5 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
5 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Is syndication the BEST way to build links? You decide

by JRemington
4 replies
  • SEO
    • |
This is an appropriate time for me to ask you all the above question.

Is syndication the BEST way you build links and boost SEO rankings?

After reading through countless threads it appears the best possible backlinks can be gained with reasonable ease by syndication, if you're a good writer.

When people link to your sites without you even needing to ask them to, it's an excellent way to snowball your site to the front page of SE results.

Without wishing to start yet another thread about article marketing and syndication, I wanted to know if this is the most effective method for everyone out there?

At the moment, I am considering a few options:

- Concentrating on syndication (seems to happen naturally)

- Outsourcing to build backlinks on directories, forums and blog comments

- Building backlinks myself (great fun )

What would you vote for?
#build #decide #links #syndication
  • Profile picture of the author matt5409
    - syndication, good but not to be solely relied upon
    - outsourcing, can be costly, results will vary
    - manual building, boring but can be enjoyable when you see the fruits of your labour

    personally i opt for points 1 and 3
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4574683].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Originally Posted by JRemington View Post

    After reading through countless threads it appears the best possible backlinks can be gained with reasonable ease by syndication, if you're a good writer.
    That's been my experience, certainly.

    Not in terms of "numbers of backlinks" at all, of course, nor in speed of acquiring them. But in link-juice terms, like so many marketers I've found that even a little bit of syndication goes a lot further than (for instance) directory backlinks by the thousand.

    But this should surprise nobody, in my opinion. Even long before the (in)famous "Panda update", SEO textbook writers were explaining the logarithmic, exponential differences between relevant, authority-site backlinks and low quality mass-links.

    Originally Posted by JRemington View Post

    When people link to your sites without you even needing to ask them to, it's an excellent way to snowball your site to the front page of SE results.
    Absolutely.

    To article syndicators, the key issue is that the backlinks we get that way tend (for obvious reasons) to be relevant ones, and therefore comparatively speaking worth their weight in gold. The SEO isn't typically our primary objective at all - but even its incidental side-benefit results typically seem far superior, to so many of us, than other "link-juice experiences" we've had.

    I do still do some blog-commenting and even forum-commenting, when finding relevant blogs and forums for the purpose, which comes under "building backlinks myself", and I agree that can be fun (albeit time-consuming), but put me down as "concentrating on syndication", for the most part.

    I have plenty of experience of your other option, "outsourcing to build backlinks", but I've long since abandoned it now - with great relief, and actually seem to be doing better without it than with it, and better with the niches I've started off since then than in some earlier ones, too.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4574754].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JRemington
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      That's been my experience, certainly.

      Not in terms of "numbers of backlinks" at all, of course, nor in speed of acquiring them. But in link-juice terms, like so many marketers I've found that even a little bit of syndication goes a lot further than (for instance) directory backlinks by the thousand.

      But this should surprise nobody, in my opinion. Even long before the (in)famous "Panda update", SEO textbook writers were explaining the logarithmic, exponential differences between relevant, authority-site backlinks and low quality mass-links.



      Absolutely.

      To article syndicators, the key issue is that the backlinks we get that way tend (for obvious reasons) to be relevant ones, and therefore comparatively speaking worth their weight in gold. The SEO isn't typically our primary objective at all - but even its incidental side-benefit results typically seem far superior, to so many of us, than other "link-juice experiences" we've had.

      I do still do some blog-commenting and even forum-commenting, when finding relevant blogs and forums for the purpose, which comes under "building backlinks myself", and I agree that can be fun (albeit time-consuming), but put me down as "concentrating on syndication", for the most part.

      I have plenty of experience of your other option, "outsourcing to build backlinks", but I've long since abandoned it now - with great relief, and actually seem to be doing better without it than with it, and better with the niches I've started off since then than in some earlier ones, too.
      You certainly ride the waves of syndication.

      What I like about the idea of syndication is that if you're a strong article writer, then you have the power.

      I'm very surprised that outsourcing wasn't so effective for you but actually, I'm quite pleased that I don't feel I have to do it.
      Signature
      What you're not selling your products in different languages yet?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4574804].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author halfpoint
        It's not the best way on it's own.

        It's certainly a component of the "best way".
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4574961].message }}

Trending Topics