No, this is probably the most white hat method of promotion out there. Google will love it but more importantly, if you write great posts you will get traffic from your posts and not have to worry about Google and it's ever changing algorithms.

No.

Certainly not of the type you're discussing.

The page-rank of the pages on which you post doesn't make much difference. What matters most is their relevance to your own site (shared context, keywords, LSI etc.).

You can judge the number of posts you'll need only approximately (at best!) and only by assessing the SEO quality of the sites above you, whose places you want to take/overtake in Google's SERP's.

The SEO-quality of the competition is far more important than its quantity.

It doesn't matter how many sites are below you: all that really matters is the SEO-quality of the sites on the front page of the SERP's. A site with thousands of mass backlinks from article directories and forum profiles (typical outsourced non-context-relevant junk backlinks) is typically far easier to beat than a site with far smaller numbers of backlinks mostly from relevant authority sites in the niche: those can be pretty difficult competitors.

As you can see, in Google's SERP's, from the regularity with which lower-PR pages with fewer backlinks outrank higher-PR pages with more backlinks, page ranks and "numbers of backlinks" alone are becoming less and less important all the time.

Quality and relevance are what determine the outcome. And Google has said pretty openly that that's their plan, and that future algorithm updates will continue, increasingly, to produce that result. It's not as if they've made a secret of it at all.

I've always found that guest posts on relevant blogs (regardless of their page ranks) are potentially very good backlinks to have.

That's just what I exactly wanted to imply!

Think logically before bragging about an idea that might just mislead others.
If relevance really is the real thing, does that mean having a link from a blog that discuss exactly the same as what you discuss would be more valuable as it was relevant than having a link directly from yahoo's homepage as it is not relevant at all?

After all, just how exactly would Google see the relevance between "menopause e-book" and "being-middle-aged"?

Although you chose just eight words to sum up a rather lengthy article, I think you missed some more important bits. You missed on these (the bold emphasis is mine):

And this:

And this from Terry Kyle:

A couple of other things to note:

> The article appeared on a site devoted to "reviewing" article submitters and other mass backlinking tools. It's an affiliate site, so their opinions may not be completely impartial.

> Although the article isn't dated, the comments suggest it was published in March of this year, right after Panda. Given Google's comments about site quality and relevance, even if they had it right six months ago, they may not have it right today.

Given the added bits I quoted here, I'd say relevant links are important now and will be even more so in the future...

Aah..thanks dude for that...You said that Guest posting can get us to page 1 for competitive niche and then we have to diversify

May i know what does that "Diversity" include?

Also why is it that we have to diversify when in page 1