Tracker | Car GPS

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4686665].message }}

Marc Lindsay

13 years ago

Hi Mike,

I dont need to take a challenge up to justify, we do this day in and day out and am always open to seeing things in a new light, and I should have said this.

In my current experience, accross hundreds of domains, both mine and for very high end corporate clients (usually performance based), this is what I have shown to be the most effective spend of a resource.... 1 for 1.

Now if you re-read and become aware now of a few more points in my post.

I did say that some very high authority links can go a very long way.

If you have, on hand, at your ready, very high authority links, that are just as easy to get, as opposed to lower quality links.....

Then absolutely you are correct, I would take those every day.

I break down every action into a point based system, on the effort required to gain those links.

So this is the experience I talk about.

When I refer to high authority links, I am referring to PR7's 8's and 9's and a very traditional way of garnering them (not through having your own network as such).

Hopefully this gives some further clarification.

If you have a network yourself of say, 4's 5's and 6's on hand and can easily provide links back with minimum time investment.....

PURE GOLD

Not only will they give big boosts, but they will strengthen the lower quality links in how long it takes for them to be picked up.

I hope that clarify's my post.

Marc

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4686842].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc Lindsay

Now if you re-read and become aware now of a few more points in my post.

I did say that some very high authority links can go a very long way

You are assuming I am not aware or haven't read. Yes I saw and read and am totally aware of your points - its just that your "Every time" equal resources statement is still false. You simply cannot speak for everyone and every technique which you did. I think you know deep down (or even openly seeing as how you say you do some corporate SEO work) that there are serps where you can't come in with an Article network heavy approach and expect to survive AT ALL. So I didn't claim to have a problem with all your points. I specified which one was terribly off. You made a very blanket statement. I think you know that so trust me - its not a matter of rereading.

If you have, on hand, at your ready, very high authority links, that are just as easy to get, as opposed to lower quality links.....

Then absolutely you are correct, I would take those every day

thats fair enough Marc. I can live with that statement except I don't see why it has to be either "very high" or what you are defining as easy. Compared to no quality links theres no reason I would have to get VERY high links. You specified equal resources and I indicated how I can multiply the effect of a $50 PR 3 bought domain. I don't need to counteract zeros and N/as with very high PR links. I don't see anywhere in the serps where people are really going after a term in a very competitive field and a bunch of PR zeros are killing sites with a generous helping of PR5s, PR4s and a bunch of other PR links. IF quantity can beat quality "every time" then show me. Its simply not credible because in discussions like this I have had no problem rolling off serps that show the effect of Quality over quantity.

Want one? Heres one I use all the time

backlinks - Google Search

Top two after Wikipedia have as much as 50 times Less links to the Xrummer guy at five and guess what - thats even with the xrummer guy utilizing High PR links as well.

And this isn't even close to being a top competitive term

thats one example and I can and have rolled out a bunch more without breaking a sweat. So whats happening to Quantity beating quality with equal resources every time? Or are we just assuming that every one at the top has more resources? Might be true some of the times but it isn't in many serps. Some just put better quality in and some just used their noggin (not resources) on how to get better links.

When I refer to high authority links, I am referring to PR7's 8's and 9's and a very traditional way of garnering them (not through having your own network as such).

Nope.. I have seen and rank sites without PR7s. Maybe you didn't read the thread closely but the person you were agreeing with cited a whole bunch of PR zeros and N/As. SO when we are talking about low quality its more accurate to consider it low low quality and frankly no quality with recycled every year .infos. again it does not take that - a PR 7-9 portfolio - to beat those links.

But I gather you are a bit more reasonable on this and probably just overspoke on that every time thing. If you do get to read the thread in detail you will see why I couldn't let that slide.

Mike, also I cant show my results to you because many clients have us sign an NDA, they dont like anyone knowing who does their SEO. Many of them do 7 figures am onth from their online business's so you can imagine why.

You misunderstood Marc. I haven't asked anyone to show their sites,customers or networks so don't even think to feel I was pressuring that. Totally understand. Thats where I live also. I'm just saying Google is sitting there with an endless supply of data that is mostly unrelated to our customer's sites.

Saying what either one of us does everyday or stating we can't show our customer's sites doesn't let any of us off the hook to back up what we claim. We can still show it in the serps. I can and have and you can do the same.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4687314].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Want one? Heres one I use all the time

backlinks - Google Search

Top two after Wikipedia have as much as 50 times Less links to the Xrummer guy at five and guess what - thats even with the xrummer guy utilizing High PR links as well.

If he has a ton of profile links then that's another argument ENTIRELY. Profile links aren't very effective anymore.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4687582].message }}

Marc Lindsay

13 years ago

Mike, also I cant show my results to you because many clients have us sign an NDA, they dont like anyone knowing who does their SEO. Many of them do 7 figures am onth from their online business's so you can imagine why.

I'd love to do another test challenge, we do them quite often to measure individual techniques.... Right now though I am a bit flat out with everything, though when its time again I think it would make a brilliant case study.

We've just finished one using AMA only as a link building technique and going very targeted on domain match and keywords.

Small example it was and will publish the result on our blog soon.

To say one method is "the best" in SEO would be very close minded and lead to a thread that is useless.

Instead, I would suggest everyone read over the major points and look at this in another way....

With the resources in this thread, how could you both get high authority links, at a cheap resource cost, on a consistant basis from maximum IP diversity as possible?

With SEO, I choose to always go with a breadth of link building techniques, so you spread the load on technique.

One may get devalued tomorrow, but your result will still stay strong if you look at a few very strong, tried and tested techniques.

Marc

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4686901].message }}

Marc Lindsay

13 years ago

@ Mike

Interesting....

Unless the specification of what we consider high quality, low quality when referencing links.

We will both be replying based on our own model of those meanings.

Which means this will go around and around in circles.

I didnt specify that it was entirely an article network either.

You are correct, i did not read the entire thread, though i commented on one statement which may give the impression I was agree'ing with everything previously said. Not so.

I never use just one method of link building.

For the record.... and its alot more than this but I'll simplify my definitions.

low quality: Pr 3 and below
high quality: pr4 and above

Of course then we can get into link age, domain age, and current rankings the domain has.... but for the purpose of this exercise thats how I would define it.

Xrumer links, profile links..... I dont even use them, not a long term method in my mind and I'm suprised they have become the "status quo" to me they are spam that has somehow been passed off as a legitimate method.

You certainly do not need massive PR links to make a movement, I think more or less we agree on the majority and if we were person to person we would align pretty quickly on what we actually both mean.

I agree.... I can show the same. TBH I just dont have the time right now.

I am constantly suprised though at how many very top competitive terms, are ranked mearly off article submission and directory submission as their major basis of links.

Reasonable, very much so, to cut off and think your model is the only way is ignorance and cuts you off from learning and evolving.

Thanks for clarifying, I'd say from what you have replied with, perhaps my vision of low quality, is closer to what you would call high quality or my scales need adjusting

PR 7's and 8's perhaps they are called.... Super Quality

All that being said, differetn strokes for different folks.

Would/could I use .info's for majority of my clients..... hell no

They would call it ****ty link building.

Does that mean they are not effective? Not specifically.

If one client wants to dominate and have 8 of his sites on the first page for his terms, and is willing to risk being penalized..... They are usually open to more on the line techniques.

Ultimately it depends on the site, the purpose and what you are willing to do.

The point here guys is that SEO can bring results in many different ways and to analyze all factors is near on impossible, sure we can see trends and make judgements on those trends.

Overall, I do see the vast majority of good ranking sites, with what I consider, the lower quality methods. (easy to gain links from networks, article directories and directories) though I should probably re-define what I classify those as.

To be honest some of the "high PR networks" around, i would define those as low quality as well because the link, although has PR..... is a freaking garbage site.

I've seen sites take HUGE jumps in rankings through some high PR links.... WHEN they have a great base of "foundation links", maybe thats what I'll re-define my "low quality" as.... Foundation links.

Perhaps we can keep this conversation constructive

heh.... for all those looking and going WTF..... I am not related in any way to Marc L, though our initials do match.

I actually had a friend contact me and ask if that was me posting, which it is not

Marc

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4687929].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc Lindsay

.

low quality: Pr 3 and below
high quality: pr4 and above

I get where you are coming from but thats not the context in this thread and we can't just change it now. We've already been talking about low quality links as PR n/as and zeros so in this context even a PR2 would be quality comparatively..

Xrumer links, profile links..... I dont even use them, not a long term method in my mind and I'm suprised they have become the "status quo" to me they are spam that has somehow been passed off as a legitimate method.

totally agreed

I am constantly suprised though at how many very top competitive terms, are ranked mearly off article submission and directory submission as their major basis of links.

IF the articles have PR then yes I would say there are some. Now directories. Yes indeed. I have seen those and I think people have gotten the entirely wrong idea about Directory links. Google from what I see is not able to identify all directories and put them in the same boat. Niche ones are still giving good kick.

Thanks for clarifying, I'd say from what you have replied with, perhaps my vision of low quality, is closer to what you would call high quality or my scales need adjusting

Maybe not but for this thread..........

Would/could I use .info's for majority of my clients..... hell no

They would call it ****ty link building.

oh oh. dem might be fighting words mister.

To be honest some of the "high PR networks" around, i would define those as low quality as well because the link, although has PR..... is a freaking garbage site.

Agreed but I can see with them a bit. If you are in the IM SEO niche and you have spent the cash people don't wast to pay a decent price for links so you pack it with ton loads of links to make it up in volume and then when you surround it with relevant content you have a hodgepodge of different content even in a single paragraph. I've been lucky so far to not have to do that. I sue extremely low OZBl and decent content on my top network but thats only used for business SEO clients who pay fairly well.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4688178].message }}

epathj

13 years ago

high quantity ALWAYS beats HIGH quality. Always has and always will. We have the proof to back it up too.

I think low quality and info domain do a little bit effect on your work

Thanks

Signature

Tablet-Pcuk | Best Cheap Android Tablets | Androidacc.com |Best Cheap Android Smart Phone

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4688098].message }}

bdavisx

13 years ago

Wow, another pissing match. Didn't see this coming...

Still, nuggets too be gleaned from each thread. I'm just too full from the popcorn at this point!!!

Thanks

Signature

Local Search and Marketing Strategies

Bloomington Landscaping

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4688185].message }}

Bramantya Prakosa

13 years ago

hahha i agree with kok choon here, using service like elite seolinkvine and others will save some huge amount of money,unless you will sell your service i think there's no big benefit to you..if it's just for your rankings,you will get it much bigger value from the blog network services..

Thanks

Signature

nice articles http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/1/prweb9121616.htm

www.seomachinepro.com/jv

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4688226].message }}

Clyde

13 years ago

20 years later and they're still arguing.

Seriously you guys just have too much time on your hands or something lol.

or is this some sort of marketing technique where two vendors just screw each other to gain hype? :p

I kid.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Generate Unlimited Number of Micro Niche Keywords, Multi-threaded EMD Finder PLUS More!

50% OFF WSO.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4692097].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Clyde

20 years later and they're still arguing.

Seriously you guys just have too much time on your hands or something lol.

or is this some sort of marketing technique where two vendors just screw each other to gain hype? :p

I kid.

LOL, you're right. He's on ignore now. I'm done, I have money to make.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4692233].message }}

jonkjonk

13 years ago

get a room guys. ffs.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4699967].message }}

michael scott

13 years ago

Marc_L,
I think you might be over-analyzing the make money online site's links. Mike Grant has stated that he's done some shifty domain redirects so I'd assume (haven't checked personally) they are high PR trusted domains being redirected that even most backlink checkers can detect.

I don't think it's really possible to find a highly competitive phrase that utilizes only high PR links. There's definitely going to be a mixture of random PR N/A links along with powerful PR links. A few social bookmarks here and a few PR N/A blog comments there. It's used to simulate a "popularity" for google to see. But if you think you can ever rank for big money phrases with only PR 0s and infos, then your chances of doing that is equivalent to the chances of the Republicans passing the American Jobs Act.

mattlaclear,
I've tried your private network services and while it's great to rank for lower to slightly medium keyword phrases, it's not going to do me good if I wanted to rank for highly competitive phrases in the serps. Also, I don't think it's a wise idea to flaunt your WF testimonials as a method to gain reputation if your reputation on the google serps are saying completely different. :confused:

I don't know what Mike Anthony does either but he's the type of guy that will find anything to argue with. Maybe he should've became a lawyer? But for SEO strategy, this man speaks the truth in many of his posts.

[ 2 ] Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4711755].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by michael scott

I don't know what Mike Anthony does either but he's the type of guy that will find anything to argue with. Maybe he should've became a lawyer? But for SEO strategy, this man speaks the truth in many of his posts.

argue about anything eh? I'll prove thats not the case. Point A.... Well.....

I cannot lie I have been told I would have made a great lawyer

but hey its a forum....

But Mat will disagree with you and cite you as a hobbyist because according to him his is the greatest seo service ever on the planet (ROFL and without a single top serp result for any ultra competitive terms

........

)

I think you might be over-analyzing the make money online site's links. Mike Grant has stated that he's done some shifty domain redirects so I'd assume (haven't checked personally) they are high PR trusted domains being redirected that even most backlink checkers can detect.

Mike's no dummy....he would not have put the site out there without some of his resources hidden. He as much as stated that but Marc didn't get it

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4711805].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

But Mat will disagree with you and cite you as a hobbyist because according to him his is the greatest seo service ever on the planet (ROFL and without a single top serp result for any ultra competitive terms

........

)

I remember Mike when you accused us of faking our testimonials because of the sheer amount we had. I have said it all along. But I'll say it again. If anyone thinks they pack more juice than we do lets compare testimonials.

By the way Mike. DO you know how many sales you bring in for us when you mention my name with stink on it?

Warriors come check our thread out to judge for themselves. So really I have to thank you for all the sales help you're doing for us. You're not an affiliate of ours are you? If so I have to remind you that WF forbids the pimping of affiliate links.

But are we the best? I have no idea. Have we grabbed more page one rankings than any other Warrior in the history of WF?

Hard to tell. But I promise you I will work tirelessly to make that a reality.

Catch me if you can mate. But I want to caution you the way to build up a successful business is to help as many folks as you can get to where they want to go.

It's not done sitting around bitching about your competition.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4715776].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

I remember Mike when you accused us of faking our testimonials because of the sheer amount we had

Your memory is like your SEO in the real competitive serps - pretty bad. I said people can fake testimonials and you and Marc took exception claiming that it was an accusation not a general statement of fact. Too bad I will say it again -

testimonials are easy to fake, joint venture and outright buy with add on incentives. Don't know whether you do or do not but it is a fact that everyone that has been around here KNOWS. No fault of the mods. Its impossible to entirely police.

By the way Mike. DO you know how many sales you bring in for us when you mention my name?

LOL. Maybe one day I will get the opportunity to bring your name up because theres many of us that would love the opportunity because that would mean you would be in a thread for the first time not pimping your services bringing it and your name up but sadly we never get the opportunity edge wise because there is not a thread you are in where you don't.

It's not done sitting around bitching about your competition.

Like I said man I like your sense of ambition but you are not my competitor. You work in the $99 dollar world I work in the $1000-5,000 per month business world where if a SEO professional even saw your .info Pr nowhere network ranking in their niche (Which would be like sighting a UFO) we could ban you to Siberia with a link spam report. You will always have more WSO testimonials because

A) I would concentrate on quality ranking top 3 rather than long tails at position ten because my goal is to make people money and thats where the real money is.
B) it takes you 200 customers to what my 2 clients over 30 days can make me.

So see? its the same old foolishness of trying to create some leverage for yourself based on your low quality SEO business model. Its a total nonsense criteria being made that everyone should do the same business model even though that model can't even present a single high competitive serp in which it ranks.

I build quality networks and have no intention of doing otherwise. Now if my students want to smoke you they have my blessings . To what they have learned already they can add a thousand .infos and smoke you easily- not hard at all.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4715950].message }}

Marc_L

13 years ago

Originally Posted by michael scott

Marc_L,
I think you might be over-analyzing the make money online site's links. Mike Grant has stated that he's done some shifty domain redirects so I'd assume (haven't checked personally) they are high PR trusted domains being redirected that even most backlink checkers can detect.

If Mike Grant is doing that and he's admitting it publicly then I wouldn't want to be his customer. Furthermore Mike Grant isn't doing all the SEO for that site, that much is certain so I have no idea how much credit he deserves for the ranking.

I don't think it's really possible to find a highly competitive phrase that utilizes only high PR links. There's definitely going to be a mixture of random PR N/A links along with powerful PR links. A few social bookmarks here and a few PR N/A blog comments there. It's used to simulate a "popularity" for google to see. But if you think you can ever rank for big money phrases with only PR 0s and infos, then your chances of doing that is equivalent to the chances of the Republicans passing the American Jobs Act.

Never claimed otherwise what you are doing is buying into Mike Anthony's strawman of my position.

mattlaclear,
I've tried your private network services and while it's great to rank for lower to slightly medium keyword phrases, it's not going to do me good if I wanted to rank for highly competitive phrases in the serps.

What would you call highly competitive phrases? Also do you expect to rank for "insurance" for 99 bucks?

Also, I don't think it's a wise idea to flaunt your WF testimonials as a method to gain reputation if your reputation on the google serps are saying completely different. :confused:

Where do you think those testimonials came from? Results in the serps.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4712459].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

If Mike Grant is doing that and he's admitting it publicly then I wouldn't want to be his customer.

There is nothing wrong with doing a 301 redirect. Go do some reading. Seems like you don't even know what a redirect is. Thats a clueless insinuation against Mike. Again you are showing you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about when you talk about SEO.

Furthermore Mike Grant isn't doing all the SEO for that site, that much is certain so I have no idea how much credit he deserves for the ranking.

More than you deserve for ranking half the long tail MFA low quality serps you allegedly rank ( position 6-10 isn't even really ranking). Sheeesh! really this is just poor form, a ugly attitude and being a lousy sport. If he worked on that site to bring it to the top position then he would deserve credit. Doesn't matter how many people worked on it before. It didn't rank under them but the links might be there. Its what links brought it to its position NOW at the top of the serp that counts.

nothing more than sour grapes.

Where do you think those testimonials came from? Results in the serps.

Forum profiles can give you results in the serps too.........for really weak keywords. Thats why you can't show even with thousands of PR zero links anywhere in the serps where anyone is ranking in a truly competitive serp using quantity over quality.

Stick in a niche where MFA and affiliate pages rule with weak links just don't pretend that a real SEO shouldn't get credit for a really competitive term .
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4712589].message }}

michael scott

13 years ago

If Mike Grant is doing that and he's admitting it publicly then I wouldn't want to be his customer. Furthermore Mike Grant isn't doing all the SEO for that site, that much is certain so I have no idea how much credit he deserves for the ranking.

I don't know who exactly works on the site but it's clear that the reason the site sits #1 is because of high pr links. Domain redirects are not bad actually. Sometimes if a company wants to change their site/brand name that's exactly what they will do.

Never claimed otherwise what you are doing is buying into Mike Anthony's strawman of my position.

Sorry but that comment was not directed towards anyone. It was just my philosophy on things.

What would you call highly competitive phrases? Also do you expect to rank for "insurance" for 99 bucks?

This is exaclty my point. Even if I bulk purchase the links from your network, it will get me only so far for big money keywords. In the end, I'd be spending alot more than what I'm trying to make. Not saying your services is completely ineffective, it'll do real well for my thin affiliate sites with weak serps but not highly competitive ones.

Where do you think those testimonials came from? Results in the serps.

This is where I'm confused. I always research before spending money on services and WF testimonials are always BS to me especially if theyre from the WSO section. But given my nature of curiosity to test things, I tried your service anyways.

Here's what I found in google from a quick glance as far as testimonials goes:

SeoTrafficServices.org Matt LaClear Complaints, Reviews - Black Hat Spammer

Scam Report - Matt Laclear Fraud Internet

Rip-off Report | seotrafficservices.org Matt LaClear | Complaint Review: 694911

These are just a few from page 1 and theres even more if you look deeper.

And then an attempt to push down those bad review links by using mass comment spam. Holy crap. This is one way to trash the serps. Whoever is managing that campaign should be fired for being sloppy and leaving that footprint.

http://www.google.com/search?q=matt+laclear+{scam|scammer|ripoff}&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US

fficial&client=firefox-a

I don't normally bash other people like that but I don't think it's appropriate to label yourselves kung fu experts at SEO and then execute those types of SEO strategies above. It's stuff like that that makes many people view SEO as a sketchy practice.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4712739].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

I'm more amazed by the xrummer blasts in the year 2011 from "seo experts". Wow looks like we have been talking about even lower quality than I thought. Talk about hobbyists.

Originally Posted by michael scott

Domain redirects are not bad actually. .

Not at all. The only issue is if you over do it and use just that.

Does anchor text carry through 301 redirects? ...

but hey if you don't know what they are then you can say anything :rolleyes:
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4712824].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Originally Posted by michael scott

I don't know who exactly works on the site but it's clear that the reason the site sits #1 is because of high pr links. Domain redirects are not bad actually. Sometimes if a company wants to change their site/brand name that's exactly what they will do.

Sorry but that comment was not directed towards anyone. It was just my philosophy on things.

This is exaclty my point. Even if I bulk purchase the links from your network, it will get me only so far for big money keywords. In the end, I'd be spending alot more than what I'm trying to make. Not saying your services is completely ineffective, it'll do real well for my thin affiliate sites with weak serps but not highly competitive ones.

This is where I'm confused. I always research before spending money on services and WF testimonials are always BS to me especially if theyre from the WSO section. But given my nature of curiosity to test things, I tried your service anyways.

Here's what I found in google from a quick glance as far as testimonials goes:

SeoTrafficServices.org Matt LaClear Complaints, Reviews - Black Hat Spammer

Scam Report - Matt Laclear Fraud Internet

Rip-off Report | seotrafficservices.org Matt LaClear | Complaint Review: 694911

These are just a few from page 1 and theres even more if you look deeper.

And then an attempt to push down those bad review links by using mass comment spam. Holy crap. This is one way to trash the serps. Whoever is managing that campaign should be fired for being sloppy and leaving that footprint.

http://www.google.com/search?q=matt+laclear+{scam|scammer|ripoff}&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US

fficial&client=firefox-a

I don't normally bash other people like that but I don't think it's appropriate to label yourselves kung fu experts at SEO and then execute those types of SEO strategies above. It's stuff like that that makes many people view SEO as a sketchy practice.

Let me help you with some math pal. One customer posted those complaints after we refused to refund his money after we delivered his links. So you just found evidence left by that one guy. Absolutely brilliant detective work if you ask me.

Now take that one complainer and compare it to our sea of testimonials. Unbelievable man.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4715703].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Now take that one complainer and compare it to our sea of testimonials. Unbelievable man.

Absolutely false. Google shows much more than that guy and you yourself are aware of people who did not like your service over on other forums - MULTIPLE. This is not about bashing you Matt it is the natural extension of you attempting to use WSO testimonials as the proof of everything SEO and in particular this thread. If you do that then there is absolutely no reason to limit it to the ones you want to show on your sales thread. A WSO thread is paid for by the seller and so there rightfully are more controls on it. However on the Internet and other forums people are not limited at all.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4715786].message }}

mattlaclear

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Absolutely false. Google shows much more than that guy and you yourself are aware of people who did not like your service over on other forums - MULTIPLE. This is not about bashing you Matt it is the natural extension of you attempting to use WSO testimonials as the proof of everything SEO and in particular this thread. If you do that then there is absolutely no reason to limit it to the ones you want to show on your sales thread. A WSO thread is paid for by the seller and so there rightfully are more controls on it. However on the Internet and other forums people are not limited at all.

Every quarter or so someone threatens to throw stink on us if we do not immediately refund their money. I'm not much on responding to threats other than telling them to jam it. From the looks of it it seems a few of those terrorists have found one another on the complaint forums. If you hurry I'm sure you can join them in their bashing.

Thanks

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4715813].message }}

BrentR

13 years ago

Originally Posted by ebizman

Hey,

I'm looking to setup a private blog network and I've been reading on the forum people setting it up with .info domains. My question...if I register 100 .info domains and and build links from that network. If I let all domains expire will my sites lose those backlinks?

because i've seen .info domains are cheap when you register them first them but after renewal the price jumps.

Any feedback from SEO experts would be nice. If anyone has a PDF guide on setting up a private blog network that would be nice too.

Thanks!

Sounds like a horrible idea. You would NEVER want to launch a blog network, incurr hosting charges, private IP's, and content generation only to realize your new domains are HORRIBLE for driving rankings.

Domain expiring, auctions, and community forums will show you how to find reasonably priced domains with preserved link profiles. Well, the preservation of the link profile comes down to your timeliness and site consistency.

ps. I know I ignored the last 6 pages of comments, was hoping to get this thread back on course

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Rel="punctual"

Changing the Game - 2011

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4738157].message }}

MikeFriedman 13 years ago

Something I have always wanted to try, but never tested...

Has anyone used the "noindex, dofollow" statement in their robots.txt file for their network?

Supposedly, Google does not devalue these links in any way (according to Google), but I do not totally see why they don't.

What reason would someone have to want a site to NOT be indexed, but to still count all the page's links other than doing something a little shifty?

I would think that would be an obvious red flag to Google, but maybe not.

Has anyone tried this?
- Thanks
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4738240].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Fair enough. Look bottom line. The idea that you are going to build 100 infos and rank all your sites with them is flat our ridiculous.

There is NO network out there now ranking (read first page placement that may or may not get you any traffic to speak of) sites on that many .infos. the only network people have read about in this thread that utilizes .infos utilizes THOUSANDS of them AND by all admissions backlinks them as well.

Read that

THOUSANDS. SO just to begin to compare you would need at least say one thousand which is going to run you $2,000 right there . Then you need to host them. If you even stick 10 on an IP you are going to need a hundred IPS so thats another hundred+ a month and then you are probably going to have to get some VPS systems just to push that content out.

after all that you will still be operating at less than a quarter of the strength of the .info network you are trying to copy.

Then you are going to have to populate those domains.

Monetization techniques?

Besides trying to rank your sites the only thing you will be able to TRY and do is do a first page placement service. Your network will be of no value for people who buy or rent links. If you had taken the money and got some PR 3 and 4s even some 2s you could rent and sell links and get back more money to build out your network even larger without having to go all out of your own pocket.

Finally when it is all said and done and you decide you want to go after a really competitive serp IF you rank top three ( big if since in this entire thread NO ONE has shown that kind of network ranking top three in a truly competitive serp) then all your competitor has to do is drop a spam report to Google who seeing that your site is propped up by a bunch of PR0 .infos with gibberish content (how can it be otherwise since you had to populate a thousand sites with content?) will very well ban your site to oblivion or wipe out a huge segment of your network EASILY.

Not trying to start back up a war or words but I think its pretty obvious that anyone telling you to buy a bunch of .infos KNOWS that you are not going to be in a position to buy 5,000 .infos. The only viable model is one that actually works even better and that is to build a high Pr network. You can get going with that for less than $500, build it out over time, rent it out so that it can provide some cash to build it larger and larger and at the same time get the kinds of links that can rank your sites in almost any serp when combined with a number of other free techniques.

It is an absolute NO brainer on every level to buy aged domains and build a high Pr network over a bunch of .infos.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4738420].message }}

bhuff85

13 years ago

I'm going to jump in with a few questions that should hopefully get us back on the topic of setting up private blog networks, rather than bickering over 6 pages about who is right and who is wrong.

I've always been curious about setting up a private blog network of my own (just a small network of possibly 25 to 50 sites with various PR), but had a couple questions:

1) Does each domain need to be on its own C-Class IP or can you have a few of them per each C-Class IP. If you have more than one, does that risk leaving a possible footprint?

2) Do you guys use any software to easily submit content to each blog on your network?

3) Are you placing links within content, on blogrolls or both?

4) How are you keeping up the integrity and quality of each site? Are you constantly building links to them in order to retain (and possibly gain) PR?

Hopefully we can get this train back on the tracks

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want to speed up your writing and save time?
This book will show you how:
--> Write Fast: 21 Powerful Ways to Cut Your Writing Time in Half! <--

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4770042].message }}

Mike Anthony

13 years ago

Originally Posted by bhuff85

I'm going to jump in with a few questions that should hopefully get us back on the topic of setting up private blog networks, rather than bickering over 6 pages about who is right and who is wrong.

Most people have been fair enough to recognize that even with some very hot disagreements and yes a good amount of bickering an incredible amount of information has been dropped in this thread by BOTH SIDES. I really don't see how mischaracterizing the entire six pages as bickering does anything to really help the thread. its kind of bickering about bickering.

Frankly I am bored with it. I really don't see anyone spilling all the beans in an open forum. This is the second thread chocked filled with more information that is in most threads. Matt and Marc have said they won't be sharing everything about their networks and on that we agree totally. We've shared enough in this thread for a nice priced WSO already. Quite a bit of it has actually been detrimental to share regardless of which side of the issues you are on. Just creates more competition and/or even drives up prices in the domain aftermarket.

Not taking the time to express any appreciation for the free information already given doesn't (to me at least) really help.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4770662].message }}

bhuff85

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Most people have been fair enough to recognize that even with some very hot disagreements and yes a good amount of bickering an incredible amount of information has been dropped in this thread by BOTH SIDES. I really don't see how mischaracterizing the entire six pages as bickering does anything to really help the thread. its kind of bickering about bickering.

Frankly I am bored with it. I really don't see anyone spilling all the beans in an open forum. This is the second thread chocked filled with more information that is in most threads. Matt and Marc have said they won't be sharing everything about their networks and on that we agree totally. We've shared enough in this thread for a nice priced WSO already. Quite a bit of it has actually been detrimental to share regardless of which side of the issues you are on. Just creates more competition and/or even drives up prices in the domain aftermarket.

Not taking the time to express any appreciation for the free information already given doesn't (to me at least) really help.

Understandable. I figured the questions were in-line with what was already being discussed. I never said I didn't appreciate the information already given out (as I spent well over an hour reading through all of the pages). More or less, I was just looking for further clarification on a couple things that were touched on at one time or another during the discussion, but apparently I must have hit the wrong nerve with you today.

In other words, a simple "I'd personally rather not discuss what I do" would've sufficed just fine.

Either way, I'll get it figured out, as I'm looking to use this for my own benefit for websites I own. Would much rather spend the money to develop a strong link network, rather than continue to throw money at other private networks each month.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Want to speed up your writing and save time?
This book will show you how:
--> Write Fast: 21 Powerful Ways to Cut Your Writing Time in Half! <--

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4771220].message }}

Mike Anthony 13 years ago

Originally Posted by bhuff85

In other words, a simple "I'd personally rather not discuss what I do" would've sufficed just fine.

No I am saying that I already have shared that and so have others and an actual declaration of some appreciation for that would have been nice. Its been a very informative thread and its really not pleasant to have it all characterized only as bickering when you have put a lot out there that many wouldn't put out at all (and again that goes for both sides). I however do sincerely wish you the best with your network.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4771333].message }}

MikeFriedman

13 years ago

Originally Posted by bhuff85

Either way, I'll get it figured out, as I'm looking to use this for my own benefit for websites I own. Would much rather spend the money to develop a strong link network, rather than continue to throw money at other private networks each month.

Actually, I would do both.

I use other people's networks all the time along with my own.

I don't use the same networks for every site I work on. The footprint would be pretty obvious to anyone smart enough to know what to look for.

Incorporating other networks makes it easier to add some variety.

Plus, if for any reason your network ever got hit, you probably wouldn't completely lose your rankings. And vice-versa. If someone else's network gets taken down, my whole backlink profile is not gone.

I have no reason to believe this would happen, but I am overly cautious.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4771429].message }}

Chris Sweeney 13 years ago

Here's my question. I recently bought 2 expired PR3s and a PR4. I got them all set up with links to my money sites. Does it take a certain amount of time for Google to start crediting my money sites with the high PR link juice? I see that Google has indeed crawled and indexed the new sites, since they were just parked GoDaddy pages in the index before. So does Google see a PR3+ link and say something like:

"Ok, this may be a spam comment or something, so let's give it, say, 7 days to see if the link gets deleted by a moderator. If the link is still here after the 7th day, then we'll start to let the juice flow completely"...?

Or, on the other hand, are SERP improvements from links from high PR pages usually pretty fast?
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4773101].message }}
- Mike Anthony 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Chris Sweeney
  
  Or, on the other hand, are SERP improvements from links from high PR pages usually pretty fast?
  
  Hey Chris
  
  Depends on the serp and where you were in the serps. I have clients that shoot right up with a few PR 3 links even to number one and others that take their time. Although it is niche related I have noticed a parallel between sites with good on page and bumping up a bit faster. The only site I saw no great change for was a site that was nothing more than content scraped from another site. When I finally was given complete control to build out content the owner wanted instant results even though the site had been just rebuilt and several of the pages were all new. Only site I had to walk away from without mission accomplished
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4773301].message }}

natewc

13 years ago

Hi guys, several of you have talked about setting up private namservers for each unique IP.

I just signed up with turnkey who don't provide a unique NS for each IP and I'm having a heck of time trying to figure out how to setup my own NS's.

Could anyone point me in the right direction? Maybe to a resource on the net.

Thanks,

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4821830].message }}

Chris Sweeney

13 years ago

I got a question too regarding my high PR homepage backlink sites. I'm trying to get them and their links crawled faster, for I lack patience. For me, bookmarking things always made them get crawled super-fast. But I'm afraid to bookmark them and have someone see them and report them. Should I be worrying about this or should I just go ahead and bookmark them? I want my juice and I want it now.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4823870].message }}

JackPowers

13 years ago

Interesting thread for once, although you have to read between to learn. Setting up a blog network and managing it definitely is not a beginners game.

My take on the quantity vs quality debate is perhaps a bit more nuanced. Let me put it like this to begin with:

1000 .info links with no/few links to domains and on same IP = close to worthless
1000 .info links with ongoing linkbuilding to domains on unique IPs = valuable
100 PR 3-5 links on unique IPs = $$$ in the bank

Another little thing that most of the low quality proponents seem to ignore is the link velocity factor. Once you go down that road where you are building low quality links all over the place, you really have to keep on building cause those links will eventually move of the front page, get deindexed, lose value etc., which means your site will bounce all over the place in a tango with Google. Use this kind of linkbuilding on a new domain and it will almost certainly get flagged and sink for some time. This is when most newbs/business owners get really scared and stop linkbuilding which just confirms for Google that you are spamming. Of course, if you continued to spam AMA, UAW etc your site will eventually come back and do ok, but I prefer not to spend my time polluting the net with yet another crappy piece of 'content'.

On the other hand, on the smaller high page rank network, the longer these links stay, the longer the links to my high page rank networks stays, the more Google will trust my money sites. It's amazing how many sites are ranking in less competetive niches with just a few old DMOZ/Google directory links.

IP diversity is certainly a factor, much more so than domain diversity. I would much rater take one PR6 link than 1000 PR0 links.

Now, in creating my new network I will certainly have some new domains, which I will backlink using various automated means, but these will only be used for diversity purposes.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4919633].message }}

MikeFriedman 12 years ago

Originally Posted by JackPowers

IP diversity is certainly a factor, much more so than domain diversity. I would much rater take one PR6 link than 1000 PR0 links.

Nice to see when someone gets it.
- Thanks
Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4921305].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

This thread doesn't seem to die (which isn't a bad thing necessarily). Just got another PM (get a few every week) and checked in here. To answer your point Jack - Those new domains can be built into High PR ones quite easily by utilizing your higher PR sites. So you CAN use them for more than diversity.

Originally Posted by JackPowers

Now, in creating my new network I will certainly have some new domains, which I will backlink using various automated means, but these will only be used for diversity purposes.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4988590].message }}

dout

12 years ago

Can anyone recommend some good software to manage a private blog network?

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5045601].message }}

dburk

12 years ago

Originally Posted by dout

Can anyone recommend some good software to manage a private blog network?

Take a look at Windows Live Writer. it supports most blog platforms and makes it easy to manage multiple blogs, it's free and supports plugins so you can choose from the many currently available plugins, or develop your own if you have needs beyond the options already available.

For those who are not already aware of this, Wordpress has multisite support built-in since version 3.0 It makes setting up and managing a blog network a breeze.

Create A Network « WordPress Codex

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

* Get Results - Outsource Your PPC Management |
* Don Burk Advertising & Marketing - www.donburk.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5045876].message }}

dout

12 years ago

Originally Posted by dburk

Take a look at Windows Live Writer. it supports most blog platforms and makes it easy to manage multiple blogs, it's free and supports plugins so you can choose from the many currently available plugins, or develop your own if you have needs beyond the options already available.

For those who are not already aware of this, Wordpress has multisite support built-in since version 3.0 It makes setting up and managing a blog network a breeze.

Thanks! I will check it out.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5046643].message }}

Mike Anthony 12 years ago

Originally Posted by dout

Thanks! I will check it out.

Dout. You can do with something much more robust than that . Live writer is limited to what you want to do with a network. although there are some tools that do alot more than content bare minimum would probably be something like Spinchimp which is pretty cheap. Some say AMR but I found it to be a mess and cumbersome to work with
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5056680].message }}

Fraggler 12 years ago

Originally Posted by dout

Can anyone recommend some good software to manage a private blog network?

Link Farm Evolution does a good job.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

- Stop Wasting Time & Money on Traffic!
- You Can't Improve What You Don't Measure
- Why You Should Create Separate Desktop and Mobile Google Adwords Campaigns
Connect with me on LinkedIn
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5065735].message }}
- Marc_L 12 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Fraggler
  
  Link Farm Evolution does a good job.
  
  LFE is great at managing a bunch of blogs, agreed.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5066098].message }}

Goath

12 years ago

If you build Wordpress blogs there is some software which gives you the ability to manage all your blogs from one place. (it's a plugin, search for it don't know anymore it calls)

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5045656].message }}

MaverickUK

12 years ago

Having sifted through the thread, I didn't find any of the valuable information that you said could be compiled in to a WSO Mike. I could have missed it somehow, but I really can't seem to find it - I'm interested in settin up my own network, so this information would be handy (and no, I'm not being sarcastic).

I also think you're totally dismissing the use of low quality backlinks Mike, for whatever reason. Whatever may seem low quality to you could potentially be high quality to a potential customer of Leclear's (who I may add is a bit of a rude prat).

Let's say these people are wanting to rank for XYZ coffee machine in Google, I have full confidence that these 'low quality' backlinks you speak of can help people achieve these rankings and in the end potentially make the client back more money than they paid for the service.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5059690].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MaverickUK

I also think you're totally dismissing the use of low quality backlinks Mike, for whatever reason. Whatever may seem low quality to you could potentially be high quality to a potential customer of Leclear's (who I may add is a bit of a rude prat).

Let's say these people are wanting to rank for XYZ coffee machine in Google, I have full confidence that these 'low quality' backlinks you speak of can help people achieve these rankings and in the end potentially make the client back more money than they paid for the service.

There isn't a network out there that can rank for super competitive keywords on it's own. Sure, 500 PR 5 links (page not domain) would be great but it also doesn't look natural to have only these links.

It takes a variety of kinds of links, you can look at any serp with any value and see that the top of the page one is filled with sites that have PR 0-7 links pointing towards it.

An example was brought up in the thread a real "gotcha" moment. Turns out that there were other SEOs working on the site (raises hand). Low PR bulk loses and high PR "quality" wins by default it seems. :rolleyes:

I'm not going to get into which way is "best" because that's useless and has been done in this thread; there are all sorts of ways to get the results you want.

Moral of the thread?

Shut up and build links, links from all kinds of sources with all kinds of PR.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5059769].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

There isn't a network out there that can rank for super competitive keywords on it's own. Sure, 500 PR 5 links (page not domain) would be great but it also doesn't look natural to have only these links.

Pure and UTTER nonsense. Sheesh Marc really this high PR network thing is really baffling to you. I'd point you to some networks and some rankings but every thread that has happened in has been locked for the good reason that it compromises the sites and networks in question. Your statement above demonstrates a substantial lack of a clue.

Why would a network with 500 PR5 pages have to have only PR5 page links?????? Ever heard of creating a new page?

Grief. IF you have a 500 PR 5 network who doesn't know that you would have the opportunity within that network to have all kinds of pages with various PR? Even with blog rolls and blog comments if you wanted. Want forum links stikc a forum on it and add navigation. Boom different PR Forum links available. A sufficiently large network can simulate ANY kind of backlink and with PR for N/A to PR5 or more. What you just wrote is total bunk to anyone who knows anything about building websites with new pages and navigation.

There are plenty of networks that you will never know because they operate only for higher paying SEO clients. Totally false statements.

An example was brought up in the thread a real "gotcha" moment. Turns out that there were other SEOs working on the site (raises hand).

Wrong. your services did not rank the site. Your services FAILED to rank the site and then other things were done to it. this is a recurring theme in your sales tactics that has been called out on places like backlink forums where you got blasted pretty hard for that distortion. You consistently take credit for sites where you did not help to rank and then the people gave up on your services and did something else to rank. If you want to claim that isn't something that has been brought up I am really handy with the link.

Just because you deliberately have no deadline for you guarantee and can have someone buy your services long ago to no effect doesn't make you able to claim you had anything to do with ranking them long after your service proved to be useless. Mike Grant has already indicated how the sites got there. He is one of the guys that had you in his rear view mirror when he finally ranked the site. Don't fib on Mike or try to take any credit for his work. Thats really quite unethical.

I've had customers come to me who couldn't crack the top with their low quality forum links and then I got my networks to rank them within weeks. OH oh I guess it was the forum links that got them there. LOL. Sorry if you can't rank the site and then someone else does the credit is all theres not yours.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5060094].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Pure and UTTER nonsense. Sheesh Marc really this high PR network thing is really baffling to you. I'd point you to some networks and some rankings but every thread that has happened in has been locked for the good reason that it compromises the sites and networks in question. Your statement above demonstrates a substantial lack of a clue.

Show me something where a site is ranked highly for a competitive SERP with only PR sites. If it is utter nonsense then this should be easy to find.

I think variety has such a huge part to play.

Why would a network with 500 PR5 pages have to have only PR5 page links?????? Ever heard of creating a new page?

Mike, it was just an illustration. Point being that having only PR sites (of any PR value) is not natural. Look at ANY serp and you can see this time and time again.

Grief. IF you have a 500 PR 5 network who doesn't know that you would have the opportunity within that network to have all kinds of pages with various PR? Even with blog rolls and blog comments if you wanted. Want forum links stikc a forum on it and add navigation. Boom different PR Forum links available. A sufficiently large network can simulate ANY kind of backlink and with PR for N/A to PR5 or more. What you just wrote is total bunk to anyone who knows anything about building websites with new pages and navigation.

Mike, seriously, this is not my point. Of course you can make new pages and of course PR distributes throughout the page by varying levels. Of course of course. All I was saying is that having only PR links isn't natural, period. I retract the 500 PR 5 links statement, it was just a silly exaggerated example that you jumped all over by taking it literally.

Wrong. your services did not rank the site. Your services FAILED to rank the site and then other things were done to it.

Mike, you have zero evidence to make this claim. Please produce it or retract it. However, this is part of the point of my assertions. It takes all kinds of links.

this is a recurring theme in your sales tactics that has been called out on places like backlink forums where you got blasted pretty hard for that distortion.

LOL, "recurring"? Mike, I'm not sure you read that thread very well. A customer making a claim does not mean it is 100% true. Time and time again some customers exaggerate the situation and you take it as gospel because, hell I don't know why, and totally discount any explanation out of hand.

You consistently take credit for sites where you did not help to rank and then the people gave up on your services and did something else to rank.

Prove it.

If you want to claim that isn't something that has been brought up I am really handy with the link.

You'd need to define "consistently" as well Mike. 1 or 2 times doesn't cut the mustard. If you had any idea the volume of customers we've had you'd be shocked that more people aren't complaining if what you are saying is true. (hint - it isn't true)

Just because you deliberately have no deadline for you guarantee and can have someone buy your services long ago to no effect doesn't make you able to claim you had anything to do with ranking them long after your service proved to be useless.

You run your mouth too much while having too little information. Do you have any idea what the site owner bought from us? Do we only sell guaranteed rankings? Do we offer a guaranteed 1st spot ranking service? Hmmmm, maybe he bought something else from us? How would you know? You couldn't know, but you assumed all over this post. If you answer "I don't know" to any of those questions then you are making baseless assertion and you should admit it.

Mike Grant has already indicated how the sites got there. He is one fo the guys that had you in his rear view mirror when he finally ranked the site. Don't fib on Mike or try to take credit for his work.

I'm NOT doing this, Mike. I don't need to take credit for his ranking.

I'm pointing out that the site owner has the variety of links that I think are important for ranking for competitive keywords. When I loaded his site in ahref.com I saw one of our blogs as the backlink on the top of the list. (before you jump all over me on this one too I am not saying its his best backlink)

I've had customers come to me who couldn't crack the top with their low quality forum links and then I got my networks to rank them within weeks. OH oh I guess it was the forum links that got them there. LOL.

I really don't know why you are so combative towards me. Hell, I agree with a lot of what you say I just don't agree that "low quality" links are worthless (or close to it). Forum links are beside the point, I'm not talking about those.

You're debating like I'm attacking your religion man, relax.:p

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5060309].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Show me something where a site is ranked highly for a competitive SERP with only PR sites. If it is utter nonsense then this should be easy to find.

already did. I am thinking of one right now that kills a SEO term with a killer network but I can't point to it. Like I said - in multiple threads outing networks has been forbidden and locked. Mods do not want it and with good reason. Can't do it. Besides I already indicated how its utter nonsense even beyond that. Why do I need to explain it to you again? a sufficiently large network can create any kind of backlink. If you don't understand how that works then you need to do some reading on Pagerank and how it is distributed through proper navigation. Your point is dead. Any Network of sufficient size can create PR pages of varies PR by creating a link and adding navigation.

All I was saying is that having only PR links isn't natural, period

Marc you said that within the context of arguing that no network by itself can rank a site for a competitive term which is wrong for all the reasons I cited. It doesn't matter what you retracted. It doesn't require 500 pages. A network with 100 PR 5 pages can do the same. You are deliberately distorting the clear advantages and versatility of a High PR network and for rather obvious reasons. You don't run one and herald the quantity approach

As for all the rest of your stuff I'll skip it because people have had enough of our backing and forth in this thread except to say I owe you no retraction and you will receive none. I also owe you no taking of your word over what others have said about their own rankings. The recurring thing stands. I've seen it more than two times despite your claims.

Mike was in this thread and he is One of the SEOs that ranked that site and he completely disagreed with your approach to SEO in regardto networks. He clearly indicated that it was the quality over the quantity that got him to rank that site. His word for it stands not a bystander in the past that did not rank that site.

Why are we so combatitive towards each other? I really don't think its personal. Seriously. I know nothing of you outside of this forum. Our approach to things is like water and oil I suppose I really do find it unethical to try and imply that you have some credit where you don't and the "raising" of your hand as one of the SEOs was CLEARLY an attempt to take some. SO truthfully I think we disagree on principle. To me the team that ranks a site gets that claim not the team that didn't rank it in the past. To me you don't get to say any customer that honestly states their opinion about your approach not working for them is to be disbelieved because you like to squelch people wherever you can unless its a testimonial you like. To me you can't just come in dismissing tried and proven realities like High PR quality trumps low quality. especially now after various Panda changes.

Its all different principles. Thats it

Now lets let the thread get back to SEO networks.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5060548].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

already did. I am thinking of one right now that kills a SEO term with a killer network but I can't point to it. Like I said - in multiple threads outing networks has been forbidden and locked.

Oh, I wouldn't want you to out any network. I haven't seen any site with only PR backlinks which ranks for a competitive term.

Mods do not want it and with good reason. Can't do it. Besides I already indicated how its utter nonsense even beyond that. Why do I need to explain it to you again? a sufficiently large network can create any kind of backlink. If you don't understand how that works then you need to do some reading on Pagerank and how it is distributed through proper navigation. Your point is dead. Any Network of sufficient size can create PR pages of varies PR by creating a link and adding navigation.

I understand this and I told you this already so its bad form to accuse me again. However your comments above seem to hint that you agree that a varied PR link portfolio is the way to go, which has been my point.

Marc you said that within the context of arguing that no network by itself can rank a site for a competitive term which is wrong for all the reasons I cited.

I guess we'll have to take your word for it.

It doesn't matter what you retracted.

It sorta does because you misconstrued what I was saying and you repeated it here in this post by insinuating that I didn't know how PR distributes throughout a site. I retracted it to get you to focus on my point and not on a misunderstanding.

It doesn't require 500 pages. A network with 100 PR 5 pages can do the same. You are deliberately distorting the clear advantages and versatility of a High PR network and for rather obvious reasons. You don't run one and herald the quantity approach

For us the high PR network wouldn't work out logistically. The point (and I'm repeating myself) is that you need all kinds of links to rank for competitive search phrases.

As for all the rest of your stuff I'll skip it because people have had enough of our backing and forth in this thread except to say I owe you no retraction and you will receive none.

Sure, baseless assertion is the way you roll lol. You made claims that you have no ability to verify and are thus talking out of your rear.

I also owe you no taking of your word over what others have said about their own rankings.

No but you dismiss my claims out of hand and accept detractors like they are speaking the irrefutable gospel truth.

The recurring thing stands. I've seen it more than two times despite your claims.

Do you know how many customers we have worked with? Hell I'll give you 20 people making those claims and I'll just say the percentages would still be extremely low. You don't have enough data points to make intelligent reasonable guesses. You make claims about us continually with little evidence which clearly shows your bias.

Mike was in this thread and he is One of the SEOs that ranked that site and he completely disagreed with your approach to SEO in regardto networks. He clearly indicated that it was the quality over the quantity that got him to rank that site. His word for it stands not a bystander in the past that did not rank that site.

Irrelevant, Mike's statements are his opinions (as yours are yours and mine are mine) and they are not evidence that you are correct. You'd have to assume he was correct based upon your opinion and assertion that he is correct.:confused::confused:

Mike also claims to have used xrumer links which shows that he agreed that diversity is important plus we have no idea what Mike's role was in working on that site. Did he do some of his WSO link building on it? We just don't know what he did. The only thing we do know is Mike and I made claims that we worked on the site. You don't know what he did and you don't know what we did so any claims that Mike ranked the site and we had no impact is 100% unmitigated baseless assertion. Those are facts.

Why are we so combatitive towards each other? I really don't think its personal. Seriously. I know nothing of you outside of this forum. Our approach to things is like water and oil I suppose I really do find it unethical to try and imply that you have some credit where you don't and the "raising" of your hand as one of the SEOs was CLEARLY an attempt to take some.

Your assumption that we had no role is your opinion and it is not a fact. Plus, I don't need to take credit, I'm more interested in keeping the site owner happy and we are over and over and over again. I'll take his/her appreciation over the readers and yours any day.

SO truthfully I think we disagree on principle. To me the team that ranks a site gets that claim not the team that didn't rank it in the past.

How do you know what you are assuming here? How do you know anything about this person's SEO purchases? You assume, first, that I was trying to take credit and secondly you assume that we played no role in the rankings he has achieved when he/she keeps buying from us over and over. Also my argument wasn't that I'm right because we ranked this site the argument is you need many forms of backlinks, period.

To me you don't get to say any customer that honestly states their opinion about your approach not working for them is to be disbelieved because you like to squelch people wherever you can unless its a testimonial you like.

No but a fair minded person would allow somebody who has a claim made against them to answer the charges. There are two sides to every story. But the important thing to consider is that sometimes ranking a site takes longer than we'd like and people get impatient, which is fine. But you can't take a handful of cases and claim that there is some kind of pattern with our service especially since we work with thousands of clients.

Maybe the people who complain are a small minority? I'm not sure if you've ever worked with the number of transactions we are talking about but there are always a percentage of unhappy customers no matter what you do.

To me you can't just come in dismissing tried and proven realities like High PR quality trumps low quality. especially now after various Panda changes.

I'm not doing this Mike, your approach is focused on one side more than the other while mine exactly flips the scales. Both of the approaches work.

Its all different principles. Thats it

Now lets let the thread get back to SEO networks.

Well, I can't just let those misrepresentations you made about our business sit. I'll answer them wherever they are made.

You really should make sure you know all the facts before you make claims against another business. A business that clothes, shelters and feeds our kids based upon us working our tails off for our clients. There is no pattern of customers being unhappy with our services. We work with or have worked with over 15,000 keywords and you find a few people complaining and you assert that there is a pattern of us not delivering? Of course some aren't going to be happy but they are a small minority and this should be noted the next time you want to say we fail our customers.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5060860].message }}

Mike Anthony 12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

However your comments above seem to hint that you agree that a varied PR link portfolio is the way to go, which has been my point.

No marc I don't agree with you. I just preferred to focus on the hopelessness of your position even if we needed to buy your premise. Want me to blow that up as well I will.

It sounds reasonable until you look at it in the real world and then you realize how silly it is. Lets say a site ONLY :rolleyes: had links from Wikipedia, Cnn, Abc news, Discover, Adobe, Micrososoft, Amazon, New york times, Consumer reports, Wall street journal, the home pages of 600 more news sites, the top 50 retail sites and 200 government sites. lets throw in a hundred more sites from the fortune 500 all High PR pages

So you are telling me that because a few sites equivalent to my grandmas new five day old blog doesn't link to them they will not rank? Thats crazy , whack, evidenceless and totally contradictory. Why contradictory?

Well think for a second. When Google gives your page a PR N/A and won't even give you a zero much less a 1 what are they really saying? Their saying for this site in terms of links you don't even make the grade to be put on the scale yet. SO they are going to not rank a site because it only has links from sites that have made the grade? . You got any proof on that? Any evidence or even common sense rational for the fourth shooter on the grassy knoll? Because last time I checked before you were insisting on wanting to be shown sites ranking on other networks you won't show not one high ranking term in a competitive serp that your network does rank for. Which is why regardless of mod action you were out of line to ask anyone for any network proof to begin with.

Forget your network like I said I can understand that but you can't show a even half way competitive serp unrelated to your network where any portfolio of .info N/As and zeros ranks a sited in a decent serp. You can only wave your hand and claim its so WITHOUT SHOWING A SINGLE SERP that isn't hid behind customer confidentiality. No? then finally - show it in the serps

So the average site will end up getting links just by sheer ratio of statistics from PR zero and N/A links? So what? you think thats a basis for your theory. Thats poor logic. Thats like saying the President of the Unites states gets rep because he has a twitter account. Its incidental based on statistical usage. Yes invariably if you are getting traffic and rising in the serps you will get links from lower quality pages. It expresses no causality. Get a real SEO theory. This is something that a lot of low quality sellers are using to keep their sales up post panda. It gets even funnier when link spammers insist in essence that Google rewards sites that get a variety of spammy links because they want diversity of those spammy links.

Popularity counts sure but if you get popularity and it were all PR pages there will be no penalty in the algo. Thats made up by IM WSO "SEOs" and the fact that most Imers don't know how to get a good stable of PR links to begin with.

Like I said I am sticking to talking SEO networks. Your other personal rants and focusing in on selling points is going to be ignored as will be your diatribes of why only what some customers state should be taken as fact. I'll worry about your customers or your network when I find a serp I want to be in where I can't beat a bunch of PR 0 .infos. Honestly I'd be happy to even find one serp where that is happening. Would drastically cut down competition analysis time. Talk about instant green light .

Until then all that is of no relevance to me. Like I have said you are welcome to the many serps where even SenukeX can rank a site on the front page. No one needs a network to get a bunch of PR N/As and zeros. they can get those all over the internet with no hosting charges or domains to buy. You build a network to get what you can't get easily. Theres no other logical way. There never has been for the people in this thread.

Thats right to be flat out honest you have never in this thread offered a viable alternative to anyone. Nada. You know perfectly well that no one is who is not going to run a ranking service is going to go out and buy 3,000 .infos , drop $6,000 on it plus hosting and publishing costs in time and resources. Its smoke and mirrors because such a model only makes sense to a first page ranking service. No one else. In can't be shown anywhere with any proof that a couple hundred no PR .infos will rank you in anything you would need them to rank for. Notice I said proof not your claims.

In fact it can't even be shown anywhere that even 3,000 links can rank you in a competitive serp. Sorry. people don't shell out $6,000 for guarantees on position 10 where theres proven little comparative traffic. When sales copy says top three is guaranteed call me. Until then the absence of that promise is for a reason and we both know what it is.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5062330].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MaverickUK

Having sifted through the thread, I didn't find any of the valuable information that you said could be compiled in to a WSO Mike.

Actually that wasn't just me Mav. Others have said it. I didn't say that it would be a $97 WSO but hey what do you want out of a free thread? As a matter of fact I could point you to ton loads of WSOs that were VERY popular that have less than whats in this thread and they would have affiliate links galore. I take it you haven't bought any of the hyped $27 and below SEO PDF WSOs recently

.

I also think you're totally dismissing the use of low quality backlinks Mike, for whatever reason. Whatever may seem low quality to you could potentially be high quality to a potential customer of Leclear's (who I may add is a bit of a rude prat).

LOL not touching the last part. NO but I don't. I just don't think you have to go into the hundreds or thousands of domains and hosting them. I do article marketing when it suits me for popularity. Fire up AMR , Magic submitter or Article demon for a few hundred of those low quality links without hosting them and all on separate Class C IPS. Press release sites and free blog sites. But hey when I talk my network why should I not use high authority? or at least attempt to build up my own new sites to High PR? They are the one kind of link I can't get with a tool.

Let's say these people are wanting to rank for XYZ coffee machine in Google, I have full confidence that these 'low quality' backlinks you speak of can help people achieve these rankings and in the end potentially make the client back more money than they paid for the service.

see answer above. If I want low quality I run a tool for them but tell me how much backlinks do you think it will take for you to have this full confidence you say you have? I don't know anyone even in this thread ranking sites with 50 or a 100 PR zero domains. Want to buy 300 .infos at $2 a pop? No thanks I could get a nice stable of PR3s, PR2s and a couple PR4s for that and I can leverage those in a variety of ways that your low quality backlinks can't keep up with. DO I buy some .coms and .net over at netfirms for $4.95 with privacy? Yeah but with the intention of building them up with the rest of my network.

Thats why I think people buying Senukex yearly license or subscribing to it for even ten months is one of the daftest things I have ever seen, Once you start talking about laying out anywhere over $500-$600 over the next three to four months you should be thinking of a high pr network UNLESS you are just using SenukeX to offer the service to the newbs

It how you use your cash is the issue. I'll use it to build a high PR network any day

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5059948].message }}

MaverickUK

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Actually that wasn't just me Mav. Others have said it. I didn't say that it would be a $97 WSO but hey what do you want out of a free thread? As a matter of fact I could point you to ton loads of WSOs that were VERY popular that have less than whats in this thread and they would have affiliate links galore. I take it you haven't bought any of the hyped $27 and below SEO PDF WSOs recently

.

Ah my mistake, thought you were referring to yourself as opposed to everyone's input as a whole. And no, I haven't ever bought a single WSO and don't ever have an intention of doing so (though don't mark me down if I release an WSO at some point next year

)

Thats why I think people buying Senukex yearly license or subscribing to it for even ten months is one of the daftest things I have ever seen, Once you start talking about laying out anywhere over $500-$600 over the next three to four months you should be thinking of a high pr network UNLESS you are just using SenukeX to offer the service to the newbs

I actually cancelled my subscription to SENukeX last month as I truly believe its a waste of money. I didn't really receive results (whether it was because of crappy respun waffle I'm not entirely sure) with it and even if I wanted to build PR N/A backlinks (which I do) I could do it by hand or pay someone to do it for half the price of the monthly fee.

However my thoughts have now turned to acquiring PR2-6 domains with a view to building my own blog network. I already have a few PR 2, 3 and 4 websites that could potentially be used as part of the network. I've been pondering about your course, even though I do sometimes think you can be an absolute bitch

I noticed in another thread you said you use your network to recoup money back from overhead costs, how exactly do you do that?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5060108].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MaverickUK

I've been pondering about your course, even though I do sometimes think you can be an absolute bitch

You are the second person this week that wanted to curse me out and then wanted to ask for a date. At least the other one was willing to pay for dinner. You want the meal for free too

.

I noticed in another thread you said you use your network to recoup money back from overhead costs, how exactly do you do that?

I have ton loads of ways but thats where the bitch part comes in

. For free I'll only give you my most obvious one - rent or sell unused space on it. incidentally PR6s have become very pricey be sure you do your due diligence checking them out and bidding on them. To be honest I've backed away from anything over PR5s recently. A lot of the high prices are not justified. people see PR6 and the bids start flying even if the backlinks are not so hot or maybe people think they are and I don't.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5060178].message }}

MaverickUK

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

You are the second person this week that wanted to curse me out and then wanted to ask for a date. At least the other one was willing to pay for dinner. You want the meal for free too

.

Nah I'm happy to pay for dinner, hell I'd even pay for desert, but a free glass of wine before the meal would go down a treat.

I have ton loads of ways but thats where the bitch part comes in

. For free I'll only give you my most obvious one - rent or sell unused space on it.

Oh come on. That was almost as bad as the free fortune cookies you sometimes get after eating at a restaurant!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5060251].message }}

Mike Anthony 12 years ago

Originally Posted by MaverickUK

Nah I'm happy to pay for dinner, hell I'd even pay for desert, but a free glass of wine before the meal would go down a treat.

Good wine is more expensive than the meal Bro

Oh come on. That was almost as bad as the free fortune cookies you sometimes get after eating at a restaurant!

Confucious say he who buy PR domain only to backlink his money site is fool.
there you have a hint at another with your free fortune cookie. lol
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5060334].message }}
- MarksWineClub 12 years ago
  
  Need a wine club membership Mike? (Just askin')
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Read our most recent articles on wine, this month it's that unappreciated region called Napa Valley.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5064453].message }}

basyoz

12 years ago

thx . . . . . .

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5059812].message }}

boxoun

12 years ago

Let's say I have a network of 25 high pr sites. How far can that take me before I need to expand? How many sites could benefit and how do I prevent footprints?

Different geo locations, domains etc but what about linking patterns?

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5061348].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Did he do some of his WSO link building on it? We just don't know what he did. The only thing we do know is Mike and I made claims that we worked on the site. You don't know what he did and you don't know what we did so any claims that Mike ranked the site and we had no impact is 100% unmitigated baseless assertion. Those are facts.

Pure Garbage. Get spyglass and learn what he did but before you do learn something about 301 redirects as well. IF you spent any time learning SEo and looking at search results instead of pushing what you sell (or do both) you would know that almost any site that you properly analyze tells the story of how it ranked. You are still trying to put yourself on level with the SEO who actually was working on it when it was ranked. Like I said principle is why we really disagree so often.

The only facts are that Mike was working on the site when it ranked not you and I happen to know what he did that really got the site to rank despite your claims. What the SEO that ranked a site says made a site rank beats the claims of a past backlinker that failed to rank the site any day. You have no credibility on the issue but thanks for underlining the accuracy of my consistent and recurring claim which is verifiable now even in this thread. Very poor form. Stick to sites that you actually ranked. Or since you won't You can always go back to talking about testimonials on long tail customers where you have at least some traction. Leave ranking for serps like "make money online" to people who actually know how to utilize high PR links.

Originally Posted by boxoun

Let's say I have a network of 25 high pr sites. How far can that take me before I need to expand? How many sites could benefit and how do I prevent footprints?

Different geo locations, domains etc but what about linking patterns?

The variables to that question are endless. Anyone attempting to answer that in a thread is going to leave out all kinds of important factors.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5062367].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Pure Garbage. Get spyglass and learn what he did but before you do learn something about 301 redirects as well.

Fine, if i give you a list of his backlinks you can tell me precisely what he did? No? You're talking out your ass again. You don't know what he did and neither do I. You make far too many assumptions. Please meditate on this fact, I am not trying to take credit for anything. Close your eyes and breath deeply and repeat to yourself over and over until your mind can grasp this fact.

IF you spent any time learning SEo and looking at search results instead of pushing what you sell (or do both) you would know that almost any site that you properly analyze tells the story of how it ranked.

I'm not pushing what I sell here Mike, i think you need to get that through your thick rock hard skull.

You are still trying to put yourself on level with the SEO who actually was working on it when it was ranked. Like I said principle is why we really disagree so often.

I know the level I am in and its that of somebody who lives very comfortably doing what I do and that is SEO. I couldn't care less about trying to take credit, I stated facts. We weren't even trying to get that rank for that customer so i don't know how we could have failed. Remember we sell more than guaranteed services right? right?

The site owner could be buying from 20 vendors for all we know, you just don't know but you seem to think you do when you don't have a clue.

The only facts are that Mike was working on the site when it ranked not you and I happen to know what he did that really got the site to rank despite your claims.

You don't know this, it isn't a fact. What other sites were we working on at the time?

What the SEO that ranked a site says made a site rank beats the claims of a past backlinker that failed to rank the site any day.

I'll correct you again, you don't know what the site owner bought and expected from neither Mike Grant nor from us so this assumption that we failed is BS again.

You have no credibility on the issue but thanks for underlining the accuracy of my consistent and recurring claim which is verifiable now even in this thread. Very poor form. Stick to sites that you actually ranked. Or since you won't You can always go back to talking about testimonials on long tail customers where you have at least some traction. Leave ranking for serps like "make money online" to people who actually know how to utilize high PR links.

This isn't about our service, you constantly make it the case. All I said was that I worked on that site too, period. You took that as us taking credit for others work, I didn't claim it. Your mind concocted and rushed to assumption after assumption to make piss poor conclusions,THAT is a pattern.

I'm not going to argue with you any longer about how to build a network because I really don't care about that any more. What I will do is defend against your continual lies about what it is we do and what our customers get out of our services. Don't bring our service up and I won't either.

There are many ways to skin a cat but you religiously defend your particular viewpoint and attack other peoples opinions and the people who hold them over and over.

(I hope I took all the personal insults out of this post, if I left any in I apologize.)

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5064244].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by boxoun

Let's say I have a network of 25 high pr sites. How far can that take me before I need to expand? How many sites could benefit and how do I prevent footprints?

Different geo locations, domains etc but what about linking patterns?

As far as the linking patterns... There is a lot you can do. What you want to avoid is the same outbound links on multiple pages. So if the homepage of Site A links to money sites 1-7, you don't want a page on Site B also only linking to money sites 1-7.

There are a couple of ways to avoid this, and it does take some planning. One easy way to avoid this is to throw in links to other sites randomly, or you can rent out space on the sites. Either option can help add some variety to the outgoing backlinks on the sites.

Don't forget, as Mike alluded to, with a high PR network, you can create other high PR properties. For example, create a new page linked to off of the homepage. You can create a forum, just be careful to take proper precautions to avoid spammers. Otherwise you will end up spending hours constantly cleaning up the forum.

I don't worry about the geo locations of my sites too much. However, if I was working on a project trying to rank a site in Germany, I would seek out hosting in Germany to put a small network on.

As far as how far 25 sites will take you, like Mike said, there are a lot of variables there. Are you trying to rank for "How to lose weight" or "I have hairy feet like a Hobbit, how do I get rid of it"? For the first one, 25 will not get you near the top 3. For the second one, probably 1-2 links will get you to #1.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5062601].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

As far as how far 25 sites will take you, like Mike said, there are a lot of variables there. Are you trying to rank for "How to lose weight" or "I have hairy feet like a Hobbit, how do I get rid of it"? For the first one, 25 will not get you near the top 3. For the second one, probably 1-2 links will get you to #1.

Well I should have mentioned that even 5-10 PR domains OR LESS will boost you in a ton load of serps. I did a favor for a couple people who fell in Panda and believe it or not a couple PR2s and one PR3 got them right at the top. Getting Pr links tends to boost your entire portfolio as someone mentioned a few pages back. No way you need 25 before you see big boosts.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5062867].message }}

Matthew Shelton

12 years ago

How much does it matter what the keywords are in the aged PR domains? I mean I'm sure it would help a lot if you were trying to rank a dog training domain if you had another domain with page rank with "dog training" in the domain name to link to it, nevertheless it looks like what is most important is the PR of the domain that the link is coming from, and the domains' keywords are not nearly as important - is that correct?

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5063140].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Matthew Shelton

How much does it matter what the keywords are in the aged PR domains? I mean I'm sure it would help a lot if you were trying to rank a dog training domain if you had another domain with page rank with "dog training" in the domain name to link to it, nevertheless it looks like what is most important is the PR of the domain that the link is coming from, and the domains' keywords are not nearly as important - is that correct?

I've never put any importance on the domain name the link was coming from. In fact, I have often used a domain for 5-6 different niches.

I have never tested this, so I cannot say for sure one way or the other that it has an effect.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5063171].message }}

Mike Anthony 12 years ago

Originally Posted by Matthew Shelton

How much does it matter what the keywords are in the aged PR domains? ?

Almost zip. the most prevailing idea I have to get out of my students heads is that many of the factors that relate to ranking a money site apply to network sites. They don't. You are not trying to rank your network sites.

Plus I have never seen any evidence that domain gives you much relevancy brownie points from the linking site s point of view. LSI and relevancy is determined by actual articles and content on the site. Amazon does not rank for many products because amazon has relevance to that and what does wikipedia have relevancy for? So you ar ecorrect PR and authority is what you are worrying about with a SEO network. Content and domain are important only so far as retaining the links the aged domain has.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5063200].message }}
- Matthew Shelton 12 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony
  
  Content and domain are important only so far as retaining the links the aged domain has.
  
  So glad you brought that up Mike, that's something I've often wondered -
  
  how DO you manage/create/relink the content of your aged domain to retain as many of the links as possible?
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5063891].message }}

mattlaclear

12 years ago

Same two guys still trashing our service despite the fact that we have been running it for 19 months. We have more page one rankings coming in daily than ever before. Get over it. We designed a system that works. Period.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5069767].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

There is a reason your service has only worked here and been laughed off of every other IM forum it's been posted on.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5069955].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

There is a reason your service has only worked here and been laughed off of every other IM forum it's been posted on.

Where else have we posted this service? It's only ever been posted on one other forum Mike. It wasn't laughed off of that forum it did ok over there.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072425].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Where else have we posted this service? It's only ever been posted on one other forum Mike. It wasn't laughed off of that forum it did ok over there.

You might have made some sales at that other forum, but the majority of users who had something to say about it didn't sound very positive.

And I misspoke. You are right. I apologize.

It may not have been posted on other forums, but it has been brought up in threads on other forums and in every case it has been ridiculed and laughed at.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072485].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

You might have made some sales at that other forum, but the majority of users who had something to say about it didn't sound very positive.

I'm sure you took a poll. :rolleyes: There were less than a handful of people complaining when we sold A LOT. So What? What does that prove Mike? When you have the volume that we have some people are going to be dissatisfied. The fact that we are still in business and pumping the kind of volume we are shows that we provide value to the vast majority of our customers. Deal with it.

And I misspoke. You are right. I apologize.

It may not have been posted on other forums, but it has been brought up in threads on other forums and in every case it has been ridiculed and laughed at.

SO? Those people didn't know what they were talking about (if it's the thread I participated in).

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072604].message }}

mattlaclear

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

There is a reason your service has only worked here and been laughed off of every other IM forum it's been posted on.

We have more page one rankings coming in than ever before. You find a few dimwits talking on another thread from some hick forum and you're attempting to use it as ammo to harm our company? Plus I have seen several threads where we come highly recommended from a group of Warriors then you're posting against us warning others away from us.

Once we take on a campaign we never give up on it until we have delivered what we have promised. Anyone trashing our service is obviously either not our customer or someone who has grown impatient waiting for the ranks.

We run our business with complete integrity which is why we are doing so well in the market place. We're actually a vendor who cares about our customers so much so we keep our word to them even when it hurts.

Funny thing is I have never seen your name recommended to anyone on the forum though.

Want to know why that is?

It's because you choose to bash others on the forum instead of helping them. There is no profit in doing so. Stop doing that and I dare say you'll see an improvement in your business.

But once you do start becoming successful you'll have a handful of dweebs attacking your business then as well.

Anyone reading this can tell in a New York minute from our testimonials that we're the real deal when it comes to SEO.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072703].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

We run our business with complete integrity which is why we are doing so well in the market place. We're actually a vendor who cares about our customers so much so we keep our word to them even when it hurts.

Funny thing is I have never seen your name recommended to anyone on the forum though.

.

Thats a lie. I have seen recommendations For Mike. If you spent any time in this section that was not related to your interjecting advertisements for your service you would know this. Mike is a respected SEO here and the fact that he is not running a WSO is no slight on him. We might tangle over issues and even services based in issues. sometimes in the midst there are some jabs on both sides but that last post of your just degraded into little else but a personal attack on Mike without relationship to any issue related to this thread.

remember this is about building networks at least go back to pretending you are weighing in on that issue.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072772].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Thats a lie. I have seen recommendations For Mike.

So you know for a fact that Matt has seen those recommendations? Clairvoyance would be needed for you to say this is a lie.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072819].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

So you know for a fact that Matt has seen those recommendations? Clairvoyance would be needed for you to say this is a lie.

It was a lie. He implied directly that Mike didn't help people and that if he did his business would improve. Speaking of clairvoyance though perhaps that should be your next WSO since Matt has the power to know how people who don't pimp out their whole business here are doing in their business. Could even be a SEO offering where Matt tells people which webmasters are open to giving out High Pr links.

I wasn't taking credit.

uh - huh

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Turns out that there were other SEOs working on the site (raises hand).

Originally Posted by Marc_L

The only thing we do know is Mike and I made claims that we worked on the site. You don't know what he did and you don't know what we did so any claims that Mike ranked the site and we had no impact is 100% unmitigated baseless assertion.

Sure man If you say so you were not saying and implying that you shared responsibility for ranking that site. We believe you :rolleyes:

Now can we get back to SEO networks and only SEO networks. You have been throwing a whole lot of accusations about lying so you have even less leverage to claim offense. I certainly am not going to offer any apologies for what I see and know from my perspective and neither I bet are you.

SO lets stay on topic and you can explain to me why with your theories on Ip diversity someone should bother building a network with the same PR 0 N/A links they can get for free.

Your own IP diversity theory has torpedoed and sunk the advice you are giving in regard to networks.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072990].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Funny thing is I have never seen your name recommended to anyone on the forum though.

Want to know why that is?

It's because you choose to bash others on the forum instead of helping them. There is no profit in doing so. Stop doing that and I dare say you'll see an improvement in your business.

But once you do start becoming successful you'll have a handful of dweebs attacking your business then as well.

Actually, Matt, I spend a lot of time helping others on this forum.

But I answer actual SEO questions and do my best to keep people from being led astray by people telling them things like backlinks off a PR n/a network will get them ranked for anything that is the least bit competitive and making sure they understand that having nonsensical, overspun PLR pointing at their website may not be the best idea for their long term success.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073150].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

sure they understand that having nonsensical, overspun PLR pointing at their website may not be the best idea for their long term success.

Good point solidly back on building SEo networks. Its stunning how many people building networks figure that they can put anything on them. If you actually go for anything where there is another SEO working (and thats a whole lot more than the alleged "Super competitive" terms) doing that spun nonsense on PR N/A links much less say all .infos as has been suggested here really opens up the domain with all its links to deindexing after a link spam report to Google.

If in fact a heavily .info network were to get into ANY kind of struggle in a serp where a SEO knew what he was doing one link spam report would flush the entire network down the drain and anyone who had spent any money on it or with it.

Its just such a short viewed lousy way to build a network in so many different ways.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

You and the other Mike keep making this claim, BUT you don't have any evidence to back it up. You are both talking out of your arses. You don't know what you are talking about.

Missed this before. All I can say is that its a good thing there are enough people who don't know anything about Google and link spam reports. They are the only people who would not know how foolish this statement is. No evidence to back up the fact that if you have thousands of .infos pointing to your site with spun content gibberish you would not stand up well to a manual review? Umm i guess if you don't know what a manual review is and how a manual review works.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073217].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Good point solidly back on building SEo networks. Its stunning how many people building networks figure that they can put anything on them. If you actually go for anything where there is another SEO working (and thats a whole lot more than the alleged "Super competitive" terms) doing that spun nonsense on PR N/A links much less say all .infos as has been suggested here really opens up the domain with all its links to deindexing after a link spam report to Google.

Why does having a .info network mean you can only get links from the .infos?

If in fact a heavily .info network were to get into ANY kind of struggle in a serp where a SEO knew what he was doing one link spam report would flush the entire network down the drain and anyone who had spent any money on it or with it.

It's easy to avoid this Mike since somebody with this type of network would and could mask it by getting other types of links as well. Sure, 3000 links from .infos looks spammy as hell. That's why you have to make other types of links.

Its just such a short viewed lousy way to build a network in so many different ways.

Not if you build up your network. Not if you mix other stuff in. This could be a very future proof way to build your network if it's done right.

Missed this before. All I can say is that its a good thing there are enough people who don't know anything about Google and link spam reports. They are the only people who would not know how foolish this statement is. No evidence to back up the fact that if you have thousands of .infos pointing to your site with spun content gibberish you would not stand up well to a manual review? Umm i guess if you don't know what a manual review is and how a manual review works.

I wasn't commenting on the manual review portion of the statement Mike. I was talking about your continual assertions that all we rank for are crap keywords with no competition.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073455].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Sure man If you say so you were not saying and implying that you shared responsibility for ranking that site. We believe you :rolleyes:

WRONG! I have no interest in taking credit for that particular ranking. I don't need to take credit. Because you assumed I was doesn't make it a fact. I know what we did for the site, you don't. I don't know what Mike Grant did for that site and neither do you. You don't know how many people have been working on that site and neither do I. Mike very well might have been involved in a bulk of the SEO for that site, I don't know and neither do you.

Now can we get back to SEO networks and only SEO networks. You have been throwing a whole lot of accusations about lying so you have even less leverage to claim offense. I certainly am not going to offer any apologies for what I see and know from my perspective and neither I bet are you.

As long as you quit lying about our services, sure.

SO lets stay on topic and you can explain to me why with your theories on Ip diversity someone should bother building a network with the same PR 0 N/A links they can get for free.
Your own IP diversity theory has torpedoed and sunk the advice you are giving in regard to networks.

I don't understand that last part. What has been torpedoed?

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073393].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Same two guys still trashing our service despite the fact that we have been running it for 19 months. We have more page one rankings coming in daily than ever before. Get over it. We designed a system that works. Period.

Works for what? My son's train systems worked great but thomas the tank can't get me to any business destination. Who sees your network in any really competitive serp? You have been asked multiple times to show a competitive serp ranking with PR n/A .infos. You can 't show anything in the serps and have to hide behind testimonials of people that you don't want to share their keywords or verify they are ranking for anything competitive (cause the vast majority are not0. yeah Its the same two guys and others responding to the garbage posted by Your side to put down other networks to boost your own agenda. The claim "that no network can rank a site by itself " laugher. Stop posting that junk and we won't have to respond.

I don't give a rip about your service. This is a thread about building a network. time to unmask these approaches. You are both in this thread offering nothing to the average IMer. Just talk about your services yada yada yada. Why? simple - WATCH

Anyone out there willing to pay for 3,000 .infos so as to emulate Matt and Marc's long tail ranking system? thread is long enough to come to some real world practical conclusions.

Thats what? minimum $6,000 in domain registration plus hosting and infrastructure to post with? A lot of hundreds more a month MINIMUM. Who wants to step up given that even the service built on this system never promises more than first page and or top 3 rankings? (when I see tht promised I will know the system owners believe in their system as much as they claim to).

anyone up for that $6,000 plus many more thousands investment for that return? Step up.

Anyone?

NO?

Then whats the point? Any service out there that can show evidence that they rank sites with 400 .info PR N/As? Let Matt and Marc wave their hand all they want and make claims. They can't show proof that that would work for anything but even weaker serps than they do first page placement for (which aint real top 3-4 ranking anyway people) and you can be sure of one thing - when you can't rank people 's sites with that no one will be paying you a dime to rent or buy links on your N/A .infos. Bought and rented Market will not pay for that junk.

Lets finally call a spade a spade. This is just a point blank silly premise for anyone not building a rank on the first page service. Only A fool would go to the trouble of spending $6,000+ to build a network in order to rank first page and not with a good promise of top three rankings for his serps. So this add zero value to the discussion of how Imers should build their own network. Its merely being offered here as a way to interject from time to time talk about Matt and Marc's service and customers etc.

If you have lets say that $800 to invest in 400 .infos with the hope or ranking and it gives you nothing but a first page placement in a very weak serps with no high traffic. What will you do? Recoup it how else? Ha d you spent that money buying and building PR sites you can go in and exchange, sell and rent space and keep going. Building and building you network without coming up with heaps of extra cash. So consider the gamble and before you do and buy into any post made by them or even me take a walk over to Google and try looking at some serps, fire up Spyglass to check backlinks and tell me how often you see a portfolio filled with PR N/A .info domain pages?

The only evidence that anyone can put on the table that is real is that you would have to go in at a much higher count of .info PR N/A domains. A count that some people in this thread running their yap know that you are not going to do so it does nothing but point at their service.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072634].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I don't know why you keep bringing up our service, you lie continually about it whether its on purpose or out of ignorance it doesn't matter.

Given that you recently have said that no network can rank a site on its own, raised your hand (and yes you typed that with your own hands) to take credit for ranking a site another SEO ranked and then followed that up by implying that a network has something wrong with it because it is deindexed - despite the fact that you and everyone else here knows your network can have domains deindexed by Google - I'll leave it to the readers to determine who lies and who doesn't.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072712].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Given that you recently have said that no network can rank a site on its own, raised your hand (and yes you typed that with your own hands) to take credit for ranking a site another SEO ranked and then followed that up by implying that a network has something wrong with it because it is deindexed - despite the fact that you and everyone else here knows your network can have domains deindexed by Google - I'll leave it to the readers to determine who lies and who doesn't.

I wasn't taking credit. I don't need the credit. Point was Mike Grant wasn't working alone and there may have been 20 other SEO vendors working on that site.

My point about the deindexing wasn't that the network was bad but that they probably did something else to increase the rankings. Something that got them into trouble. Maybe the site's content was thin garbage? Maybe they did some cloaking to get the ranking? Whatever they did caused Google to deindex them.

I can't leave open ended questions around for you because you like to fill them with stuff I didn't intend to say. You wrote a three paragraph rant on something I didn't say. What a waste.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072799].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I don't give a rip about your service.

If you would stop bringing it up then it wouldn't be a topic of this thread any longer, but no you keep running off at the mouth and then I take issue with your lies and then you bash our services again then I respond etc etc etc.

This is a thread about building a network. time to unmask these approaches. You are both in this thread offering nothing to the average IMer. Just talk about your services yada yada yada. Why? simple - WATCH

What sort of keywords do the average IMer go after? Super competitive keywords? Like "SEO" or "make money" or "MLM" or "insurance"? NO! Of course not.

It's pretty simple to setup an effective network that will help the aspiring network owner rank for keywords that they are actually going after. You don't need 3000 domains to do this either. 100 would be effective. Over time you could build those site's PR if you so choose using simple to use tools.

Maybe you can fill us in on what types of keywords "average IMers" are going after because it seems to me that you expect a proposed network needs to help rank for ridiculously competitive keywords. When you get up into that level the on page content has to be much much better anyway and no amount of high PR links would rank a site with crap and thin content over a site that has great on page content.

So Mike, what are the types of keywords the "average IMer" might go after?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072765].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

If you would stop bringing it up then it wouldn't be a topic of this thread any longer, but no you keep running off at the mouth and then I take issue with your lies

Marc we are in this last back and forth due to your own lies abut what other networks that you are clearly oblivious to cannot rank on their own for. There are no lies from me in this thread . Nada. You are about to pop a blood vessel because I exposed your claim that a network could not create all the links needed in your theory or mine to rank for a site in contradiction to your own made claim and because I did it in such a way that anyone reading the thread can see that it was all smoke and mirrors.

What sort of keywords do the average IMer go after? Super competitive keywords? Like "SEO" or "make money" or "MLM" or "insurance"? NO! Of course not.

Who said anything about super competitive? I said competitive. Don't do the strawman dance. I've seen you point to your theory of SEO networks and its success and I am saying that every time that I see one of your so called success it turns out to be a weak term. Show us otherwise. You never have and I suspect I am a prophet and you never will.

It's pretty simple to setup an effective network that will help the aspiring network owner rank for keywords that they are actually going after. You don't need 3000 domains to do this either. 100 would be effective.

Ugh. Total and I mean TOTAL Crapola and obviously so. If 100 domains PR N/A domains could "effectively" rank a site for competitive serp then a AMR run would well do the trick and it doesn't. You talk about lying and then you weave a fabrication of epic proportions. For serps that that could work for why bother building a network for it? Just go do some article marketing and get some free blogs. Thats just so full of total nonsense. i knew you would claim this and said you would but perhaps you missed where I said you would have no proof. You have a shining opportunity to finally prove me wrong and wow us all with PROOF of what you are saying.

insert cricket sounds here

But hey I will gladly show you up for the total nonsense you peddle. Le t two people step up who have The cash to buy say 200 .info domains. twice the size of your totally bogus claim. One of them can go ahead and buy your silly proposition and the other one will invest the same money in Pr domains. I'll show the second my way.

Even a newb knows that my guy will SMOKE your guy. Why in the world build a network to get the same level PR links that you can get out there for free? My guy can use his network and the many available free N/S and zero links if he wants and add it to his portfolio of high pr domains in his network where your guy has nothing but a full portfolio of all low quality PR links. You talk about people talking out of "their arse" as you put it and then demonstrate how its done to perfection. One moment you are trumpeting diversity and then the next minute you are back to pimping the power of all low quality links with no variety in PR.

HINT MARC - even under your theory of varied PR thats why when it comes to BUILDING a network no one should bother with a A PR nada network. The whole point of building a network is to get the links you can't normally get free and easy. You are just totally convoluted even in your own theory or just can't get out of your head how this doesn't relate to your service. Using your very own variety theory they should build high PR networks so as to get that variety. :rolleyes:

My suggestion for anyone thinking that building a 100 PR N/A network to put with their other free PR N/A links is a winning strategy -

Put down the pipe with the foreign substance and seek an intervention.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5072966].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Marc we are in this last back and forth due to your own lies abut what other networks that you are clearly oblivious to cannot rank on their own for. There are no lies from me in this thread . Nada. You are about to pop a blood vessel because I exposed your claim that a network could not create all the links needed in your theory or mine to rank for a site in contradiction to your own made claim and because I did it in such a way that anyone reading the thread can see that it was all smoke and mirrors.

I suppose you need to clearly outline what you think a competitive search term is. If you are talking about the PR distribution throughout all the pages of a site then I already told you that this isn't what I meant. If you recall I retracted the example in an effort to get you to focus on what I actually meant. OF course PR flows throughout a website's pages, everybody knows this.

Who said anything about super competitive? I said competitive. Don't do the strawman dance. I've seen you point to your theory of SEO networks and its success and I am saying that every time that I see one of your so called success it turns out to be a weak term. Show us otherwise. You never have and I suspect I am a prophet and you never will.

What is "competitive"? How many keywords do you have direct knowledge of that we work with?

Ugh. Total and I mean TOTAL Crapola and obviously so. If 100 domains PR N/A domains could "effectively" rank a site for competitive serp then a AMR run would well do the trick and it doesn't.

What is a competitive search term?

You talk about lying and then you weave a fabrication of epic proportions.

What is a competitive search term?

For serps that that could work for why bother building a network for it?

Because you can work on your network just as easily and automatically.

Just go do some article marketing and get some free blogs. Thats just so full of total nonsense. i knew you would claim this and said you would but perhaps you missed where I said you would have no proof. You have a shining opportunity to finally prove me wrong and wow us all with PROOF of what you are saying.

What is a competitive search term? Examples would be nice.

But hey I will gladly show you up for the total nonsense you peddle. Le t two people step up who have The cash to buy say 200 .info domains. twice the size of your totally bogus claim. One of them can go ahead and buy your silly proposition and the other one will invest the same money in Pr domains. I'll show the second my way.

I don't even know what you consider "competitive" yet. What keywords are considered competitive in your mind. In any case I have spent far more time than I should already answering your BS. I have no interest in taking on something like this to prove I am right.

You talk about people talking out of "their arse" as you put it and then demonstrate how its done to perfection. One moment you are trumpeting diversity and then the next minute you are back to pimping the power of all low quality links with no variety in PR.

Are you that dimwitted? Really? There are shades of gray Mike do you think I was saying that all you need to do is build 100 new sites and blast your content onto those sites alone to get ranks? Really? You've got to be kidding me. The 100 sites are part of a portfolio an added tool of domains that nobody else can get any links from that are very helpful for getting rankings. There are many tools available to the "average IMer", this network would be one of them.

My suggestion for anyone thinking that building a 100 PR N/A network to put with their other free PR N/A links is a winning strategy -

Put down the pipe with the foreign substance and seek an intervention.

Never touched the stuff.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073320].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

If you recall I retracted the example in an effort to get you to focus on what I actually meant. OF course PR flows throughout a website's pages, everybody knows this.

You retracted the number of 500 not the statement or premise and my rebuttal stands to any reasonably sized network. if you want to claim that you retract the whole premise then yes I will accept that you did not have a clue what you were saying but saying it nevertheless if that is now your admission. Is it? Good. Progress. We now agree.

What is "competitive"?

A term that multiple people are after and willing to work to rank for with varied techniques - and you call me dimwitted. ROFL. Competitive comes from the word competition. Therefore competitive refers to the amount of competition for a term. as they used to say - Duh. Never call anyone dumb or dimwitted while demonstrating that you have the characteristics that mark the adjective. You end up proving that the mirror makes a better case then you yourself are making.

So your mission should you finally choose to accept it (which we know you won't) would be to find a serp where /info Pr NAs are causing a site to rank higher than another site that is not utilizing them.

Are you that dimwitted? Really? There are shades of gray Mike do you think I was saying that all you need to do is build 100 new sites and blast your content onto those sites alone to get ranks? Really? You've got to be kidding me. The 100 sites are part of a portfolio an added tool of domains that nobody else can get any links from that are very helpful for getting rankings. There are many tools available to the "average IMer", this network would be one of them.

Weak. Do you really thing anyone caring to read this thread is that dumb Marc? They can clearly see your foolishness here.Why build a "portfolio an added tool of domains that nobody can get any links from that are helpful" WHEN THEY HAVE THE SAME PR as the other free link resources? Like I said you tanked, torpedoed, sunk and devastated your own argument without realizing it. Your claim that diversity in Pr is necessary illustrates CLEAR AND STRONG that the one thing that you should do when building a network is get the one thing you cannot get easily for free with other tools - HIGH PR links. Your claim that they should go out and build a network with the same kind of Pr that they can get for free presently just exposes your advice for what it is - Total and unspeakable nonsense.

You can get angry, dance, shake and shimmy, ad hom, curse call names it really doesn't matter. If you already have PR 0 and PR N/A domains in your reach(and all Imers do) and you hold to needing diversity in PR (WHICH YOU CLEARLY MAINTAINED) then you go out and get what you can't easily get to round off the variety.

Your claim that if johnny has ten white marbles and needs blue, green and red marbles for diversity he should go to the store and get more special white marbles is just plain daft and what angers you into suggesting dimwittedness is that you know anyone with a brain can see how whacked it is. people are smarter than that and can see right though you.

I wasn't commenting on the manual review portion of the statement Mike. I was talking about your continual assertions that all we rank for are crap keywords with no competition.

Marc for once at least try to apply yourself to understand the argument being made. the point is that in serps where there is a lot of competition there are SEOs that are more likely to report obvious link spam. Manual reviews ARE directly related to competitiveness. I don't care what ever you add to your portfolio. If you have thousands of PR .infos pointing at your site that is a red flag to any manual reviewer. My own assertions (Mike F can speak for himself) are based on every serp I have seen your network rank INCLUDING ones that Matt posted in his advertising for the network AND based on the fact that unlike a lot of networks that I have seen in competitive serps I have never seen any network set up like that on low PR do well.

Not interested in getting back into what you claim and I think. I am sticking t your shoddy network advice not discussing your services further. Just clarifying that point.

Not if you build up your network. Not if you mix other stuff in

For goodness sake man. Use your noggin. If you are going to build it up you are going to build it up with PR links. If you own some of those in your network it is 1000 time easier to build up other domains. So either way you should start out your network with PR Domains. Your approach continues to make no sense. It is only being offered because it lines up with a service you provide that is utterly unpractical for this thread but if you admitted it you would have to exit it. You can't point to any evidence that 100 PR N/a links have any real utility in ranking a site over going with an AMR run and using free blogs. In fact the only thing you have done is fed off of what a network with thousands of PR N/As allegedly has done (and yes in weak and very weak serps based on all available evidence that is not your assertions otherwise - which are hardly unbiased).

So at best all you can show anything concrete for is a network of thousands of .info N/As and on a cost return ratio it stinks for anyone not building it just for a first page ranking service. period.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073531].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

You retracted the number of 500 not the statement or premise and my rebuttal stands to any reasonably sized network. if you want to claim that you retract the whole premise then yes I will accept that you did not have a clue what you were saying but saying it nevertheless if that is now your admission. Is it? Good. Progress. We now agree.

You think I thought that PR didn't vary on all the subpages for a particular site. I am well aware of this fact.

A term that multiple people are after and willing to work to rank for with varied techniques - and you call me dimwitted. ROFL. Competitive comes from the word competition.

I know what competition means Mike. What I don't know is what YOU consider a competitive keyword like an example of one. This is a very important thing to consider for the topic of the thread.

Therefore competitive refers to the amount of competition for a term. as they used to say - Duh. Never call anyone dumb or dimwitted while demonstrating that you have the characteristics that mark the adjective. You end up proving that the mirror makes a better case then you yourself are making.

What is an example, in your mind, of a competitive keyword. Any example would suffice.

Weak. Do you really thing anyone caring to read this thread is that dumb Marc? They can clearly see your foolishness here.Why build a "portfolio an added tool of domains that nobody can get any links from that are helpful" WHEN THEY HAVE THE SAME PR as the other free link resources? Like I said you tanked, torpedoed, sunk and devastated your own argument without realizing it. Your claim that diversity in Pr is necessary illustrates CLEAR AND STRONG that the one thing that you should do when building a network is get the one thing you cannot get easily for free with other tools - HIGH PR links. Your claim that they should go out and build a network with the same kind of Pr that they can get for free presently just exposes your advice for what it is - Total and unspeakable nonsense.

The only person I think fits that bill is.... never mind.

I might have sunk your strawman version of my point but not what it truly is.

There are alot of reasons to not go after the high PR network. It's extremely difficult to scale for one. If the PR goes down on your sites then you lose the advantage you were paying for in the first place. Plus you can always backlink your newly registered sites to increase their PR if you so choose. For instance, I recently (September) started an adsense site. During the recent PR update it went up to PR 2. It was dead simple easy to do as well. Why couldn't this be duplicated throughout your network? The answer is, there is no reason.

There are negatives to the .info bulk route too, sure. Hosting can be a pain, more sites to maintain (trust me on this!). More time consuming in getting content out to your sites. So before you think I gloss over those, I'll head you off at the pass.

Your claim that if johnny has ten white marbles and needs blue, green and red marbles for diversity he should go to the store and get more special white marbles is just plain daft and what angers you into suggesting dimwittedness is that you know anyone with a brain can see how whacked it is.

That isn't the argument Mikey. I can't be bothered to continually correct what I am saying over and over because you can't understand it. How many times have I told you that what you are saying I said isn't what I actually said? Maybe I suck at conveying my thoughts to words or maybe you have a hard time in grasping nuance.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073679].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

There are alot of reasons to not go after the high PR network. It's extremely difficult to scale for one.

No its not . You are just ignorant of how to scale thats all. and the last thing I am going to give you is a free course on the subject. Stick to the PR N/As just don't pretend to know what you don't becaue it leads people astray that think you might.

If the PR goes down on your sites then you lose the advantage you were paying for in the first place. Plus you can always backlink your newly registered sites to increase their PR if you so choose.

Please stop talking about what you don't know and talking out of both sides of your mouth. First if you do the right research on your sites you will NOT lose all your PR. The advantage will in fact stick. Plus if you do lose some links you can always back them up. Has it occured to you that if you can build them up that you can patch them up much easier if they already have PR and lose a link?

Marc just stop because you are showing you don't know a thing about maintaining PR networks but still pretending to.

liks on another site For instance, I recently (September) started an adsense site. During the recent PR update it went up to PR 2. It was dead simple easy to do as well. Why couldn't this be duplicated throughout your network? The answer is, there is no reason.

The answer is easy its pointless. You can buy a PR 2 for less than most backlinking services runs you will have to do. Second I can get a PR2 within minutes with my existing infrastructure. Why? Because I already control PR form my existing network without having to run all over spamming sites to get a little juice in order to get a PR2 and pat myself on the back like its a grand accomplishment. LOL. On higher PR3s I can even use existing link space to pay for extra links to back up the site and grow it further. There are TON loads of techniques to leverage your existing PR domains - again you have no idea what you are talking about as its obvious you have not maintained such a network and grown it.

Plus nothing drops faster in real Pr than a site that is built up by weak links and since you don't have any real powerful links in your ownership your PR will fluctuate and drop like crazy from deleted Profile links, no followed and removed blog comments and buried article directories. You'll have sites you willalways have to be throwing links at. I have domains I almost forgot about and the links and PR stick.

While you were growing your new domains I was already using existing domains with PR to rank customers and my own sites and putting back cash into the network. Like I said your theory is a losing proposition right across the board.

and meanwhile as prophesied zero evidence offered that a 100 .info new N/a domains can rank sites. how about 200? Nada. Like I said all you can point to proof wise is thousands and at that point its just plains silly for most people to invest 4-8 thousand dollars to build them up without getting some of your own PR domains in your network to start out with. Total fail.

Maybe I suck at conveying my thoughts to words or maybe you have a hard time in grasping nuance.

As even this last post indicates its not the ability to convey your thoughts that suck its that you haven't thought things through to begin with.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073777].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

For goodness sake man. Use your noggin. If you are going to build it up you are going to build it up with PR links.

Yes and if you can do so with no effort, wouldn't that be great? You don't need too many to affect your own PR.

If you own some of those in your network it is 1000 time easier to build up other domains. So either way you should start out your network with PR Domains.

Fine, go ahead do it whatever way you want. I don't think your way is wrong I just am stating that there are other methods available.

Your approach continues to make no sense. It is only being offered because it lines up with a service you provide that is utterly unpractical for this thread but if you admitted it you would have to exit it.

Wrong, but I should expect no less from Mike Anthony.

You can't point to any evidence that 100 PR N/a links have any real utility in ranking a site over going with an AMR run and using free blogs. In fact the only thing you have done is fed off of what a network with thousands of PR N/As allegedly has done (and yes in weak and very weak serps based on all available evidence that is not your assertions otherwise - which are hardly unbiased).

See, you just can't help yourself from talking about our service. Give it a rest.

So at best all you can show anything concrete for is a network of thousands of .info N/As and on a cost return ratio it stinks for anyone not building it just for a first page ranking service. period.

We know your opinion on the subject by now Mike. LOL

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073729].message }}

Black Hat Cat

Banned 12 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5089562].message }}

Mike Anthony 12 years ago

Originally Posted by Black Hat Cat

I don't care how tough a keyword is, if you can't move it from 212 to 205 in four months, it ain't the keyword that is the problem.

Hi Black hat,

We've got some specific instructions from mods not to get into talking about services that I most definitely am going to adhere to so I won't comment on that situation. I just think that when we approach strategies we ought to be able to look at Google and not anything else and be able to show the principles there.

That why I am always saying - show it in the serps - because without that and only unspecified successes as relates to keyword and sites - who knows? The one lab where you can go for evidence without exposing peoples niches and website is Google with a backlink checker.

Thats why I am not buying that strategy to build a network (again NOT talking service talking about the thread topic)- because I can't find anywhere in the serps where a site with high PR links is being beat by one without if they are targeting the same keywords. Sites with N/as and zero alone do not beat sites with N/A and zero plus a good helping of PR links - all anchor text and content being equal.

Almost all sites will get N/as and zeros easily. I mean there are domain and IP crawlers that give you those without you trying. So if you are going to bother to build a network why bother building what you can get easily and with what will never beat a site with High Pr links?
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090084].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

nvm post removed

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090518].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I don't know what his ticket is or I'd take a closer look at this case. I'll update when I can locate it.

No. You answered the post. There is no reason to have an additional "update", It will then only be what you have to say about it versus what the client had to say about it. I've let others know that the mods have made it clear they don't want this service oriented so from here on it can be reported not hashed out in this thread.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090600].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

No. You answered the post. There is no reason to have an additional "update", It will then only what you have to say about it versus what the client had to say about it. I've let others know that the mods have made it clear they don't want this service oriented so from here on it can be reported not hashed out in this thread.

I hadn't realized you have been promoted to mod status. I'll post my findings as long as that post by black hat cat remains in the thread. I won't bring that topic up unless it is brought up by others.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090611].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I hadn't realized you have been promoted to mod status. I'll post my findings as long as that post by black hat cat remains in the thread. I won't bring that topic up unless it is brought up by others.

No not playing Mod but I suggest you contact your brother before you insist that you are going to take this thread off topic just because of what one person said and you already answered. He received the same PM from a mod as I did.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090731].message }}

wegenbelasting

12 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5089619].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by wegenbelasting

Mike, dont you think 100 .info domains will help when there url's are very similar and synonyms to the keyword you try to rank for? And when they are about the same topic they would be immens relevant. So 100 PR3 domains still outrank 100 extreme relevant PR0 domains?

I'm sure Mike will answer too, but...

The URL from where the link comes from has nothing to do with the quality of the link.

Yes, everything else being equal, 100 PR 3's will outrank 100 PR 0 "relevant" domains every single time.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5089931].message }}

Marc_L 12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Yes, everything else being equal, 100 PR 3's will outrank 100 PR 0 "relevant" domains every single time.

Agreed :p
- Thanks
Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090684].message }}

Mike Anthony 12 years ago

Originally Posted by wegenbelasting

So 100 PR3 domains still outrank 100 extreme relevant PR0 domains?

In a heartbeat to agree with MikeF. As an illustration how do you think Google sees the word "warrior" as relating to internet marketing? No one outside of knowing this forum identifies warrior with marketing so this site has no brownie points for having a relevant domain name. Why does it rank for internet marketing terms? Links and on page (not in domain name ) content. relevancy is determined by anchor text and the content in the page that viewers can read.

The site that ranks for more terms across the board than any other - wikipedia - has a domain name with no relevancy to 99.999% of the term it ranks for.

On a practical level most everyone that builds a network is doing so for multiple sites and niches. It just isn't practical for them to do that for one keyword or niche unless that keyword gave great traffic from searches and made good money - but then if so it would be competitive and the .info N/As would be too weak for that serp anyway.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090128].message }}
- wegenbelasting 12 years ago
  
  [DELETED]
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090272].message }}
  
  Mike Anthony 12 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by wegenbelasting
  
  Agree with most of it but not with the anchor txt, I think I'm going to do some experiment soon.
  
  You disagree that anchor text linking to your site convey's to google as a relevancy ranking factor?
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090375].message }}

boxoun

12 years ago

You both can prove it to your customers. Enough has been said.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073864].message }}

Marc_L 12 years ago

Originally Posted by boxoun

You both can prove it to your customers. Enough has been said.

LOL, I think you are right!
- Thanks
Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073882].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Although I'd really like Mike to give us an example of a "competitive" keyword so we know what we are talking about.

I'd also like to know what kind of keywords an "average IMer" might be going after as well.

Also I never claimed that 100 .infos would be used entirely by themselves to rank for anything so I don't think I am required to offer any evidence. Hell, I don't even know what Mike thinks a competitive keyword is yet. His answer of "one that has competition" isn't very informative. Maybe if I list a few he can give his assessment....

insurance
car insurance
car insurance quote
fur boots
boots
gym shoes
women's shoes
make money
make money online
money
work from home
nintendo 3ds

Also which of these keywords do you think an "average IMer" might be targeting?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5073960].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Although I'd really like Mike to give us an example of a "competitive" keyword so we know what we are talking about.

Why is that when you say you rank for competitive terms that you know the meaning of the word but now magically don't? Give us yours then. Since you are recommending 100 new .infos to rank sites then go ahead and tell the good people what they can rank for with that. It was your suggestion after all. YOU sadi ti would be effective in ranking. Go for it.

Also I never claimed that 100 .infos would be used entirely by themselves to rank for anything so I don't think I am required to offer any evidence

Typical. You are demanding definitions while trying to duck out of having to give any evidence for your assertions. That should be as transparent to anyone as saying I don't have any proof. Of course if you are telling people to invest a few hundred dollars to rank sites with .infos you should have some proof that doing so will be effective. What world do you live on anyway? Your just dancing around because you know you have been tagged without anything to back up you suggestions.

The viability of your suggestions falls on that one point and yet you can't show any proof whatsoever that people are not better just finding a few hundred article directories to post to with some free blogs and that adding those will give them any real big effect. If it takes hundreds or even thousands which is all you have proof for then its totally invalidates choosing them over domain names with Pr for the same investment.

Your suggestions for building networks has always been a load of rubbish and I 'm glad I got around to exposing it for what it is. As for your list. Most of them you would have no prayer with so don't worry I don't even expect you to aim that high. Like I said you gave the recommendation of 100 .infos being effective so provide some serps where that would be the case.

So far the best you have done in countering my points is claiming that Johnny should get more white marbles that he already has to see if he can remanufacture them into different color marbles. Even though in this case it would be easier to have other color marbles in order to change the white ones color anyway. Owning Pr to create additional Pr does wonders for that ability. You just have not figured that out yet.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5074266].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Why is that when you say you rank for competitive terms that you know the meaning of the word but now magically don't? Give us yours then. Since you are recommending 100 new .infos to rank sites then go ahead and tell the good people what they can rank for with that. It was your suggestion after all. YOU sadi ti would be effective in ranking. Go for it.

I want to know what Mike Anthony considers a competitive SERP. You're the one that keeps saying that .infos can't rank for competitive keywords but you keep dodging the question as to what a competitive term is.

Typical. You are demanding definitions while trying to duck out of having to give any evidence for your assertions.

We may be talking about different classes of keywords, we are left to guess what you consider competitive. This is why I'd like to get your idea of what an average IMer would go after. I would rather not shoot at a moving target.

That should be as transparent to anyone as saying I don't have any proof.

No, I don't have any case studies that show 100 .info domains ranking for any keyword. Then again I don't claim that it would. I claimed it was a part of a portfolio of tools that would help the "average IMer" rank their sites for the keywords that "average IMer's" go after.

Of course if you are telling people to invest a few hundred dollars to rank sites with .infos you should have some proof that doing so will be effective. What world do you live on anyway? Your just dancing around because you know you have been tagged without anything to back up you suggestions.

I'm not telling them to do anything. I do know for a fact that adding .infos to your toolset does help in rankings. You don't need thousands to see a difference either. Tell you what, if you really want a case study I'll perform one for you. Give me $200 and I'll make 100 .info blogs then we will perform a test. If I fail I'll pay you the $200 back, if I succeed then I keep the domains and I don't pay you anything back. I'll pay for hosting too. Although I'd need to know what you consider a worthwhile keyword first. I'm sure $200 is nothing to somebody who is so good at SEO.

The viability of your suggestions falls on that one point and yet you can't show any proof whatsoever that people are not better just finding a few hundred article directories to post to with some free blogs and that adding those will give them any real big effect.

Having a hundred sites that you completely control the content of is a pretty good advantage to have. Plus you can get those extra AMR links in addition to the .infos, why choose?

If it takes hundreds or even thousands which is all you have proof for then its totally invalidates choosing them over domain names with Pr for the same investment.

We don't broadcast our content to all of our blogs everytime.

Your suggestions for building networks has always been a load of rubbish and I 'm glad I got around to exposing it for what it is.

LOL, you did huh?

As for your list. Most of them you would have no prayer with so don't worry I don't even expect you to aim that high. Like I said you gave the recommendation of 100 .infos being effective so provide some serps where that would be the case.

I thought I would loosen your tongue and you would give us an example of the type of keyword you think the "average IMer" would go after. Oh well.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5074407].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I want to know what Mike Anthony considers a competitive SERP. .

This aint dancing with the stars Marc. You can quit with the two step. LOL. You said 100 .infos would be effective so either you had no idea what serps you were talking about when you suggested that to people or you can supply the ones you were referring tp. Unless you are saying that what Mike Anthony thinks guides your suggestions

. I mean I'd try and pick my brain too if I didn't have a SEO on staff. LOL.

and no one cares about how many domains you use with your service. All you have to do is present even a jot of real proof that buying 100 .infos and going to the trouble of setting them up and hosting them will be effective enough to spend the money and time on. So far you are laying a goose egg on that and it aint the golden ones in the bedtime stories either.

Having a hundred sites that you completely control the content of is a pretty good advantage to have. Plus you can get those extra AMR links in addition to the .infos, why choose?

hey keep illustrating you can't keep your theories straight. I love it. adding more PR N/a and zeros doesn't create the variety you were talking about earlier. If you hadn't notices there were three choices not the only two you know to use for SEO.Seriously you should pay royalties to AMR because where would you be without it? One trick ponies do even worse with only one foot to stand on. Me? I'll add the PR domains I control as a better asset than your new N/A infos and I wouldn't tank my $200 bucks on your unproven failed to back up theory that they provide anything near to what I would consider "Effective".

but thanks for the laugh before bed. Literally LOL. Why in the world should I send $200 to you to help you test out your own theory? You say you are not touching anything illegal but writing things that someone only writes when their eyes are red and they are grinning uncontrollably.

You know nothing for a fact. Thats just forum talk for I can't verify squat but take my word for it. Roughly just the forum equivalent of when a boxer has had his bell rung and is dancing to look impressive when he has no idea which of the three duplicate fuzzy images he should swing at. Facts have proof of existence and yours is non existent. Night Marc. Its been fun and funny.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5074512].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

This aint dancing with the stars Marc. You can quit with the two step. LOL. You said 100 .infos would be effective so either you had no idea what serps you were talking about when you suggested that to people or you can supply the ones you were referring. Unless you are saying that what Mike Anthony thinks guides your suggestions

.

What I consider "average IMer" keywords. I know what the "average IMer" is going after too, maybe I'll give some examples when I have more time to look at it.

and no one cares about how many domains you use with your service. All you have to do is present even a jot of real proof that buying 100 .infos and going to the trouble of setting them up and hosting them will be effective enough to spend the money and time on. So far you are laying a goose egg on that.

You haven't shown that buying 20 PR domains would make a difference either.

hey keep illustrating you can't keep your theories straight. adding more PR N/a and zeros doesn't create the variety you were talking about earlier.

It increases the ip diversity though but Mike, you're doing it again. I didn't say that this is all that you would do. I'm just saying that you could get the AMR links along with the .infos, you don't need to choose.

If you hadn't notices there were three choices not the only two you know to use for SEO. Me? I'll add the PR domains I control as a better asset than your new N/A infos and I wouldn't tank my $200 bucks on your unproven failed to back up theory that they provide anything near to what I would consider "Effective".

$200 isn't a whole lot of money for SEO professionals, my time is worth more than that and I'd be donating it to the project. Plus if I fail I'll pay you the $200 back. But we'd need to agree on a keyword.

but thanks for the laugh before bed. Literally LOL. Why in the world should I send $200 to you to help you test out your own theory? You say you are not touching anything illegal but writing things that only someone high would write.

Simple, you've spent more than $200 worth of time telling me I'm full of crap. I know I've spent triple that of my own. I'd figure that because you know SEO so well you must wipe with hundred dollar bills. Oh well.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5074588].message }}

Mike Anthony 12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

You haven't shown that buying 20 PR domains would make a difference either.

Really? I guess home page backlink services don't work right Marc? We are not in the same boat. I got a paddle in mine. I can point to serps and services that people know work. can we have the name of the service provider that uses 100 .info N/A domains to rank sites? Or is that reverse fiverr where they pay you to use the service?

$200 isn't a whole lot of money for SEO professionals, my time is worth more than that

mowing the yard, writing some original articles . Shoot even walking the dog but your time setting up .info Pr N/A aint worth much to me. Sorry if you are hard up but repeated requests for me to pay you to test your own theory i s well - looney. Where I come from they have this saying if you believe in something - you put your money where your mouth is not ask that someone who doesn't believe put theirs.

$200 is like you said nothing but the fact that thats all you can come up with as a premise to even get some beginnings of proof to what you have claimed as fact says all we need to know. since it seems that s all we'll get I'm going to let Melissa rest her jaw and call and end to this back and forth.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5074751].message }}

Melissa82

12 years ago

How did I get access to both of your PM boxes?

Seriously, I've followed this thread for a while and thank you both for your early contributions but now I feel like I'm watching a tennis game with a toothache.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5074565].message }}

Mike Anthony 12 years ago

Originally Posted by Melissa82

but now I feel like I'm watching a tennis game with a toothache.

High compliment, If the tennis wasn't good why watch?
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5074634].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Mike, I said I would pay you back if it failed. I don't need the $200 believe me.

$200 is nothing to me but I wanted you to invest into the project because I wasn't going to put up the money and the time just to show that 100 .infos work and are worth having as part of the "average IMer's" arsenal. Like I said my time is more valuable than the $200.

Ok, I'm done. If you change your mind drop me a line.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5074824].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

I think it would be helpful to understand what a network can or cannot do by figuring out what kind of keywords you are going to go after. What I call "average IMer" keywords my approach will work just fine.

If you are trying for top 3 for "car insurance quote" Mike's 10 PR network nor my 100 brand new .infos are going to make much of a difference. (cost equivalent assuming aged domain costs $20).

Some examples of "average IMer" keywords.

acne pills
cystic acne treatment

Mike, what do you consider a keyword the "average IMer" might go after? I think this is vitally important to the type of approach you take in building a network.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090647].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I

If you are trying for top 3 for "car insurance quote" Mike's 10 PR network nor my 100 brand new .infos are going to make much of a difference. (cost equivalent assuming aged domain costs $20).

Actually marc I can leverage even a 10 Pr network to get 40-60 PR links for that serp and that would make a difference. in fact over time probably even more.

Mike, what do you consider a keyword the "average IMer" might go after? I think this is vitally important to the type of approach you take in building a network.

Good then since you suggested a 100.info PR n/a network in building a network you can go ahead and tell people what you think that would rank for since you gave them that particular suggestion. I'm glad you are off the me paying to fund your experiment stuff but you keep ducking that question. If you said that something would be effective you must have had something in mind before suggesting it. So go ahead and tell us what the new 100 .info PR would rank for.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090761].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Actually marc I can leverage even a 10 Pr network to get 40-60 PR links for that serp and that would make a difference. in fact over time probably even more.

The 100 .infos would make a difference as well but you won't be getting to top 3 with either.

Good then since you suggested a 100.info PR network in building a network you can go ahead and tell people what you think that would rank for since you gave them that particular suggestion. I'm glad you are off the me paying to fund your experiment stuff but you keep ducking that question. If you said that something would be effective you must have had something in mind before suggesting it. So go ahead and tell us what the new 100 .info PR would rank for.

I gave two examples of what I would call "average IMer" keywords. The 100 .infos would help rank top 3 with either.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090784].message }}

mattlaclear

12 years ago

I'm thinking it would probably look more natural to Google if a site had 100 links from pr3 blogs and 100 links from pr0 sites.

Really I think the answer here is to combine both types of networks into one. That would provide a healthy dose of diversity imo.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090855].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

There is zero need to pick out keywords that 100 PR 0 links would work for. There is also no reason to debate this.

You think PR 0 links are valuable. I think they are ****. That doesn't matter either.

Let's pretend I got hit on the head really hard and lost my mind and believed that 100 PR 0 links were awesome.

Fine.

Even believing that, there is still no reason to waste money buying 100 PR 0 .info domains. PR 0 links can easily be obtained all over the place. I can get an autoapprove list for Scrapebox and blast tons of PR 0 links all over the place. I can use AMR and drop tons of PR 0 links all around.

Why spend $150-200 to buy the domains plus the cost of hosting? Hosting each one on its own IP is going to run you $150-200/month.

There are plenty of tools out there I could use for a lot cheaper and get PR 0 backlinks off of far more IP's.

And you can't even justify it by saying you could sell links on the 100 PR 0 .info's. First of all, I don't think there is a market for links off 100 PR 0 .info sites. Secondly, I could easily spend the money on SEnuke or Magic Submitter and sell that as a service. Judging by the popularity of crap like Nuke4me, I could actually sell that kind of service for far more money than backlinks off 100 PR 0 domains.

So even if I felt that I needed PR 0 backlinks to rank my site effectively, I just couldn't possibly justify the expense for 100 PR 0 domains.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5090957].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

There is zero need to pick out keywords that 100 PR 0 links would work for. There is also no reason to debate this.

Then why don't you stop? But since you brought it up....

You think PR 0 links are valuable. I think they are ****. That doesn't matter either.

PR 0 links are not **** but you need to know how to maximize them to make a system like the one I am talking about work. Sure if you just post the content on the .infos and thats it, then there isn't a whole lot of advantage in doing so. There are tools out there that allow you to get PR links, for free, and on autopilot. So let's say you place 100 links on your .infos, along with hundreds more on those easily obtainable directories through AMR. Now imagine you can increase the authority of those 100 .info links on auto pilot. Creating the .info sites cost you $217 with free privacy. Try finding 10 aged domains for under that plus you have to pay for privacy. You'll most likely get 7 or at most 8 PR domains for the price of 100 .infos.

Let's pretend I hit got hit on the head really hard and lost my mind and believed that 100 PR 0 links were awesome.

Please lets turn a new leaf and stop with the personal insults. You don't need to be hit in the head really hard to see the value in what I am saying.

Even believing that, there is still no reason to waste money buying 100 PR 0 .info domains. PR 0 links can easily be obtained all over the place. I can get an autoapprove list for Scrapebox and blast tons of PR 0 links all over the place. I can use AMR and drop tons of PR 0 links all around.

Then grab those too, what's stopping you? Problem with these links is that you can't be sure that they will be around that long since you don't own the domains. With the 100 .infos you 100% control what stays and goes. Thus increasing their authority is a much more worthwhile endeavor.

Why spend $150-200 to buy the domains plus the cost of hosting? Hosting each one on its own IP is going to run you $150-200/month.

You don't need to have 1 ip per domain. 5 domains per ip is fine. You'll get a crap ton of ip diversity by using AMR and other tools. It's not a problem.

There are plenty of tools out there I could use for a lot cheaper and get PR 0 backlinks off of far more IP's.

And you can use them along with your .infos.

And you can't even justify it by saying you could sell links on the 100 PR 0 .info's. First of all, I don't think there is a market for links off 100 PR 0 .info sites. Secondly, I could easily spend the money on SEnuke or Magic Submitter and sell that as a service, and judging by the popularity of crap like Nuke4me, I could actually sell that kind of service for far more money than backlinks off 100 PR 0 domains.

People buy these types of links Mike.

So even if I felt that I needed PR 0 backlinks to rank my site effectively, I just couldn't possibly justify the expense for 100 PR 0 domains.

Then do it your way! Simple, but don't pretend that yours is the only way to go about it.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5091022].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Please lets turn a new leaf and stop with the personal insults. You don't need to be hit in the head really hard to see the value in what I am saying.

That was not at all intended as an insult. That was merely a statement to reinforce my strong belief that PR 0 links are virtually worthless for ranking, and it would take a pretty hard hit on the head to make me think otherwise.

So, what I'm gathering from your post is that you would take 100 PR 0 .info's and blast a bunch of other PR 0 backlinks at them to increase their authority? Or did I read that wrong?

I don't see that doing a whole to increase authority, but even if it did, I could do the same thing blasting at web 2.0 sites to build them up instead of wasting the money on the PR 0 domains and hosting.

If I'm just blasting out PR 0 backlinks with automated tools, to me your point about controlling the domain is just not really a concern. So what if a few backlinks are dropped? I can easily blast out hundreds or thousands more.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Creating the .info sites cost you $217 with free privacy. Try finding 10 aged domains for under that plus you have to pay for privacy. You'll most likely get 7 or at most 8 PR domains for the price of 100 .infos.

Give me 7 PR 3's... I can turn those into an additional 5-8 PR 1's and 2's at minimum. With those, you would outrank 100 PR 0's easily. And if you wanted to sell links, I have no doubt that people would pay more for links off of 12-15 sites with PR than 100 sites with no PR.

I'm sorry. I just see no value in buying 100 PR 0 .infos. Not to mention, as far as footprints go, I would never recommend that someone buy nothing but .info sites. So if you get off of the .info's, you are looking at a lot more money spent to build a network of 100 PR 0 sites.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5091129].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

That was not at all intended as an insult. That was merely a statement to reinforce my strong belief that PR 0 links are virtually worthless for ranking, and it would take a pretty hard hit on the head to make me think otherwise.

Fair enough.

So, what I'm gathering from your post is that you would take 100 PR 0 .info's and blast a bunch of other PR 0 backlinks at them to increase their authority? Or did I read that wrong?

Yeah you did. You can get PR from this process without doing anything other than setting it up initially.

I don't see that doing a whole to increase authority, but even if it did, I could do the same thing blasting at web 2.0 sites to build them up instead of wasting the money on the PR 0 domains and hosting.

Sure but the web 2.0s can get deleted and the links you create to them are then worthless.

If I'm just blasting out PR 0 backlinks with automated tools, to me your point about controlling the domain is just not really a concern. So what if a few backlinks are dropped? I can easily blast out hundreds or thousands more.

If you are trying to create authority of your backlinks then its more optimal to do so on links that you control 100%. Sure, you can do it for free on web 2.0s but then you always run the risk of getting your accounts axed. Some web 2.0s don't like spam complaints.

Give me 7 PR 3's... I can turn those into an additional 5-8 PR 1's and 2's at minimum. With those, you would outrank 100 PR 0's easily. And if you wanted to sell links, I have no doubt that people would pay more for links off of 12-15 sites with PR than 100 sites with no PR.

As soon as the pr 0's getting any PR backlinks then you effectively have up to 100 PR backlinks and these will be very powerful.

I'm sorry. I just see no value in buying 100 PR 0 .infos. Not to mention, as far as footprints go, I would never recommend that someone buy nothing but .info sites. So if you get off of the .info's, you are looking at a lot more money spent to build a network of 100 PR 0 sites.

This is why you do other types of backlinking, by doing so you effectively mask your network. If all you do is run links on the .infos then you are 100% correct.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5091191].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

As soon as the pr 0's getting any PR backlinks then you effectively have up to 100 PR backlinks and these will be very powerful.

Like I said the beans have already been spilled on how ineffective this is despite your present claims. exhibit A -

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Pr0 .info sites for the most part. They usually become pr 1's over the course of the year though. It's those we renew.

So lets stop the smoke blowing. incidentally in case you are unaware Marc - almost no one that builds Pr domains buys PR1s.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5091636].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Like I said the beans have already been spilled on how ineffective this is despite your present claims. exhibit A -

So lets stop the smoke blowing. incidentally in case you are unaware Marc - almost no one that builds Pr domains buys PR1s.

Mike, this has nothing to do with what I am saying. You are not supposed to bring our service into this.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5091673].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Mike, this has nothing to do with what I am saying. You are not supposed to bring our service into this.

Learn to read Marc that had absolutely nothing to do with your service. It is a direct quote in this very thread that has to do with your particular way of building a network which you are suggesting in this thread and how much PR it builds up according to Matt. There is NO MENTION of the effectiveness of ranking with your customers, no mention of your customers or anything else with the service. It relates EXCLUSIVELY to the kind of network that you are suggesting in this thread. The ineffectiveness being referenced is the inability to build up much PR in the network that Matt admitted to in this thread. Thats the quote as is obvious if you read.

IF you say one thing in this thread and then Matt says something else in it and you both build networks together its a contradiction that bears relevance to this thread without saying anything about any service you provide.

That has everything to do with what you were saying.

P. S. Please desist from sending me anymore worthless threatening PMs. In fact since I never requested it don't send any at all.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5093487].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Learn to read Marc that had absolutely nothing to do with your service.

But you mention something that we may be doing in maintaining this network. How we do so has nothing to do with how an "average IMer" might do so. What we do has nothing, absolutely zero to do with what I am suggesting for "average IMers".

IF you say one thing in this thread and then Matt says something else in it and you both build networks together its a contradiction that bears relevance to this thread without saying anything about any service you provide.

No it doesn't, stick to the subject.

That has everything to do with what you were saying.

No it doesn't, we have thousands of domains far outside of the reach of the "average IMer". We are talking about 100 here. What Matt and I do with a particular service's network is absolutely irrelevant, drop it.

P. S. Please desist from sending me anymore worthless threatening PMs. In fact since I never requested it don't send any at all.

Threaten? LOL Leave our service out of this and what we may or may not do in maintaining a network for this service. It has no bearing on what my points are.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5095530].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

But you mention something that we may be doing in maintaining this network.

No I mentioned Matt who builds the same kind of networks that you are suggesting stating in this very thread that after a year of building the sites up they reach only PR1. Its his quote in this thread about the exact thing we are talking about - building up N/As to PR1s. Don't care how you take it or try to twist it its on point and it speaks to the point you were making and contradicts it. Period. I don't give a rip about your service stop trying to work it in. I have made it very clear I am talking about building up .info N/As to have Pr regardless of how few or how many.

No it doesn't, we have thousands of domains far outside of the reach of the "average IMer". We are talking about 100 here. What Matt and I do with a particular service's network is absolutely irrelevant, drop it.

Again Stop trying to work your service into it. we are talking about building up NAs to zeros. doesn't matter how much of them you have so stop advertising. Each domain is built up in its PR separately. Google has no multi build PR option :rolleyes:. The point stands. If after a year domains cannot be built up in your own experience then you are blowing smoke. Has nothing to do with your service. Its domain by domain page by page

You are interjecting it by quoting a "gotcha" quote from pages ago about how we may maintain a network for a particular service. I don't want people to duplicate that. I'm talking about 100 .infos, period.

this reasoning is as bizarre as you claiming I should give you $200 to test your theory and repeating over and over again seriously. Again stop trying to distort issues to claim I am mentioning your service. the process of building up a .info PR N/A. is done on an individual page to page basis. Everyone here knows that so what service you use, how big your network is is totally irrelevant. If you attempt to build up a .info PR N/A for a year and it only gets to a PR1 then the point is VERY legitimate and has nothing to do with any service but your own ability to do what you were claiming you can do.

Get Mad with Matt for outing you not me.

So anybody gladly taking those links are idiots. Nice. But this destroys your argument that people don't pay for these links in any case. Whether you think they are stupid or not is irrelevant.

:rolleyes: People do not pay for individual forum profile by profile do they? You are so lost and have no clue what was being talked about. People do pay for links individually on a high Pr page. Do a google search.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5095933].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

-more inane gibberish-

What Matt said has nothing to do with what I am suggesting, period, end of story. Drop it, it's irrelevant.

Again Stop trying to work your service into it. we are talking about building up NAs to zeros. doesn't matter how much of them you have so stop advertising.

I am not bringing it into this. I know we are supposed to stop with the personal insults but you make it so damn hard. What I am suggesting has nothing to do with what Matt, nor I do for maintaining a network that we use for a particular service. You brought up tactics that we have used in the past for a network that we use EXCLUSIVELY for said service. Drop it.

Each domain is built up in its PR separately. Google has no multi build PR option :rolleyes:.

No Kidding!

The point stands. If after a year domains cannot be built up in your own experience then you are blowing smoke.

Like it has been clearly stated to you 100 times now, what we did a year ago has not relevancy to what I am suggesting now. We didn't even TRY to do what I am suggesting in the way I am suggesting for the "average IMer". I wouldn't expect an "average IMer" to create a network of our size nor am I suggesting that he/she follow what we might or might not have done in maintaining this network (that we use exclusively for a certain taboo service). You connected what I am suggesting now to what Matt said PAGES AGO about our SERVICE related network. The two have absolutely zero to do with the other. Get off it.

Has nothing to do with your service. Its domain by domain page by page

Then stop bringing our service into it! The network I am suggesting is not modeled off of our network, get a clue.

this reasoning is as bizarre as you claiming I should give you $200 to test your theory and repeating over and over again seriously. Again stop trying to distort issues to claim I am mentioning your service.

You mentioned our network that we use to run that service, period. I am not suggesting a network like we have for use specifically for our service. Understand? Get it?

the process of building up a .info PR N/A. is done on an individual page to page basis. Everyone here knows that so what service you use, how big your network is is totally irrelevant. If you attempt to build up a .info PR N/A for a year and it only gets to a PR1 then the point is VERY legitimate and has nothing to do with any service but your own ability to do what you were claiming you can do.

How do you know we tried to increase the PR like I am suggesting here? Where is your damn evidence of that? Goodness you connect ideas that have nothing to do with the other, CONSTANTLY. You may be the most annoying person I have ever dealt with on any forum. What Matt said had absolutely zero to say with what I am suggesting!!!! This 100 .info network is NOTHING like what we do for our other network. Matt has not outed anything that has to do with what I am suggesting the "average IMer" do with his/her network!

:rolleyes: People do not pay for individual forum profile by profile do they? You are so lost and have no clue what was being talked about. People do pay for links individually on a high Pr page. Do a google search.

Thats why you sell LOTS OF THEM! If you have 5 PR domains and 100 PR 0 domains you can make money off of either, proven fact. Whether you sell them singly or in bulk doesn't matter one bit. You can make money either way.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096062].message }}

wegenbelasting

12 years ago

You bitches :p get back on topic, how we gonna setup a private blog network?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096117].message }}

Melissa82

12 years ago

Originally Posted by wegenbelasting

You bitches :p get back on topic, how we gonna setup a private blog network?

I think they should just have sex and be done with it

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096130].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Melissa82

I think they should just have sex and be done with it

I'd have to pay for the room and I refuse! LOL

I'm going to get back to working on this order where somebody bought my links.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096209].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Marc same answer as before. Proof. when you offer some for anything you can tell me to drop things until then deaf ears. No one buys PR1s and thats what has been exposed in this thread

There are ton loads of Home page backlinks high Pr blog networks I can point to with 10, 20 or 40 domains working with. Proof positive for High PR networks. Where the proof for your 100 N/A network suggestion?

continue to be obtuse about the point on buying Links on pages. No one buys individual links on N/As any more than anyone buys a particular forum profile link. People do buy individual links on PR pages. There are multiple marketplace for it even if you are clueless to that market not existing for N/As.

edit - removed not getting into anything but proof.

Most IMers (and I have seen probably 25,000 keywords for campaigns) go for much more realistic class of keywords so these links work wonders no matter how much the Mikes say otherwise.

For 100 .info N/As- networks? Grade A baloney. Pure nonsense. Prove it works wonders.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096364].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

There are ton loads of Home page backlinks high Pr blog networks I can point to with 10, 20 or 40 domains working with. Proof positive for High PR networks. Where the proof for your 100 N/A network suggestion?

You'd get around 6-8 aged domains for the $217 the .infos would cost. Do you have anything with those numbers to point to?

continue to be obtuse about the point on buying Links on pages. No one buys individual links on N/As any more than anyone buys a particular forum profile link. People do buy individual links on PR pages. There are multiple marketplace for it even if you are clueless to that market not existing for N/As.

Why does it matter? Money is money and you can sell the links JUST THE SAME just not on an individual basis. Why does it matter?

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096598].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Even believing that, there is still no reason to waste money buying 100 PR 0 .info domains. PR 0 links can easily be obtained all over the place. I can get an autoapprove list for Scrapebox and blast tons of PR 0 links all over the place. I can use AMR and drop tons of PR 0 links all around.
.

Yep. Makes no sense. When you set up the .info N/as you have to pay for the domains and then hosting for them etc. Free blogs, article marketing , press releases even some profile stuff allows you to put in content links. So theres no reason to build a network to get your NAs and zeros.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Now imagine you can increase the authority of those 100 .info links on auto pilot. Creating the .info sites cost you $217 with free privacy. Try finding 10 aged domains for under that plus you have to pay for privacy. You'll most likely get 7 or at most 8 PR domains for the price of 100 .infos.

Come on Marc who do you think you are fooling here? We are all aware of the tools out there and you are trying to act like you have some secret stashed away in the process that oooh just imagine if we knew it :rolleyes:. You are already on record that when you build a network you make most of the .infos go each year and they do not build any substantial PR. that cat is out of the bag. lets not start with the deception stuff. Yes if you do enough runs with automated software you will get a bit of juice but its nowhere like you are trying to paint and takes great volume and yes a great decay rate .

Plus its painfully obvious that you are not taking into consideration what you can do with PR domains. You probably have no clue but 7 or 8 domains can make for 50-100 Pr links if you know what you are doing. We don't get anywhere recently because you refuse to acknowledge the obvious like when you deny tht people don't want to buy links on a PR zero or n/A.

You might as well argue that the sky is green on a clear day. Anyone in this thread want to pay $12 a year for some Pr NA links? any takers? :rolleyes:

As soon as the pr 0's getting any PR backlinks then you effectively have up to 100 PR backlinks and these will be very powerful.

Thats a fail unless you have some strong Pr drawing from. If anyone wanted to do this they STILL would utilize PR domains. A single PR3 that you buy would convey far more juice to the .infos by placing 50 links on them. SO even in that scenario you would start out with a PR network to feed that setup.

The whole smoke and mirrors you are pushing (edited in case there is any misunderstanding) here is exposed by the fact that there is no mystery software or process to building PR. Pr always flows from pages that have it and is always diluted by the quantity of links and navigating pages dividing it up from its source. SO to blast your way to Pr with automated tools all you and others are doing is slicing up the pie from wherever PR is ultimately coming from. there is no free lunch. Now if you own the domain the Pr is coming from and control the source not add on some links to the interior pages you get FAR more juice no matter what you claim. The whole comparison is totally bogus. automated software almost never gives you links on the page with PR. The best exception to this is blog commenting but they get deleted, nofollowed and the PR flowing through the ones that are open to spam get diluted daily.

In the old days yes I built some PR1s and 2s with profile links but they didn't hold for long because spam links are always being removed and weakened. at the end of the day if you are depending on those for PR on your network sites you hold no advantage as you claim because with a network of N/as and zeros you are still dependent on the PR from the sites you blast and theyt are either weakening from other spammers or being removed or nofollowed. When a domain is bought its being bought with multiple links on real Pr pages that spammers can't slam and dilute.

Apples and oranges.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5091582].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Come on Marc who do you think you are fooling here? We are all aware of the tools out there and you are trying to act like you have some secret stashed away in the process that oooh just imagine if we knew it :rolleyes:.

You have to know what you are doing but there are ways to get these links without doing anything, because you are ignorant of them doesn't they don't exist.

You are already on record that when you build a network you make most of the .infos go each year and they do not build any substantial PR.

Irrelevant. This isn't about what I do for any particular business, remember, off limits.

that cat is out of the bag. lets not start with the deception stuff.

Prove the lie Mikey. I am not being deceptive.

Yes if you do enough runs with automated software you will get a bit of juice but its nowhere like you are trying to paint and takes great volume and yes a great decay rate .

There are ways to target PR links Mike. You don't need to blindly blast away.

Plus its painfully obvious that you are not taking into consideration what you can do with PR domains. You probably have no clue but 7 or 8 domains can make for 50-100 Pr links if you know what you are doing.

I'm not saying your way sucks, I'm quite certain your way works too. This isn't an either/or for me. I do it this way because it's easier, if you know what you are doing. Your ignorance, is evidence of just that, your ignorance.

We don't get anywhere recently because you refuse to acknowledge the obvious like when you deny tht people don't want to buy links on a PR zero or n/A.

I know that is wrong, I have two cars in the driveway that says otherwise.

You might as well argue that the sky is green on a clear day. Anyone in this thread want to pay $12 a year for some Pr NA links? any takers? :rolleyes:

You need to know how to sell it Mike, I'm sorry if you can't. I make thousands a month from one singular customer who likes my links just fine.

Thats a fail unless you have some strong Pr drawing from. If anyone wanted to do this they STILL would utilize PR domains. A single PR3 that you buy would convey far more juice to the .infos by placing 50 links on them. SO even in that scenario you would start out with a PR network to feed that setup.

You can't be objective because your signature is selling a course on setting up the network you are arguing for. It's obvious. You can get enough quantity of PR links to substantially juice 100 domains and 1000's of links from those domains. Remember I'm not the one calling the other person wrong in their approach, you are.

The whole smoke and mirrors you are selling here is exposed by the fact that there is no mystery software or process to building PR.

Your ignorance is irrelevant.

Pr always flows from pages that have it and is always diluted by the quantity of links and navigating pages dividing it up from its source. SO to blast your way to Pr with automated tools all you and others are doing is slicing up the pie from wherever PR is ultimately coming from. there is no free lunch.

Sure, if all you do is use public lists. You don't need to do this.

Now if you own the domain the Pr is coming from and control the source not add on some links to the interior pages you get FAR more juice no matter what you claim.

Sure but I never hinted otherwise. I don't think your approach is wrong, Mike. I'm saying there are other ways to get similar results.

The whole comparison is totally bogus. automated software almost never gives you links on the page with PR.

Not true.

The best exception to this is blog commenting but they get deleted, nofollowed and the PR flowing through the ones that are open to spam get diluted daily.

Why you need alot of them and you need to do so continually. Sure some of the links are going to go down but they all aren't.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5091669].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

I'm completely confused.

First you are arguing that PR 0 .info's have great ranking power on their own. Now you are changing your argument to building up the PR of those sites in order for them to have any ranking power. And apparently you have a magical automated way to do this that nobody else knows of.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5092989].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

I'm completely confused.

First you are arguing that PR 0 .info's have great ranking power on their own. Now you are changing your argument to building up the PR of those sites in order for them to have any ranking power. And apparently you have a magical automated way to do this that nobody else knows of.

I don't think I argued the first part at all. It isn't magical.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5095478].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

You have to know what you are doing but there are ways to get these links without doing anything, because you are ignorant of them doesn't they don't exist.

No we are all aware of them. furthermore we are not ignorant of where PR comes from to be fooled by an emperor with the new clothes claim thats really naked (for those unfamiliar with that fable). PR ALWAYS come from another page with PR - not from a tool.

A L W A Y S (unless you are one of the Sites Google picked to assign Pr to in order to start the ball roling and no one here owns one of those)

Pages that allow automated submission to pages with PR get slammed ultimately by spammers and all the rest of automated tools submit to pages that are N/A and zero themselves. this is basic stuff marc and we all know it.

Irrelevant. This isn't about what I do for any particular business, remember, off limits.

how you or I build networks is not off limits if we are talking building networks and thats what we are doing . Stop trying to interject your service into it again. We are talking about infrastructure not services. No one mentioned anything to do with what you do with your network or its success or failure. We are talking about building up PR on a .info N/A network that you are suggesting in this thread and what Matt has already admitted he experiences with it specifically in regard to the build up of PR or in this case the lack of of any significant build up.

There are ways to target PR links Mike. You don't need to blindly blast away.

Of course there are ways to target PR links. DO it all the time but its off point. You were talking automated tools and they do not leave links on high PR pages with low OBL. The few (scrapebox etc) that can leave links on pages with PR regularly also end up getting deleted more or diluted by spammers.

I know that is wrong, I have two cars in the driveway that says otherwise.

. Don't we all. Anyway I was not implying you could not get someone to pay but that no one savvy here would. People sell Forum profile links for thousands of dollars per year. Fools are born everyday but the educated non crazy market won't no matter what the claim.

You can't be objective because your signature is selling a course on setting up the network you are arguing for. It's obvious.

Nice try Marc but as almost everyone in this thread knows whats in my sig now came after several debates where I shared info that i work by not the other way around. I publicly held my views here before having any course and you in particular know this because you participated in threads where I was asked by thread participants to provide what I now do. However surprise!!! - I cover all kinds of networks so your whole point is just totally dead.

anyway I am quite sure the admonitions don't allow you to try and interject my services into this thread either.

Remember I'm not the one calling the other person wrong in their approach, you are.

Thats actually true. Yes I am. but thats a function of my proof to yours. There is a ton load of evidence on my side unlike yours. The countless home page High PR networks that rank sites some with only 20-40 domains, services like BMR (with considerable more), hundreds of thousands of serps where when people look at the backlinks they see pages with more high PR backlinks (targeted to anchor text)doing better than those with less. On and on and on with proof.

Meanwhile we are still waiting for even a sliver of evidence that 100 or even 200 .info NAs can do anything you claim. So far its rhetoric versus evidence. not much else which is why its probably time to call this thread quits

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5093882].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

No we are all aware of them. furthermore we are not ignorant of where PR comes from to be fooled by an emperor with the new clothes claim thats really naked (for those unfamiliar with that fable). PR ALWAYS come from another page with PR - not from a tool.

No Kidding! The tool isn't magic.

how you or I build networks is not off limits if we are talking building networks and thats what we are doing . Stop trying to interject your service into it again.

You are interjecting it by quoting a "gotcha" quote from pages ago about how we may maintain a network for a particular service. I don't want people to duplicate that. I'm talking about 100 .infos, period.

We are talking about building up PR on a .info N/A network that you are suggesting in this thread and what Matt has already admitted he experiences with it specifically in regard to the build up of PR or in this case the lack of of any significant build up.

Matt was not talking about what I am suggesting. Remember this is for the "average IMer". We are not "average IMer"s, most definitely not.

Of course there are ways to target PR links. DO it all the time but its off point. You were talking automated tools and they do not leave links on high PR pages with low OBL.

Ok, your ignorance is your issue.

. Don't we all. Anyway I was not implying you could not get someone to pay but that no one savvy here would. People sell Forum profile links for thousands of dollars per year. Fools are born everyday but the educated non crazy market won't no matter what the claim.

So anybody gladly taking those links are idiots. Nice. But this destroys your argument that people don't pay for these links in any case. Whether you think they are stupid or not is irrelevant.

Thats actually true. Yes I am. but thats a function of my proof to yours. There is a ton load of evidence on my side unlike yours. The countless home page High PR networks that rank sites some with only 20-40 domains, services like BMR (with considerable more), hundreds of thousands of serps where when people look at the backlinks they see pages with more high PR backlinks (targeted to anchor text)doing better than those with less. On and on and on with proof.

Well, Mike I listed a couple "average IMer" keywords in a post. What do you think "average IMer"s go after? My approach can get these keywords ranked highly (by my approach I mean 100 infos that we've been talking about). You've ducked this for so long but it's time for you to tell us what the "average IMer" is gong to target and why he'd need to build a network for it.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5095623].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Enough and my apologies to others for getting sucked in to this for so long

Marc - You suggested a 100 N/A network as being effective. Present the evidence. I don't have anymore time to waste with this totally unsubstantiated theory as surely as I have no intention of giving you $200 so that you can test it out said unsubstantiated theory.

Since you refuse to present any evidence we are done here.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5095981].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Enough and my apologies to others for getting sucked in to this for so long

Marc - You suggested a 100 N/A network as being effective. Present the evidence. I don't have anymore time to waste with this totally unsubstantiated theory as surely as I have no intention of giving you $200 so that you can test it out said unsubstantiated theory.

Since you refuse to present any evidence we are done here.

You haven't given one example of a keyword, I have given two that are what the "average IMer" are going after. My network of 100 .infos can and would make a difference in ranking for such keywords. It matters what the keywords you are going to go after when you consider creating a network of blogs for the express reason of backlinking your money sites. I'm not even saying that high PR aged domains are bad or don't work. It's that some people don't want to mess with finding them and going through that hassle IF THEY DON'T NEED TO. There is my option for those who don't want to fool with buying aged PR sites if you are going for "average IMer" keywords.

You could even start a service selling links on those blogs to cover the cost of hosting them. The notion that nobody will buy those links is absurd and goes against the facts. Whether Mike Anthony thinks anybody who buys those links are idiots is absolutely irrelevant. Most IMers (and I have seen probably 25,000 keywords for campaigns) go for much more realistic class of keywords so these links work wonders no matter how much the Mikes say otherwise.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096176].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

There is my option for those who don't want to fool with buying aged PR sites if you are going for "average IMer" keywords.

Ok, but what IS your option? You haven't really explained that other than buy 100 brand new .info's and then you have a magic lamp with a genie in it or something that makes the PR go up. I already used up the three wishes with my genie. So for those of us out of wishes, please elaborate.

If these 100 domains are PR 2's, 3's, and higher, then yes they can help something rank. What I would like to hear, and I'm sure others reading this, is how you are taking them from PR 0 to something worthwhile in an automated fashion.

And if it is by using the Tumblr trick, that is just silly because it is just a matter of time until Tumblr makes all those links nofollow and your network then becomes useless again.

As for the selling links to pay for hosting, if they remain as PR 0's, I really don't see anyone paying for that. Why would I pay for 100 PR 0 links when I can go to fiverr and pay someone $5 for 1000's? I just don't think most people see any value in 100 PR 0 backlinks unless you are trying to mislead them and keeping it from them that these are PR 0 domains. Then yeah, if people think they are something more valuable, you could sell the heck out of it I'm sure.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096504].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

As for the selling links to pay for hosting, if they remain as PR 0's, I really don't see anyone paying for that. Why would I pay for 100 PR 0 links when I can go to fiverr and pay someone $5 for 1000's? I just don't think most people see any value in 100 PR 0 backlinks unless you are trying to mislead them and keeping it from them that these are PR 0 domains. Then yeah, if people think they are something more valuable, you could sell the heck out of it I'm sure.

I know for a fact that people buy these links. Nobody is getting misled and for you to suggest it is bad form. People buy these links constantly Mike. Are you going to suggest that they are all morons too?

I sell the heck out of them and I do so because they increase the SERP results for the people buying them not by misleading them.

You could easily get $10 to submit an article to those 100 .infos plus directories. Hosting would cost $25-$50, do the math.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096563].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I sell the heck out of them and I do so because they increase the SERP results for the people buying them not by misleading them.

simple question Marc where do you sell "heck out of those"? Where?

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Why does it matter? Money is money and you can sell the links JUST THE SAME just not on an individual basis. Why does it matter?

Simple. Marketplaces exist for the sales of PR links. You do not need to take time away from your core business to go and create a new service, WSO or sales page. Its there sitting there waiting for you even if you are not a SEO provider. Liquidity is great enhanced by that simplicity and you can use that liquidity to increase your PR domains exponentially without having to pull out of pocket.

You'd get around 6-8 aged domains for the $217 the .infos would cost. Do you have anything with those numbers to point to?

Thats a question not proof. Are you under the mistaken view that a single PR domain has only one PR page? You can leverage a single bought domain to get several PR links and the proof is all over that that 20 Pr links will give you good ranking strength because many Home page links of that number do get people to rank.

again where is YOUR proof?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096665].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

simple question Marc where do you sell "heck out of those"? Where?

Irrelevant.

Although I have threads in a couple more forums. I haven't been actively selling lately and I still make thousands a month from referrals and returning clients. This is separate from what I do with Matt by the way.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096703].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

Irrelevant.

Baloney. Just more rhetoric without proof. There is no marketplace for selling N/A links and had you been selling that to the tune of 25,000 keywords like you claim it would be well known. Anyway you take it you are trying to back door your services back into the conversation not present any proof 100 .info Na networks do anything

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096775].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Baloney. Just more rhetoric without proof. There is no marketplace for selling N/A links and had you been selling that to the tune of 25,000 keywords like you claim it would be well known.

I wish my tax man agreed with you but I have worked with (in my business and combined with Matt's) around that many keywords. I know those numbers are staggering but they are accurate. Now, I'm not selling them in the same way that PR blog owners do. That much is true.

Mike, you keep editing your posts. I am not trying to pimp my services. The point was that you can make money off of 100 .infos and as proof I mention that I do it all the time. You won't make as much as I do selling them but you can make your money back in hosting easily.

But, the bottom line is that you keep telling us that 100 infos won't do anything but you won't give us even one example of a keyword that the "average IMer" might go for. I gave two examples on what I consider "average IMer" keywords and yet you have offered zero. I can't show proof for something that I don't know what I am proving.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096802].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I wish my tax man agreed with you but I have worked with (in my business and combined with Matt's) around that many keywords. I know those numbers are staggering but they are accurate. Now, I'm not selling them in the same way that PR blog owners do. That much is true.

No Marc they are not staggering I just wanted you to admit that you were back to talking about you and Matt's services in defiance of mod direction which you just did. Keywords that you utilize in that service with thousands of .info domains has nothing to do with building a PR network of 100 .infos .

You are right back to the baloney of making your arguments based on your services even though you will claim now otherwise.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I gave two keywords that this would be effective for.

Do You do understand the concept of proof? any time you want to show a comprtitive term pick one and we can get going. And before you get back into the whole competition thing that is always determined by looking at the front page of a serp as most SEos know.

Originally Posted by Marc_L

What I won't do however is publicly out my 100 sites. I'm sure you wouldn't want to publicly out your 6 site network either.

LOL you are twisting yourself in pretzels. You don't have 100 sites dedicated to utilizing that size network. and I don't have 6. I can point to what works in many serps and High Pr homepage services you don't have anything to point to.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096848].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

No Marc they are not staggering I just wanted you to admit that you were back to talking about you and Matt's services in defiance of mod direction which you just did. Keywords that you utilize in that service with thousands of .info domains has nothing to do with building a PR network of 100 .infos .

You are right back to the baloney of making your arguments based on your services even though you will claim now otherwise.

You are such a treat!!!!

I'm answering the questions I was asked. I don't want to make this about our services. I have seen 25k keywords and ON THAT AUTHORITY I think I have a pretty good idea what an "average IMer" keyword looks like. These 25k have nothing to do with a proposed .info network of 100 sites BUT it does have to do with my ability to know what most people are going after. Which is the flipping point of this thread. Why create a network if it can't rank for the keywords you are actively going after? Which begs the question, what are the keywords "average IMers" are going after.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096879].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Simple. Marketplaces exist for the sales of PR links. You do not need to take time away from your core business to go and create a new service, WSO or sales page. Its there sitting there waiting for you even if you are not a SEO provider. Liquidity is great enhanced by that simplicity and you can use that liquidity to increase your PR domains exponentially without having to pull out of pocket.

Sure, this is a good point. But, the bottom line is you can make money off of your 100 .infos rather easily as well.

again where is YOUR proof?

Proof of what? For what keywords? How can I prove something when the target is unknown? What kind of keywords do you think the "average IMer" would go after? Then we can talk. Heck I don't even have to buy 100 new domains I can use 100 I have already. Give me a keyword.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096789].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

How can I prove something when the target is unknown?

The same way you said that a 100 info N/A network would be effective. if you had no target in mind then how could you maintain that? and if you did then you can stop hedging and present the scenario YOU were recommending it for along with some proof - finally.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096820].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

The same way you said that a 100 info N/A network would be effective. if you had no target in mind then how could you maintain that? and if you did then you can stop hedging and present the scenario YOU were recommending it for along with some proof - finally.

I gave two keywords that this would be effective for.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096833].message }}

MikeFriedman

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

I know for a fact that people buy these links. Nobody is getting misled and for you to suggest it is bad form. People buy these links constantly Mike. Are you going to suggest that they are all morons too?

I sell the heck out of them and I do so because they increase the SERP results for the people buying them not by misleading them.

You could easily get $10 to submit an article to those 100 .infos plus directories. Hosting would cost $25-$50, do the math.

Again... Stop taking everything so personal. I wasn't suggesting anything about any of your personal practices. I meant that if you advertise it as "100 PR 0 backlinks for $10" or whatever the price is, I don't think you are going to have any buyers at all. If you say, "article submission to 100 new article directories" or something along those lines, then yeah you would probably have a few buyers, but in both cases they are getting the same thing.

Now are we going to discuss the magic genie or not? Because without divulging what your automated method is for building up these brand new domains, I still don't see it being worthwhile for anyone to spend the money buying them.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

SaaS SEO Consultant

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096864].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Again... Stop taking everything so personal. I wasn't suggesting anything about any of your personal practices. I meant that if you advertise it as "100 PR 0 backlinks for $10" or whatever the price is, I don't think you are going to have any buyers at all. If you say, "article submission to 100 new article directories" or something along those lines, then yeah you would probably have a few buyers, but in both cases they are getting the same thing.

Then you shouldn't say you need to mislead people to sell the links, it isn't true.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096901].message }}

Mike Anthony

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Now are we going to discuss the magic genie or not? Because without divulging what your automated method is for building up these brand new domains, I still don't see it being worthwhile for anyone to spend the money buying them.

Mike its pointless man. Marc is going to give not a drop of evidence for anything because there is no evidence whatsoever that the suggested 100 or even 200 .info PR NA network is going to do anything "effective" as claimed. If it were a thought out based on reality suggestion then he would have had the competitive keywords ready to go not ask after he made the suggestion.

Its all hedges, smoke and mirrors and its a great waste of time so finally I leave you to him. Have fun. For various reasons he simply cannot provide evidence without appealing to unrelated services as done here

Most IMers (and I have seen probably 25,000 keywords for campaigns) go for much more realistic class of keywords so these links work wonders no matter how much the Mikes say otherwise.

a clear appeal to service 20 times larger that the suggestion and hence immaterial. pointless to the thread. I'll resubscribe when the back and forth and distortions are over.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096920].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Mike its pointless man. Marc is going to give not a drop of evidence for anything because there is no evidence whatsoever that the suggested 100 or even 200 .info PR NA network is going to do anything "effective" as claimed. If it were a thought out based on reality suggestion then he would have had the competitive keywords ready to go not ask after he made the suggestion.

Its all hedges, smoke and mirrors and its a great waste of time so finally I leave you to him. Have fun.

I'll set something up with 100 of my domains. I'm going to setup a new domain that will have zero keyword density in the domain name. Then I will rank that keyword in the top 3. I gave a keyword earlier in the thread. I won't submit any content relating to this site to any of my other blogs.

The question becomes how to verify. I use these sites and I really don't want to get them exposed. I'm sure you can understand this. I'm open to suggestions.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096969].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Now are we going to discuss the magic genie or not? Because without divulging what your automated method is for building up these brand new domains, I still don't see it being worthwhile for anyone to spend the money buying them.

Not yet....

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096973].message }}

yukon

Banned 12 years ago

I'm not posting because I have a forum sig, my forum sig is my business. A lot of people post just because they have a forum sig. My forum sig doesn't take up a lot of space compared to most forum sigs, don't mind my forum sig. Some people think forum sigs are overrated, who am I to judge others forum sigs? Just saying, I'm not posting simply because I have a forum sig.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096275].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by yukon

I'm not posting because I have a forum sig, my forum sig is my business. A lot of people post just because they have a forum sig. My forum sig doesn't take up a lot of space compared to most forum sigs, don't mind my forum sig. Some people think forum sigs are overrated, who am I to judge others forum sigs? Just saying, I'm not posting simply because I have a forum sig.

I don't need to get sales by posting in this thread.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096435].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Show me a keyword then. Maybe I'll buy 100 domains and prove it. Actually PM me the keyword and maybe we can agree on something.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096419].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

What I won't do however is publicly out my 100 sites. I'm sure you wouldn't want to publicly out your 6 site network either.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5096847].message }}

Mike Grant

12 years ago

You guys are wasting your time, lol.

Thanks

Signature

Speed Kills Manifesto - The Single Most Overlooked Tactic - Proven to Increase Conversions 100% Overnight, Traffic 240% in 3 Days

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5097490].message }}

michael scott

12 years ago

Dear sir,

I am interested in your page 1 ranking service but I require proof that your .info network can handle competitive phrases. Can you provide an example of a keyword you have ranked?

Sincerely,
Michael Scott

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5097990].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by michael scott

Dear sir,

I am interested in your page 1 ranking service but I require proof that your .info network can handle competitive phrases. Can you provide an example of a keyword you have ranked?

Sincerely,
Michael Scott

Love the sig! LOL

Sorry wrong thread for that kind of thing.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5098018].message }}

Mike Anthony 12 years ago

Will you Mikes stop bumping this to the top of the thread where I have to see it. Let it die. First you steal my name, rip off my SEO views and now torture me even when I unsubscribe.

And M scott. theres nothing new in your sig. You've been doing that for awhile now from what I heard. I will say its high time for a Mike SEO network. We could rank for anything . we'd still leave the long tail for Marc's 100 .info PR N/A network which means he could still rank for -

Sweet buffalo ear nose rings or something like that.

Rough economy - we can't put everyone out of work.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5098097].message }}
- wegenbelasting 12 years ago
  
  [DELETED]
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5098124].message }}
  
  michael scott 12 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by wegenbelasting
  
  You Mikes are bragging way too much, show me some results/proof!!!!
  
  definitely by not offering seo services with a site that uses images as headlines..
  
  Sweet buffalo ear nose rings or something like that.
  
  Does this work???
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5098145].message }}
  
  wegenbelasting 12 years ago
  
  [DELETED]
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5098169].message }}
  
  Marc_L 12 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by wegenbelasting
  
  LOL, 3 mike/michaels, a matt and a marc, ok, i;ll shut up! I always suck with M5.
  
  What's funny is we have a brother named Mike.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5098177].message }}
  
  Mike Anthony 12 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by michael scott
  
  Does this work???
  
  Umm......Consider your invitation to the Mike SEO Christmas party officially cancelled/PR N/A.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5098176].message }}
  
  Mike Anthony 12 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by wegenbelasting
  
  You Mikes are bragging way too much, show me some results/proof!!!!
  
  Your username does not begin with M. You can be safely ignored
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5098147].message }}

Google.me

12 years ago

why build your own when you can use blog network services. Had bad experience thou with linkvana but the others are pretty good.

Thanks

Signature

WordPress Tutorials

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5098457].message }}

Chris Sweeney

12 years ago

Ok, here's a question. I have about 80+ "high" PR sites: A PR5, 25 PR4s, 33 PR3s, and 23 PR2s. All on separate IPs, private WhoIs, etc. What are your thoughts on inter-linking them?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5104325].message }}

Chris Q

Banned 12 years ago

I suggest you must not buy .INFO domains, they were pretty useless and you won't get customers. Instead, invest your money for high PR domains (.COM, .NET and .ORG) and a reliable SEO hosting.

If I setup my own, there will be zero .INFO's no matter if it's PR10.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5104509].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

No you didn't. You are lying. your post is still there saying you would run the test.

Not quite lying, but I was hoping to get some kind of comment from you on the keyword. Why run the keyword isn't going to prove anything? I also didn't want to make the site public and asked for suggestions on how I should proceed. I can just see myself running the test and getting it ranked and you come back and tell me the test is worthless. I want the details agreed upon first.

You had your keyword and said clearly you would proceed with it. You claiming you were waiting on me for a keyword is a clear and easy to see fabrication. As usual poor form.

I have no problem running with it but I am trying to make sure it's worth my while.

The main problem I think you are having is appreciating that you just don't need any PR to rank for alot/most of the keywords that "average IMers" are going after. If somebody is going after tougher keywords then a PR network would certainly be important. But most of the keywords that are money making keywords that are within the grasp of the "average IMer" do not require a lot of PR links.

Of course a network like yours (what you are suggesting to beginning blog network owners) has a lot of value. Selling links is one of them. You can create other PR sites by placing links on your other PR sites. It can be a very powerful foundation. Maybe I haven't made this clear enough but hopefully this buttons that down once and for all.

My network (100 .infos) would and does help sites rank for keywords that an average IMer is targeting. No PR links (from the network) needed. Now, I am willing to perform a test but I want the terms set before proceeding. I also would want a third party to track the results but they have to be somebody I trust. I am not going to post it publicly.

Thanks

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5111450].message }}

russianbear

12 years ago

Hey guys

What seo hosting are you using? Tried aseohositng - horrible!
Also what script are you using to post/drip feed the links?
Does anyone sell this info as a course?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5116677].message }}

Marc_L

12 years ago

Originally Posted by russianbear

Hey guys

What seo hosting are you using? Tried aseohositng - horrible!
Also what script are you using to post/drip feed the links?
Does anyone sell this info as a course?

What was so bad about aseohosting? Besides being expensive.

A few that I use are....

leapswitch
skynet hosting
seohost.com
indianets
aseohosting (dedi)

You can use linkfarm evolution or AMR to post to your blogs.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want answers to your SEO questions? Check out our library of FAQ's. Good luck and happy ranking!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5116751].message }}

russianbear

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Marc_L

What was so bad about aseohosting? Besides being expensive.

A few that I use are....

leapswitch
skynet hosting
seohost.com
indianets
aseohosting (dedi)

You can use linkfarm evolution or AMR to post to your blogs.

Really appreciate your input, Marc.
Seems like all seo experts are either Matts or Marcs

With aseohosting I had my sites hours offline, one time is was 2 days, and they kept telling me it's OK on their end. Probably my bad luck..

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5138395].message }}

chrislangley

12 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5117798].message }}

mark@1to101 12 years ago

If you have a bunch of sites in your network that are currently PR0, but which have "nice" domain names, such as being education or reference related, is it worthwhile to purchase some cheap random PR2+ expired domains and 301 redirect them to your preferred sites in your network?

I know that the domain names for sites in a private network aren't necessarily important, in that you're not trying to rank those sites for anything, but I feel that education and reference related domain names look more professional, which is important if you need to give link reports to people.

So, what do you think? Is it worth buying extra expired domains to boost up your existing ones?
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5117900].message }}

Setting up private blog network - SEO EXPERTS HELP ME!

Trending Topics

Are Solo ADs the Most Cost Effective Way to Promote your Product?

How do I effectively build and nurture an email list for affiliate marketing purposes?

Been a while! Any of you Old Timers here?

Are billboards still effective in driving customers?

How much does the rebranding affect CR ?