91 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
91 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Your BMR sites or ALN sites drop?

by outwest
77 replies
  • SEO
    • |
Lots of complaints of BMR backlinked sites tanking in the last two weeks, and some other paid link networks also.

comments?
#aln #bmr #drop #sites
  • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
    Not me. Two of my articles are on page 1 and they were published on February 10th, 2012.
    Signature

    RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712244].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author cssitkt
      Yes my sites have the dreaded message from google

      "Google Webmaster Tools notice of unnatural links detected...please submit your site for reconsideration"

      I think thousands of sites will be hit as there seems to be a serious crack down going on.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712421].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
        Originally Posted by cssitkt View Post

        Yes my sites have the dreaded message from google

        "Google Webmaster Tools notice of unnatural links detected...please submit your site for reconsideration"

        I think thousands of sites will be hit as there seems to be a serious crack down going on.
        Yikes. Are you using ONLY BMR?
        Signature

        RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712498].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author outwest
    Seems the more people used BMR the more their sites got hit. There seems to be a new google algo that detects either BMR or these types of paid links
    Signature
    Tech article writing .Native English Speaker(with Proof)
    specializing in SmartPhones , Internet security, high tech gadgets, search engines, tech shows, digital cameras.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712558].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
      Originally Posted by outwest View Post

      Seems the more people used BMR the more their sites got hit. There seems to be a new google algo that detects either BMR or these types of paid links
      Dang, now I can't sleep =/. Been all high and mighty with BMR the past weeks too. What now? Manual blog commenting, post on directories with unique content? I can't think of anything else
      Signature

      RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712599].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TBInternetMarketing
      Originally Posted by outwest View Post

      Seems the more people used BMR the more their sites got hit. There seems to be a new google algo that detects either BMR or these types of paid links
      Not from what I've found. I use BMR a hell of a lot and haven't seen any drops in the SERP's at all.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712935].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
    All my sites are fine and I use a lot of BMR and ALN.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712878].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author cssitkt
      Originally Posted by dp40oz View Post

      All my sites are fine and I use a lot of BMR and ALN.
      That's interesting, maybe the new unnatural link profile penalties are nothing to do with specific link sources and more to do with "unnatural".
      1. Unrealistic link velocity?
      2. Not enough generic anchors 'more' 'click here' etc?
      3. Not enough URL links www.mysite.com?
      4. Targeting keywords one at a time or in batches as opposed to random?
      5. Building links to a set of keywords only to stop completely and move to a new set?
      6. Not having a good balance of link sources?


      Any other ideas?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712960].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
        Originally Posted by cssitkt View Post

        That's interesting, maybe the new unnatural link profile penalties are nothing to do with specific link sources and more to do with "unnatural".
        1. Unrealistic link velocity?
        2. Not enough generic anchors 'more' 'click here' etc?
        3. Not enough URL links www.mysite.com?
        4. Targeting keywords one at a time or in batches as opposed to random?
        5. Building links to a set of keywords only to stop completely and move to a new set?
        6. Not having a good balance of link sources?


        Any other ideas?
        When you got that e-mail were you using strictly BMR or you had different types of backlinking?
        Signature

        RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712968].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
          Maybe those sites that are dropping just suck.

          Nobody ever wants to consider that though...
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712994].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author cssitkt
          Originally Posted by GGpaul View Post

          When you got that e-mail were you using strictly BMR or you had different types of backlinking?
          I use various sources of links not just BMR.

          The message and problems relate to the link profile not the site; more correct to say the link profiles created suck.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713081].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
        Originally Posted by cssitkt View Post

        That's interesting, maybe the new unnatural link profile penalties are nothing to do with specific link sources and more to do with "unnatural".
        1. Unrealistic link velocity?
        2. Not enough generic anchors 'more' 'click here' etc?
        3. Not enough URL links www.mysite.com?
        4. Targeting keywords one at a time or in batches as opposed to random?
        5. Building links to a set of keywords only to stop completely and move to a new set?
        6. Not having a good balance of link sources?


        Any other ideas?
        I think you hit the nail on the head. I always consider myself lucky by not getting hit when others do but I also try to take a very intelligent link building approach. All the things you mentioned I am very conscious of. I build slow and steady, allowing the ranking to unfold rather then push it. Most of my pages have around 100+ different anchors pointing to them including generic anchors and anchors including the URL. I use mostly blog networks and bookmarks.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713096].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
          Originally Posted by dp40oz View Post

          I think you hit the nail on the head. I always consider myself lucky by not getting hit when others do but I also try to take a very intelligent link building approach. All the things you mentioned I am very conscious of. I build slow and steady, allowing the ranking to unfold rather then push it. Most of my pages have around 100+ different anchors pointing to them including generic anchors and anchors including the URL. I use mostly blog networks and bookmarks.
          With that being said, is it best that I just create a post for all my keywords rather than focusing one at time and trying to get it to page 1 with BMR?

          Someone suggested to focus ONE keyword until it gets to page 1 then go onto the next one.
          Signature

          RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713202].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
            Originally Posted by GGpaul View Post

            Someone suggested to focus ONE keyword until it gets to page 1 then go onto the next one.
            No that is an awful idea. Hence why things would look unnatural. The best approach is gather around 50-150 different anchors relating to the keywords you'd like the page to eventually rank for and just build the links with those. Google is smart. You can rank page 1 for "garden tools" without ever having 1 exact anchor named "garden tools". Anchors like "gardening products and tools", "garden tools information", "check out these garden tools", "tools for gardening". Google will get it.

            Use BMR posts to snipe the exact match keywords but don't overdue it. SLOW! I don't have any of my sites taking more then 1-3 posts from BMR a day.

            With SEO take a deep breath and say to yourself "Everything I am doing now will be making me money in 2-3 months".
            Signature
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713533].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
              Originally Posted by dp40oz View Post

              No that is an awful idea. Hence why things would look unnatural. The best approach is gather around 50-150 different anchors relating to the keywords .
              overkill and results in just too many scuzzy links being used to get all those links
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713684].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
                Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                overkill and results in just too many scuzzy links being used to get all those links
                Overkill? Scuzzy? Take a look at how sites that are actually built on 100% natural links and no SEO. You'll see that anchor texts vary wildly. The way people link to things through social media, press releases, actual blog links ect.. Will show massive anchor text variation. I will give the example of Geico ranking for "Car insurance". If you dive into their back link portfolio the types of anchors and variation is staggering.
                Signature
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713800].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                  Originally Posted by dp40oz View Post

                  Overkill? Scuzzy? Take a look at how sites that are actually built on 100% natural links and no SEO. You'll see that anchor texts vary wildly.
                  I stand by it . You do not need up to 150 different keyword variations to not trip any diversity filter Google has. I see sites all the time and have ranked sites that do very well without seeing 150 or even 100 variations of anchor text. No one was saying that you do not need variation but that those numbers are overkill. Since most people here are not acquiring natural links they ARE going to turn to scuzzy links to get that variation. You have to know who you are talking to and what forum you are on and yes that will result in even more scuzzy links being used by most users here. If we were talking natural link building you wouldn't need to state a variation amount because you would have no control over it but Imers here are not going to turn to natural links to do that and it will result in low quality links being used more
                  Signature

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714350].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
                    Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                    I stand by it . You do not need up to 150 different keyword variations to not trip any diversity filter Google has. I see sites all the time and have ranked sites that do very well without seeing 150 or even 100 variations of anchor text. No one was saying that you do not need variation but that those numbers are overkill. Since most people here are not acquiring natural links they ARE going to turn to scuzzy links to get that variation. You have to know who you are talking to and what forum you are on and yes that will result in even more scuzzy links being used by most users here. If we were talking natural link building you wouldn't need to state a variation amount because you would have no control over it but Imers here are not going to turn to natural links to do that and it will result in low quality links being used more
                    I agree that that is what less experienced guys would do. I come from the school of trying to game the system as much as possible while also trying to predict future filters ect.. I think a lack of varying anchor text diversity will become a bigger and bigger factor as things move on. Maybe today 10-20 different anchors is enough not to trip a filter but it doesn't fall in line with natural looking. What most people get penalized for is not link velocity and quantity as they always think its those factors combined with a lack of anchor diversity.

                    Natural backlink portfolios rarely have loads of similar anchors. So yes you are right it may be overkill for now but logic tells me the future will tell a different story.
                    Signature
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714774].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
                Signature
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713814].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author cssitkt
          Originally Posted by dp40oz View Post

          I think you hit the nail on the head. I always consider myself lucky by not getting hit when others do but I also try to take a very intelligent link building approach. All the things you mentioned I am very conscious of. I build slow and steady, allowing the ranking to unfold rather then push it. Most of my pages have around 100+ different anchors pointing to them including generic anchors and anchors including the URL. I use mostly blog networks and bookmarks.
          In hindsight I was reckless - my rankings and income just kept going up and up so i thought things were fine.

          There were good seo methods i did practice, like:

          Diverse IP's
          No blasts
          Varied anchor text but perhaps not enough. When i look at aged sights with no SEO they have hundreds of anchor texts from obvious to just plain weird.
          No automated SEO tools Xrumer, Scrapebox, AMR etc.
          No risky on site SEO
          Varied sources of links.

          But in the end this wasnt enought to prevent the Unnatural Link Profile penalty.

          Until now i thought i was clever and could get away with link building. Don't let this happen to you and above all don't be arrogant or smug because that's the main reason i'm now bankrupt and have to explain to my family why the bills will not be paid.

          K
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713235].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author bigcaveman
            If you are only using BMR or just one type of backlinking, you are going to be in trouble.

            You need to get a wide range of backlinks from a wide range of sources.

            Keep your linkbuilding diverse and you should be OK. Also, if you build too many links too quickly you are going to be in trouble.

            Remember, slow and steady wins the SEO race.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713281].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author cssitkt
              Originally Posted by bigcaveman View Post

              If you are only using BMR or just one type of backlinking, you are going to be in trouble.

              You need to get a wide range of backlinks from a wide range of sources.

              Keep your linkbuilding diverse and you should be OK. Also, if you build too many links too quickly you are going to be in trouble.

              Remember, slow and steady wins the SEO race.
              My backlinks where very diverse so I don't think that's the culprit in my case. To high link velocity maybe but not diversity.

              People seem very confident about what works and what doesn't......the only difference is you've been lucky enough to not be caught......yet

              Unless you know what a natural link profile looks like for your niche and can mimic it accurately, you're at risk. Ask yourself - do you know what a natural link profile looks like for your niche?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713389].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    I use several blog networks including my own. Not a single ranking drop. I stay away from any network that allows spun content though.

    People are always looking for something to point to other than their own low quality sites.

    That being said, I have no doubt that at some point Google is going to address these networks. I do not think it will be in the form of a penalty (there is too high of a probability that they misidentify sites as being part of a blog network unless it is all done manually - which won't happen). I think the more likely scenario is discrediting the links.

    That is why it is foolish to rely on one method of ranking sites.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712934].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

      I use several blog networks including my own. Not a single ranking drop. I stay away from any network that allows spun content though.

      People are always looking for something to point to other than their own low quality sites.
      There seems to be a bit more to it than that though Mike. BMR closing its doors to new clients, sites that use them falling, a number of public rental SEO networks reporting deindexings (Terry Kyle's the latest one I heard about this weekend - he is closing down his and is claiming that home page backlink networks that are not very private /specialized are dead).

      Your own network might be insulating you or the ones you use just haven't been hit yet (I doubt this is an algo change but manual action is pretty easy). REALLY private networks that have real sites with decent content are as safe as can be but the nature of multiple links all kinds of content are all vunerable.

      People won't want to hear it but the best networks going forward are going to be more expensive , not take everyone and insist on either great content or insist that they write the content themselves with their own writers. Only those and networks you run yourself are going to survive.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713662].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mkash
      What other networks are there that don't allow spun content? postrunner? any others?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5721781].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
    Well I just checked, my keyword went from rank 6 page 1 to rank 2 page 1 as of today. Just BMR. I'm going to continue this until I hear it from Google/BMR themselves. Peace.
    Signature

    RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5712964].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author outwest
    I am talking about people getting google notices saying "we detected unnatural linking pattern"

    not just those who dropped for unknown reason
    Signature
    Tech article writing .Native English Speaker(with Proof)
    specializing in SmartPhones , Internet security, high tech gadgets, search engines, tech shows, digital cameras.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713021].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ChrisJohn
    I have seen two of my sites - both of which relied heavily on BMR - take a small hit.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713121].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author outwest
    I also think that its prudent to diversify
    dont rely on SEO and google only, if google comes up with some BS new algo you are screwed

    do CPA paid traffic also, master that skill
    it takes a while sure, but it means you are no longerr kissing googles ass
    Signature
    Tech article writing .Native English Speaker(with Proof)
    specializing in SmartPhones , Internet security, high tech gadgets, search engines, tech shows, digital cameras.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713404].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MaverickUK
    And so it begins... Why are people always looking to blame something or someone instead of themselves? I'm almost certain these ranking drops are not related in any way to paid links, but rather are a natural part of website evolution - you're either experiencing the Google Dance, so-called Sandbox, penalties from their crappy backlinking or something else of the likes.

    Seriously, stop blaming one particular aspect of your backlinking and start thinking more towards your backlinking as a whole - plus your website and its quality of content.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713492].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author cssitkt
      Originally Posted by MaverickUK View Post

      And so it begins... Why are people always looking to blame something or someone instead of themselves? I'm almost certain these ranking drops are not related in any way to paid links, but rather are a natural part of website evolution - you're either experiencing the Google Dance, so-called Sandbox, penalties from their crappy backlinking or something else of the likes.
      Dude, we're taking about this message that was sent to thousands of website owners over the weekend causing rankings to disappear overnight and by discussing our link building techniques we are taking responsibility.

      Google Webmaster Tools notice of unnatural links detected

      Dear Site Owner or Webmaster ofwww.yoursite.co.uk

      We've detected that some of your site's pages may be using techniques that are outside Google's Webmaster Guidelines.

      Specifically, look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or participating in link schemes.

      We encourage you to make changes to your site, so that it meets our Quality Guidelines. Once you've made these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google's search results.
      If you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to control or remove, please provide the details in your reconsideration request.
      If you have additional questions about how to resolve this issue, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support.

      Yours sincerely,

      Google Search Quality Team
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713586].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author outwest
    I dont think its anchor text diversity being hit
    Before I have seen some dummies with 100% same anchor text, dumb, but most pages I see have like 60-70% targeting the main kw or slight variation, then the other 25% or so is
    click here
    www.mysite.com
    etc etc
    Signature
    Tech article writing .Native English Speaker(with Proof)
    specializing in SmartPhones , Internet security, high tech gadgets, search engines, tech shows, digital cameras.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713716].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MaverickUK
    This problem has existed for years (about sites dropping) i'm not entirely sure why now the scaremongering has began. Whether this silly message from Google has been sent to webmaster over the weekend or not, it doesn't change the fact that Google have been trying to combat this for a long time.

    It's also worth considering that Google sometimes send out these messages at a set time to a set number of websites within its index. Google works hard to keep us SEO's guessing and to get us panicking, anyone who falls for it are falling in to the grasps that Google so much want us to do.

    If just one SEO says; "Hey, unnatural backlinking for SEO isn't working anymore, i'm going to give up." then that's a point to Google - just as they want.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713753].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author cssitkt
      Originally Posted by MaverickUK View Post

      This problem has existed for years (about sites dropping) i'm not entirely sure why now the scaremongering has began. Whether this silly message from Google has been sent to webmaster over the weekend or not, it doesn't change the fact that Google have been trying to combat this for a long time.

      It's also worth considering that Google sometimes send out these messages at a set time to a set number of websites within its index. Google works hard to keep us SEO's guessing and to get us panicking, anyone who falls for it are falling in to the grasps that Google so much want us to do.

      If just one SEO says; "Hey, unnatural backlinking for SEO isn't working anymore, i'm going to give up." then that's a point to Google - just as they want.
      I hear what you're saying but this message was sent to my sites that had the greatest link building (my smaller sites are unaffected at the moment) and a loss of rankings coinciding with the Google Message that is costing me more than $1000 a day is enough to make me change.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5713810].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author grexley
        Originally Posted by cssitkt View Post

        I hear what you're saying but this message was sent to my sites that had the greatest link building (my smaller sites are unaffected at the moment) and a loss of rankings coinciding with the Google Message that is costing me more than $1000 a day is enough to make me change.
        Maybe this is part of the answer. Maybe its not just your link profile, but how big it is. Your smaller sites were not hit, but I'm going to guess they had the same types of links as the sites with the larger backlink profiles, just not as many?

        Maybe google will allow you to have a set number of unnatural links, but once you go over a certain threshold, they penalize you.

        On the sites that were hit, how many total domains did you have backlinks from?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5720781].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by MaverickUK View Post

      This problem has existed for years (about sites dropping) i'm not entirely sure why now the scaremongering has began. Whether this silly message from Google has been sent to webmaster over the weekend or not, it doesn't change the fact that Google have been trying to combat this for a long time..
      Mav if you went by that logic then we wouldn't need to talk about algo changes either because every recent algo change has to do with what Google has "been trying to combat for years"

      Fact is google hasn't been trying even a moderate amount to kill these networks in the past. Sure there have deindexings here and there but with a few hundred dollars to sign up, a backlink checker, and then cross checking other links on the sites Google could have slapped the living daylights out of most public services in a week or two.

      Shucks even without signing up for any I could find huge chunks of a HPBL network sites in an afternoon and I don't even have as good a backlink database access as Google.

      too many hpbl providers crying at the same time. Not likely to be a coincidence
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714264].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
    Well I sent a support ticket and I basically wanted to ask what the deal is. Here is the response:

    "Paul, BMR is a tool and like any tool it can certainly be used incorrectly. Anytime users over optimize anchor text they risk getting noticed by Google.This can happen with BMR or with any link building. This is no different now than it was 6 months ago and has nothing to do with our recent decision to close membership.

    As we have stated publicly on our site and numerous other forums, our decision to close is due to our rapid growth over the last several months and the necessity to improve our network and roll out some much needed updates to keep up with the volume.

    Please reply to this ticket if you have additional questions regarding this issue.

    Best regards,"
    Signature

    RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714025].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author achukuttan
    Anyhow, I am a new guy that tried to register in BMR today, saw this...

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Membership Closed

    We've made the tough decision to close membership temporarily while we continue to build out our network and improve our code base to support further growth. It's been a wild ride over the last few months and our user base has grown rapidly. It's not fair to anyone to continue to grow so quickly. We feel it's best to control our growth so that the BMR network can remain relevant over the long run.
    Membership could be closed for a few weeks or a few months, we're not sure yet. If you would like to be notified when we re-open please add your email to the mailing list below. We will give priority by date for people on our mailing list.


    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Do we need to read this too with the ones happening now for those who lost rankings...???
    Signature
    Premium Infographics Creation Service
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714230].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author patco
    I read also a lot of negative reviews about BMR during the last few days... Not sure...
    Signature

    A blog that will show you How to Lose Weight with a cool Quick Weight Loss guide...
    Also enjoy some of my favorite Funny pictures and photos that will make you smile :)

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714306].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MarlboroMonkey
    Just another case study in why you need to use link diversity really. Even different blog networks instead of just BMR.
    Signature
    SentientAds.com - The Evolution of Display Ads
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714376].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author outwest
    I think for individual pages, about 20 anchor texts is good
    even 10-15
    Signature
    Tech article writing .Native English Speaker(with Proof)
    specializing in SmartPhones , Internet security, high tech gadgets, search engines, tech shows, digital cameras.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714557].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author EddieGee
      I had taken a break from BMR then put up some articles about 10 days ago and noticed a modest but definite decrease in Google traffic.

      It can't be that hard for Google to identify BMR sites:

      1) EVERY article has one or two links to a fairly low ranking site
      2) No adsense on the site
      3) Lots of posts on diverse topics
      4) Little relation of URL to topic
      5) No comments
      6) Only old inbound links; no inbound links to articles
      7) No Google analytics on the site
      8) All domains are registered anonymously
      9) No pages such as ("about us", "contact us", etc.)
      10) Never any outbound links to major news sites or the like
      11) No blogroll; internal archives only
      12) No affiliate links or product links
      etc. etc.

      With a little effort Google could come up with a nearly complete list of BMR sites and then find out who is heavily using them. I can't help but think that Google is doing this already.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714667].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
        Originally Posted by EddieGee View Post

        I had taken a break from BMR then put up some articles about 10 days ago and noticed a modest but definite decrease in Google traffic.

        It can't be that hard for Google to identify BMR sites:

        1) EVERY article has one or two links to a fairly low ranking site
        2) No adsense on the site
        3) Lots of posts on diverse topics
        4) Little relation of URL to topic
        5) No comments
        6) Only old inbound links; no inbound links to articles
        7) No Google analytics on the site
        8) All domains are registered anonymously
        9) No pages such as ("about us", "contact us", etc.)
        10) Never any outbound links to major news sites or the like
        11) No blogroll; internal archives only
        12) No affiliate links or product links
        etc. etc.

        With a little effort Google could come up with a nearly complete list of BMR sites and then find out who is heavily using them. I can't help but think that Google is doing this already.
        This is entirely true, and it's also shocking that a blog network (respective the sites in it) would ALSO only need very little effort to make a halfway legit site which doesn't look like utter trash.

        There is no excuse for not having privacy, terms etc...and leaving "hello world!" in it or using the default theme.

        It would take very little to put AT LEAST some half a$$ effort in a site to put a decent theme on it, links etc....or maybe even go so far as to only have niche specific sites on blog networks. How hard is that?

        The other thing would be reducing of post frequency and therefore outbound links.

        No one seems to care a #### anyway
        Signature
        *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
        -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
        *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
        Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5720855].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author AZMD
        Originally Posted by EddieGee View Post

        I had taken a break from BMR then put up some articles about 10 days ago and noticed a modest but definite decrease in Google traffic.

        It can't be that hard for Google to identify BMR sites:

        1) EVERY article has one or two links to a fairly low ranking site
        2) No adsense on the site
        3) Lots of posts on diverse topics
        4) Little relation of URL to topic
        5) No comments
        6) Only old inbound links; no inbound links to articles
        7) No Google analytics on the site
        8) All domains are registered anonymously
        9) No pages such as ("about us", "contact us", etc.)
        10) Never any outbound links to major news sites or the like
        11) No blogroll; internal archives only
        12) No affiliate links or product links
        etc. etc.

        With a little effort Google could come up with a nearly complete list of BMR sites and then find out who is heavily using them. I can't help but think that Google is doing this already.


        Opinion about 7) No Google analytics on the site: Using this is like a poker player showing their hand to the other players. Not a good idea.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5723716].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
          Originally Posted by AZMD View Post

          Opinion about 7) No Google analytics on the site: Using this is like a poker player showing their hand to the other players. Not a good idea.
          So what am I? A prostitute using Adsense? Isn't that Google?
          Signature

          RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5724151].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author RayW
    A site I created recently got sanboxed after doing only BMR. It was entirely my fault though since I was using only one anchor text. I made a total of about 20 posts all with the same anchor text; it was bound to get sandboxed...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5714680].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Laubster
      Originally Posted by RayW View Post

      A site I created recently got sanboxed after doing only BMR. It was entirely my fault though since I was using only one anchor text. I made a total of about 20 posts all with the same anchor text; it was bound to get sandboxed...
      Me too, yet other domains I purchased the same day and used different sources to link to are moving up in the rankings despite using BMR on them also. Lesson (for the 100th time): don't put all your eggs in one basket.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5730648].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author grexley
    Curious, did anyone lose ranking and traffic on sites that were not registered with Google Webmaster Tools?

    I have 2 sites I backlink to from BMR. Lots of diverse anchors, no more then 30 links a week. I've only seen my rankings rise. I do other types of backlinking as well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5715062].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dminorfmajor
      Originally Posted by grexley View Post

      Curious, did anyone lose ranking and traffic on sites that were not registered with Google Webmaster Tools?

      I have 2 sites I backlink to from BMR. Lots of diverse anchors, no more then 30 links a week. I've only seen my rankings rise. I do other types of backlinking as well.
      This is a long-running IM urban legend. The consensus is this: Using Google tracking tools like Webmaster Tools and Google Analytics gives Google a much clearer idea on the quality of your site. IE: CTR, AVG Time Spent on Site, etc.

      So these people are saying since Google has all of that new information, they determine that your site isn't as good as Site B, which is below you so Site B should be ranked higher than you.

      Better safe than sorry, I don't use Webmaster Tools and I only use Analytics on one of my sites.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5715094].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JeanneLynn
      Originally Posted by grexley View Post

      Curious, did anyone lose ranking and traffic on sites that were not registered with Google Webmaster Tools?

      I have 2 sites I backlink to from BMR. Lots of diverse anchors, no more then 30 links a week. I've only seen my rankings rise. I do other types of backlinking as well.
      I don't use Google Webmaster Tools or Analytics. Do you think this has something to do with some sites suddenly dropping?

      I don't use these tools because I've heard rumors that it may not be a good idea. However, I'm pretty new to IM so I really don't know much other than what I've read in WSOs, IM blogs and on the boards.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5715099].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
        Originally Posted by JeanneLynn View Post

        I don't use Google Webmaster Tools or Analytics. Do you think this has something to do with some sites suddenly dropping?
        Hey Jeanne, thanks for messaging back. I use analytics for all of my sites. Nothing has changed dramatically.
        Signature

        RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5715117].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author cssitkt
        Originally Posted by JeanneLynn View Post

        I don't use Google Webmaster Tools or Analytics. Do you think this has something to do with some sites suddenly dropping?

        I don't use these tools because I've heard rumors that it may not be a good idea. However, I'm pretty new to IM so I really don't know much other than what I've read in WSOs, IM blogs and on the boards.
        No it's got nothing to do with Google tools. Google simple posts the penalty message in your webmaster tools if your site is connected to it.

        A bunch of my sites lost all their rankings at the weekend. The ones with Google webmaster tools received the penalty message.

        I don't actually believe its this specific source or that tool that's causing the penalty as the message from google says your link profile is unnatural. So if your link profile looks unnatural you could be hit.

        Of course people feel a lot happier when they think they know the exact cause so it's nice to believe it's this or that but the truth is nobody knows for sure.

        A few people are saying it's your own stupid fault. I agree with this however my links were
        1. Different IP
        2. Gradual
        3. Varied anchor text
        4. In unique content
        5. From many different sources

        I never used AMR, Senuke, Xrumer or Scrapebox.


        K
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5715663].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author dminorfmajor
          Originally Posted by cssitkt View Post


          A few people are saying it's your own stupid fault. I agree with this however my links were
          1. Different IP
          2. Gradual
          3. Varied anchor text
          4. In unique content
          5. From many different sources

          I never used AMR, Senuke, Xrumer or Scrapebox.


          K
          When you say your links were from many different locations, are you talking about different BMR sites or different link building methods?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5715697].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author cssitkt
            Originally Posted by dminorfmajor View Post

            When you say your links were from many different locations, are you talking about different BMR sites or different link building methods?
            I used BMR and many other link building methods.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5720912].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author evelyng
          Google says you need backlinks, then when you get them, they penalize you! Wow, yea for Google for making rules that they don't like!

          I have not seen my sites drop from HPBL services, but now I'm holding my breath (although, I only post about 20 BMR articles a week) - maybe I got lucky!
          Signature

          Get Brandable PLR EBooks that You can Brand with YOUR Affiliate Link and Keep ALL the profits!
          http://www.brandableplr.com/

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5730402].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dminorfmajor
    Aside from finding this the other day, my rankings are fine with little to no changes. Then again, I use BMR with other link building methods.

    Pic URL: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...spyglassss.png

    This picture represents a brand new website I made about 2 months ago. I sent 12 BMR posts targeting it and only 3 of them are live according to Spyglass. 2 of those 3 are DoFollow but "Restricted From Indexing."

    I've spoken with BMR about this and they said their firewalls tend to block some of the more insidious bots and spiders. (Referring to SEO Spyglass I guess?) I don't know, I guess they want me to believe that even though Spyglass, a great backlinking tool, isn't seeing the true amount of backlinks that they've put out for me.

    If that's the case, I sure would like to be directed to a backlink research tool that DOES show me that my BMR subscription is actually working other than the "Find Your Link in Google Quotes" button...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5715070].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dp40oz
      Originally Posted by dminorfmajor View Post

      Aside from finding this the other day, my rankings are fine with little to no changes. Then again, I use BMR with other link building methods.

      Pic URL: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...spyglassss.png

      This picture represents a brand new website I made about 2 months ago. I sent 12 BMR posts targeting it and only 3 of them are live according to Spyglass. 2 of those 3 are DoFollow but "Restricted From Indexing."

      I've spoken with BMR about this and they said their firewalls tend to block some of the more insidious bots and spiders. (Referring to SEO Spyglass I guess?) I don't know, I guess they want me to believe that even though Spyglass, a great backlinking tool, isn't seeing the true amount of backlinks that they've put out for me.

      If that's the case, I sure would like to be directed to a backlink research tool that DOES show me that my BMR subscription is actually working other than the "Find Your Link in Google Quotes" button...
      Just go to your BMR account and look at the links right in front of your eyes. SEO Spyglass probably picks up about 10 percent of links that are published. NO backlink tool is even marginally accurate in picking up backlinks.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5715106].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mostafa999
    Damn BMR is getting worse, this will definitely affect my webiste
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5715540].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rjd1265
    I have not seen any problems yet...only results. But I also forum post on about 10 different forums and also do other blog posting to keep my links spread out.
    Signature
    You Are A Snowflake
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5721810].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dames Jean
    What's the best alternative to Google Analytics?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5724190].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
      Originally Posted by Dames Jean View Post

      What's the best alternative to Google Analytics?
      Web Analytics in Real Time | Clicky

      Enjoy.

      I use Google analytics and haven't found a problem. But if you really want to, go get yourself "getclicky"
      Signature

      RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5724213].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author outwest
    Has anyone who got the dreaded Google suspicious backlinks email. NOT been using article submission services or BMR?

    I am trying to narrow it down to if they are actively targeting these

    Was your site targeted and you DONT use BMR or article marketing?
    Signature
    Tech article writing .Native English Speaker(with Proof)
    specializing in SmartPhones , Internet security, high tech gadgets, search engines, tech shows, digital cameras.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5726050].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author technog33k
    I use BMR a lot across a lot of good quality sites (plus other link building methods) and have not seen any ranking drops for any of them. Actually, over the past couple of weeks I have been seeing the steady gains I have always seen since using BMR. I have randomly checked a lot of posts that say are indexed and they are all still there. Has anybody else gone theough their post lists and actally checked to see if their are any major losses from any BMR sites? I would be interested in knowing this as I am sure a lot of people here would. Being able to actually view you posts is something I am sure BMR will change (you will still be able to do Google "quote" searches) in future so it may actaully be worth going through your posts lists and seeing if there is any major loss in indexing if you have suffered a ranking drop before they potentially remove this feature. Don't rely on backlink tools. They all work differently and there is no 100% accurate backlink tool on the market..
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5747396].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author outwest
    I just had a BMR post client (I do BMR posts )
    who dropped , cancelled his BMR account yesterday, said he checked and a huge percentage of his OLDER posts are DEINDEXED, and he surmises thats why the sites those linked to, dropped way down

    I Dont think google specifically says your site is using BMR so we are penalizing it
    but
    if a lot of your old links are deindexed, NO MATTER WHERE THEY CAME FROM your sites will drop

    I didnt renew a bunch of old domains, in january, I thought they were not needed, all of them linked to my resort site
    a few days later my resort site SERPs dropped way down
    Signature
    Tech article writing .Native English Speaker(with Proof)
    specializing in SmartPhones , Internet security, high tech gadgets, search engines, tech shows, digital cameras.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5747572].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
    If you get hit with a Google penalty for using BRM/ALN or similar networks - good news. The penalty lasts from 30 to 90 days. Most of the time just 30 days. I've been tracking penalized sites (my own) and all of them come back exactly one month after the slap. Woot!

    This only applies when you build other links obviously. If you depend on one method only, then chances are your rankings just dropped (because links are gone). I hit some sites real hard (competitive niche, 6 month old site now has 17k links indexed) and got a 30 day time-out. Back in #1 now doing goood.
    Signature


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5747704].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThatAblaze
      I've noticed quite a few of the older link network blog posts disappear. Very few of my posts still exist from 2 or more weeks ago.

      I think these networks are going to have to start getting a lot smarter. Personally, if I owned a network I would cap each blog to 1 post a day. I don't see how 6 - 10 posts a day on a blog can look at all natural. Also, I would sprinkle some random posts with no links into the mix. After all, a post with no links doesn't deplete the link juice of the blog. At least one link in every blog post, now THERE is a fingerprint.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5747900].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author bagus
      Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

      If you get hit with a Google penalty for using BRM/ALN or similar networks - good news. The penalty last from 30 to 90 days. Most of the time just 30 days. I've been tracking penalized sites (my own) and all of them come back exactly one month after the slap. Woot!

      This only applies when you build other links obviously. If you depend on one method only, then chances are your rankings just dropped (because links are gone). I hit some sites real hard (competitive niche, 6 month old site now has 17k links indexed) and got a 30 day time-out. Back in #1 now doing goood.

      Can't agree more that is just how it works :p I love when Google slap my sites because I know they'll be back with much better SERPs. Of course you need to build high quality sites and content and not crappy sites.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5749108].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author broon
      Originally Posted by bagus View Post

      Can't agree more that is just how it works :p I love when Google slap my sites because I know they'll be back with much better SERPs. Of course you need to build high quality sites and content and not crappy sites.
      Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

      If you get hit with a Google penalty for using BRM/ALN or similar networks - good news. The penalty last from 30 to 90 days. Most of the time just 30 days. I've been tracking penalized sites (my own) and all of them come back exactly one month after the slap. Woot!

      This only applies when you build other links obviously. If you depend on one method only, then chances are your rankings just dropped (because links are gone). I hit some sites real hard (competitive niche, 6 month old site now has 17k links indexed) and got a 30 day time-out. Back in #1 now doing goood.
      Did you do anything to help them back, or just leave them alone? Curious, because I might be in the same situation, although it's much more than the 30 to 90 days you are talking about.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5765369].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author bitriot
        I have a feeling the recent BMR deindexing has knocked some of my sites down but I build links from many sources so, for me, it is basically seeing sites go from like #7-#14. Small decreases.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5765387].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author lukemeister
      Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

      If you get hit with a Google penalty for using BRM/ALN or similar networks - good news. The penalty lasts from 30 to 90 days. Most of the time just 30 days. I've been tracking penalized sites (my own) and all of them come back exactly one month after the slap. Woot!

      This only applies when you build other links obviously. If you depend on one method only, then chances are your rankings just dropped (because links are gone). I hit some sites real hard (competitive niche, 6 month old site now has 17k links indexed) and got a 30 day time-out. Back in #1 now doing goood.
      Google better be doing it that way, that's about all the longer they penalized their own Chrome page for the same stuff they're harping on other webmasters about
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5812080].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author petermicheal
    I use several blog networks including my own. Not a single ranking drop. I stay away from any network that allows spun content though.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5747949].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SirBucksAlot
    This has nothing to do with link diversity. This happened to us and our clients despite a highly diversce link building campaign that included plenty of White Hat practices in addition to some of the junk we see on Warrior. . . We mostly used black hat seo so competitors could not see where our real juice we coming from. So it's a myth about crappy links being ignored. The truth is, it's now possible to spam and be spammed off organic pages. . . at least till G gets their heads out of their own a$$
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5812028].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Adam James
    BMR seems to be taking a bashing around here, none of my sites or clients sites have been affected at all. I don't solely rely on BMR that would be crazy, just use the right services not the low quality ones that let you use spinning.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5813221].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GGpaul
    Originally Posted by outwest View Post

    Lots of complaints of BMR backlinked sites tanking in the last two weeks, and some other paid link networks also.

    comments?
    Are you utilizing BMR AND ALN? Or just one of the two?

    I would like to know from the rest of you as well. And if you don't use both at the same time, is it because that's bad?
    Signature

    RIP Dad Oct 14 1954 - Mar 14 2015.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5815139].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HKSEO Rotzee
    A guy did a case study here on the % of High PR networks that got de-indexed.

    Are PR Blogs Dead?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5818550].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author outwest
    Interesting, Using BMR would make me a bit nervous though, at this point.
    Signature
    Tech article writing .Native English Speaker(with Proof)
    specializing in SmartPhones , Internet security, high tech gadgets, search engines, tech shows, digital cameras.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5818610].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HKSEO Rotzee
      Originally Posted by outwest View Post

      Interesting, Using BMR would make me a bit nervous though, at this point.
      From what I've hear from the owner, and from the case studies...they haven't had anything happen that would be completely out of the normal range...definitely the higher end of normal, but nothing crazy.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5818625].message }}

Trending Topics