If you had to hire someone from wf for seo, who would it be and why?

372 replies
  • SEO
  • |
Hi. I have spend a lot of money on backlink packages from the wf hire section. It pretty obvious that i do not know what I am doing as I just purchased different backlinks packages at different times based on the reviews. The same url and the same keyword. I lost all of my rankings and that is a costly mistake that I have learned from.

My question to you is.

If you had to hire one person from WF to do all of your seo work, who would it be and why?

I see so many great testimonials but then I also read from other wf members that their rankings have drop with that particular service.
So sometimes I think that they are either fake testimonials or maybe those are people that know how to build backlinks in the right order and know which backlink package to buy from and they just want to outsource it.

Also if you wanted to hire one person not only to get your site on page one but on position 1 or 2, who would you hire, why, and what would be the process?

I ask that question before to many seo wf members who provide seo services and they all say they don't do that type of service because is way too difficult or way to expensive.

But as far as I am concern, if you use a tool like market samuraii and you see that website position 1 for the keyword you are trying to rank one has no age domain, only 5 backlinks, a pr0, the keyword in not in the title, description, head and url, not in the yahoo and dmoz directory, then why is that so difficult to acquire a position one and know them out of place?

I don't get it?

I know is different if the competition is hard, but in the above example which applies to some of the sites that I am trying to rank for, would be achieveable.

I just want to find one person who is good at keeping up with all of the new google updates and rank my site for my keyword manually, whitehat, and most importanly natural. Everyone here just offers automatic software backlinks, senukex campaigns, backlinks blast, and all these have done is damage my ranking and I am not making any adsense money anymore.

Hope to hear from you and your recommendations on whom should I go with and don't forget the why...
#hire #seo
  • Profile picture of the author StevenJones
    Why not take matters in your own hand. Select a couple of Warriors you find interesting and ask them the same questions. So basically interview them a bit, ask them how they cope with the new Google update and how they did things in the past. Then pick the one you find most suitable. Someone that is willing to give you a thorough reply is probably the most suitable SEO service provider.

    And why limit yourself to WF? There are tons of VAs/VAteams that do the same or more work for the same price structure you will be paying here. Now, this will need some thorough interviewing and perhaps teaching in some cases. The latter is highly recommended, this basically means you have a full team to your disposal and not someone running a campaign every now and then.

    Just wanted to say you shouldn't limit yourself to WF.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6181949].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author T-shirtman
    Matt Laclear

    I have purchased a lot of WSO here and I must say most have been great but I am not sure there is anyone who can come close to what Matt Laclear and his team offer, long before everyone was saying you need to mix up your anchor text they (Matt and his team) was already on this and updating there system to mix up anchor text.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6181953].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
      Thank Steven and TShirt Man for your advice. I have when to Elance but they charge alot. Also I have thought about using Matt before but I am confused about something.

      For example: Every site I have I am only trying to rank for one keyword only. His offer says 5 keywords per url. Now how do I choose the other 4 keywords for my site if those keywords are not in my content? Do I have to put the other keywords I want to rank for on my content and do I have to highlight then in bold black? I don't get it...

      Also I heard that he tells you to give him 5 keywords because he tries to rank you for the easiest of the five and then your seo service is completed. To me that is kinda of suck unless each of the 5 keywords I give him has at least 5,000 exact searches per month or more.

      Anyways hope you can give me some advice about how to choose my other 4 keywords. Can I choose keywords that are related to my niche but the keywords are not in the url, title, or content? Will a site still rank for that? The keyword might not be there but maybe it is relevant to my site niche.

      Let me know, thanks
      Signature

      Affiliate Links are not allowed!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6182040].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author mattlaclear
        Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

        Thank Steven and TShirt Man for your advice. I have when to Elance but they charge alot. Also I have thought about using Matt before but I am confused about something.

        For example: Every site I have I am only trying to rank for one keyword only. His offer says 5 keywords per url. Now how do I choose the other 4 keywords for my site if those keywords are not in my content? Do I have to put the other keywords I want to rank for on my content and do I have to highlight then in bold black? I don't get it...

        Also I heard that he tells you to give him 5 keywords because he tries to rank you for the easiest of the five and then your seo service is completed. To me that is kinda of suck unless each of the 5 keywords I give him has at least 5,000 exact searches per month or more.

        Anyways hope you can give me some advice about how to choose my other 4 keywords. Can I choose keywords that are related to my niche but the keywords are not in the url, title, or content? Will a site still rank for that? The keyword might not be there but maybe it is relevant to my site niche.

        Let me know, thanks
        The way it works is simple. You give us one url and five keywords. We then add an additional 50 keywords and backlink to all of them equally until your site ranks for one of the five keywords you give us.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6183868].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author stevo235
          Originally Posted by mattlaclear View Post

          The way it works is simple. You give us one url and five keywords. We then add an additional 50 keywords and backlink to all of them equally until your site ranks for one of the five keywords you give us.
          Sounds very penguin friendly to me
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185017].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author T-shirtman
            Originally Posted by stevo235 View Post

            Sounds very penguin friendly to me


            ''Bargain Homepage 10x PR3 Backlink Network Just $8 Per Month!!!''

            Sounds very penguin friendly to me

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185106].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author T-shirtman
    There must be more than 1 keyword that you would benefit from being in the Top10.


    With regards to matt and his team picking the easiest keyword I don’t think you should really be saying things like this unless you have evidence and I can tell you I don’t see any evidence of this in my campaign they are working on.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6182136].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
      I don't have evidence on that, but if I heard from other members who haved payed for his service. Don't get me wrong, it does work, they are just saying that is the easy words out of the 5 that they try to rank on the first page first and then your seo service is consider completed. If this is the case then I think you should provide 5 keywords and that they each have around 5,000 or more exact local searches per month and then one of your keyword will get traffic no matter what
      Signature

      Affiliate Links are not allowed!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6182470].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6184329].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author komplex
    Banned
    Looking at Matt L's posts and support and testimonials on his services, I feel confident hiring him. Sent him a PM just a little bit ago.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6184370].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kickmoney
    No one.

    If I was interested in the sort of SEO campaign you're talking about I would buy a bunch of C-Class IP's and do it myself.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6184504].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by kickmoney View Post

      No one.

      If I was interested in the sort of SEO campaign you're talking about I would buy a bunch of C-Class IP's and do it myself.
      Don't go that C class route, just grab yourself 10 shared unique hostings and throw 2 sites on each. Then you have 20 sites to help you rank. It's much better. C-class seo hosting sucks!

      I would hire my VA's to do SEO for me, they rock! I'm glad their paypal is banned or I would get some tough competition here
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6184802].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Theeban
    I would say, before you hire someone, ask for FREE Offer at least for one keyword, Get proof by yourself for their service. If you get success, then continue working with them.
    Signature
    For TOP Ranks in Search Engines - Hire skilled expert in SEO. Check expanded services to Cheltenham
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6184814].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Theeban View Post

      I would say, before you hire someone, ask for FREE Offer at least for one keyword, Get proof by yourself for their service. If you get success, then continue working with them.
      I would like to take a free offer for kw: "mortgage" the site has recently been penalized, have fun with it
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6184956].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
      Originally Posted by Theeban View Post

      I would say, before you hire someone, ask for FREE Offer at least for one keyword, Get proof by yourself for their service. If you get success, then continue working with them.
      Sorry, but no real SEO professional is going to work for free.

      Go ask your attorney, accountant, doctor, or financial adviser to work for free to show you proof that they know what they are doing. Let me know how that works out for you.

      On the other hand, they can probably show you proof of SEO campaigns they have worked on in the past, and there is nothing wrong with asking for that.
      Signature
      SEO, AdWords Management, Social Media Marketing, and more.
      Get a FREE Quote.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6188970].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Theeban View Post

      I would say, before you hire someone, ask for FREE Offer at least for one keyword, Get proof by yourself for their service. If you get success, then continue working with them.




      Signature
      Hi
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6192224].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185014].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

    If you had to hire one person from WF to do all of your seo work, who would it be and why?
    And with that your criteria you just shot yourself in the foot. Post Google's Penguin update 95% of what was and is being offered on WF will get you a notice from Google for Unnatural links and your site sent to Siberia. To the extent that testimonials ever did matter they matter even less now. The game has changed over the last three months and more in the last two weeks. Most of the SEO services offered on WF have people who have complained rightfully that those services caused their sites to tank and get unnatural links. Thats a fact.

    Asking that question generally is also not going to do you well. anyone can fly in who knows precious little about SEO and make recommendations and based on their dubious ideas of what success is.

    I would suggest you stay away from all SEO offers on WF until you know what you need to know about SEO and the latest Penguin update or you will just be trowing more money away just like you have been doing on packages. think about it - all you are going to get in this thread is testimonials - the very same kind of testimonials that you said led you the wrong way before.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6189040].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author zannix
      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

      And with that your criteria you just shot yourself in the foot. Post Google's Penguin update 95% of what was and is being offered on WF will get you a notice from Google for Unnatural links and your site sent to Siberia. To the extent that testimonials ever did matter they matter even less now. The game has changed over the last three months and more in the last two weeks. Most of the SEO services offered on WF have people who have complained rightfully that those services caused their sites to tank and get unnatural links. Thats a fact.

      Asking that question generally is also not going to do you well. anyone can fly in who knows precious little about SEO and make recommendations and based on their dubious ideas of what success is.

      I would suggest you stay away from all SEO offers on WF until you know what you need to know about SEO and the latest Penguin update or you will just be trowing more money away just like you have been doing on packages. think about it - all you are going to get in this thread is testimonials - the very same kind of testimonials that you said led you the wrong way before.
      This is one of the best and most honest replies I've read in a while. No need to add another word.
      Signature
      All you can do is all you can do - Art Williams
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6189084].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BigFatTunaFish
      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

      And with that your criteria you just shot yourself in the foot. Post Google's Penguin update 95% of what was and is being offered on WF will get you a notice from Google for Unnatural links and your site sent to Siberia. To the extent that testimonials ever did matter they matter even less now. The game has changed over the last three months and more in the last two weeks. Most of the SEO services offered on WF have people who have complained rightfully that those services caused their sites to tank and get unnatural links. Thats a fact.

      Asking that question generally is also not going to do you well. anyone can fly in who knows precious little about SEO and make recommendations and based on their dubious ideas of what success is.

      I would suggest you stay away from all SEO offers on WF until you know what you need to know about SEO and the latest Penguin update or you will just be trowing more money away just like you have been doing on packages. think about it - all you are going to get in this thread is testimonials - the very same kind of testimonials that you said led you the wrong way before.
      Hi Mike,
      I just purchased your SEO Network training class and wanted to follow up/confirm because there seemed to be no re-direct after paying at PayPal. Would you mind sending me the information via PM as to how I access the course and members area? Thanks. Here's the paypal transaction id: 9XC937250H209561S
      (Sorry for posting something unrelated to this thread but still a newbie to the form and cannot send a PM!)

      Thomas
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6190224].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by BigFatTunaFish View Post

        Hi Mike,
        (Sorry for posting something unrelated to this thread but still a newbie to the form and cannot send a PM!)

        Thomas
        You were squared away long ago but if in the future you ever have a problem like that just write the paypal address on the transaction.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6201532].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

      And with that your criteria you just shot yourself in the foot. Post Google's Penguin update 95% of what was and is being offered on WF will get you a notice from Google for Unnatural links and your site sent to Siberia.
      Not to nitpick, Michael, but Penguin wasn't about "unnatural" link notices.
      To the extent that testimonials ever did matter they matter even less now. The game has changed over the last three months and more in the last two weeks. Most of the SEO services offered on WF have people who have complained rightfully that those services caused their sites to tank and get unnatural links. Thats a fact.
      I guess you can look at it one of two ways. If some service produced enough results to get a ridiculous amount of testimonials maybe they can adapt to what Google is looking for (as they were able to do so to get all of their testimonials). It isn't like this is the first time Google has made significant changes.

      Or you can assume that they "lucked" their way into providing results to a lot of people. This is probably what you will assume but that means little to anybody else.
      Asking that question generally is also not going to do you well. anyone can fly in who knows precious little about SEO and make recommendations and based on their dubious ideas of what success is.
      The "people are stupid" canard.

      I'm not sure what one should expect for the low prices from WF providers. It's about ROI, Michael. It matters not a hill of beans what you think is a "success" when somebody else is determining value for their purchases.

      What should be reasonable to expect from a $20 purchase? $50? $100? thousands of page views a day or even hundreds? That's just not going to happen in most cases.
      I would suggest you stay away from all SEO offers on WF until you know what you need to know about SEO and the latest Penguin update or you will just be trowing more money away just like you have been doing on packages. think about it - all you are going to get in this thread is testimonials - the very same kind of testimonials that you said led you the wrong way before.
      I agree with this, oddly. The site owners should learn more about SEO because alot of times people buy a service then backlink their page with a couple of anchor text or from one source of links only then blame the service. You wouldn't go into McDonald's and order a chicken sandwich, 20 mcnuggets and two big macs and a large strawberry shake then blame McDonald's for your stomach ache. In SEO, when you buy services you have to know some basics.

      Most services here are merely tools. Learn how to use the tools that you buy.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6192029].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

        Not to nitpick, Michael, but Penguin wasn't about "unnatural" link notices.
        Links were a target of the algo change just as unnatural link notices are a part of the overall equation now. the distinction is without meaningful merit. Fall in the serps is a fall in the serps.

        I guess you can look at it one of two ways. If some service produced enough results to get a ridiculous amount of testimonials maybe they can adapt to what Google is looking for (as they were able to do so to get all of their testimonials). It isn't like this is the first time Google has made significant changes.
        by that reasoning a decent rugby player will instant make a great NFL player. No rules change and we see if they can adapt not assume they will. Adaptation is easy to see. In this case no - "they" haven't. For the most part most service providers are offering the same stuff they offered before the changes and some are trying to pretend like they have things under control by sticking their heads in the sand. Some even started new services and networks with the same spun nonsense that helped other networks get deindexed. It s really quite insane when you think about it.

        Or you can assume that they "lucked" their way into providing results to a lot of people. This is probably what you will assume but that means little to anybody else.
        No I assume they have been bamboozled by the general IM seo mentality into thinking that number 8 that statistically gets next to no traffic is success at ranking. its ot about people being stupid its about people having other areas of expertise and being entirely too trusting .

        It matters not a hill of beans what you think is a "success" when somebody else is determining value for their purchases.
        and are they now seeing value? with multiple threads complaining about tanking and some service providers (who you know well) refusing to remove the links they left that caused them to tank? You are right its about what they are seeing as the value in their sites dropping in the ranks not what a service providers wants to spin about the value of their service now.

        What should be reasonable to expect from a $20 purchase? $50? $100?
        Um anything that doesn't cause their sites to tank would be good - or um what good is it even at $5?

        I agree with this, oddly. The site owners should learn more about SEO because alot of times people buy a service then backlink their page with a couple of anchor text or from one source of links only then blame the service. You wouldn't go into McDonald's and order a chicken sandwich, 20 mcnuggets and two big macs and a large strawberry shake then blame McDonald's for your stomach ache.
        Depends if MCdonald told them it was a well balanced meal. In many cases link sellers here tell them it will cause the sites to be very healthy and rank. Wheres the "you need other links cause ours alone will just hurt you " in the sales copy? Can we expect to see it in sellers sales copy soon?

        Frankly we don't agree. I believe they should learn better SEo so that they can know a good offer before they buy whereas in countless conversations with you theres never been a time including now when something went wrong that you were not in favor of blaming the client. So you use it merely to excuse the service and blame the client that should be smart enough to not rely on the seller's sales copy. I don't

        What was that again? The "people are stupid" canard?
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6201699].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author nik0
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          No I assume they have been bamboozled by the general IM seo mentality into thinking that number 8 that statistically gets next to no traffic is success at ranking. its ot about people being stupid its about people having other areas of expertise and being entirely too trusting .
          It's also about that most people don't want to spend hundreds of dollars so what to expect for $99,- page one ranking?

          I don't offer page one rankings and if I would I sure wouldn't charge as low as $99,- as you can only build so many links or spend so many time on it to keep it profitable. Maybe I would in the near future but then there will be different prices based on the difficulties of the keywords.

          Let's say Matt gets a keyword that would make $100/month when it reaches the top 3. It's not realistic to expect top 3 results for $99,- for such keyword.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6201795].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

            It's also about that most people don't want to spend hundreds of dollars so what to expect for $99
            First I am cutting off the quote there so as not to get into a discussion about one service. SO what I say applies to all cheap backlink products

            All that is well and good but post BMR deindexing, Post unnatural link notices, Post Google looking at links in unrelated and gibbberish content you might as well stick the $99 - 140 whatever in your pocket if you are giving your site a good shot at getting tanked.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6201957].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author nik0
              Banned
              Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

              First I am cutting off the quote there so as not to get into a discussion about one service. SO what I say applies to all cheap backlink products

              All that is well and good but post BMR deindexing, Post unnatural link notices, Post Google looking at links in unrelated and gibbberish content you might as well stick the $99 - 140 whatever in your pocket if you are giving your site a good shot at getting tanked.
              Am I glad 95% of my links aren't contextual links
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6202032].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
            Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

            Let's say Matt gets a keyword that would make $100/month when it reaches the top 3. It's not realistic to expect top 3 results for $99,- for such keyword.
            Right, its about ROI. It's about foundational rankings, if you want to go further then starting on page one is a huge plus. I'm not sure what Michael expects for $99.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6206757].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author nik0
              Banned
              Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

              Right, its about ROI. It's about foundational rankings, if you want to go further then starting on page one is a huge plus. I'm not sure what Michael expects for $99.
              Indeed, it's very easy to say that we are not SEO's but just linkbuilders, and there is true in it, but they forget that they charge $1k/month so it's totally comparing apples to pears.

              Besides that I've ranked quiet a few local businesses at the top 3 for several keywords for about $100,- onetime fee. A normal "professional" SEO company would have easily quoted them for $300-400/month.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207069].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
                Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                Indeed, it's very easy to say that we are not SEO's but just linkbuilders, and there is true in it, but they forget that they charge $1k/month so it's totally comparing apples to pears.

                Besides that I've ranked quiet a few local businesses at the top 3 for several keywords for about $100,- onetime fee. A normal "professional" SEO company would have easily quoted them for $300-400/month.
                Nothing wrong with being a link builder/seller. SEO is a completely different ballgame though. It's so much more than just link building.

                And yeah there are many types of clients.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207332].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                Indeed, it's very easy to say that we are not SEO's but just linkbuilders, and there is true in it, but they forget that they charge $1k/month so it's totally comparing apples to pears.
                They who? before you start talking about apples and pears maybe you should get the facts straight first nik. Only one person has said their minimum is $1,000 and I believe it was you that stated that Mike F charges minimum $500 per month. H e hasn't stated his prices himself yet. I can go as low as $399 and as High as $3,000 or more but you still have some more facts to get straight before you claim to be making a good comparison.

                Right in this very thread you've had cheaper sellers claim that you should get more links and use other services as well. SO go ahead and add those into the mix, then take the time to do good keyword research which they don't do, analyze competition which they don't do, specify and go after one keyword rather than five which they don't do. Once you start adding up the costs of those things that have to be done you can easily go into the hundreds either in money spent or time spent.

                We re not done yet though because almost all of them will have ongoing charges because none of them guarantee that the one time payment will last for any substantial period of time.

                SO even in the cheaper packages you are not adding into it all the ongoing and hidden costs that your customers WILL end up spending. the Regular SEO in many cases is just being more upfront and clear about those charges while you don't have to include them but your customers still have to spend.

                Then you can go ahead with your apples and oranges claim. jUst start at the right point or you are skewing it.



                Besides that I've ranked quiet a few local businesses at the top 3 for several keywords for about $100,- onetime fee. A normal "professional" SEO company would have easily quoted them for $300-400/month.
                ANd you keep them there no matter what as well for the same $100? Huge difference being if you luck out and get a few top positions you still are not doing what normal SEOs do and thats putting their rear on the line to actually deliver that ranking to a particular client and serp. When I see backlink providers saying they will deliver top three to all their customers then I'll be impressed cause seriously you take in enough cheap customers then you end up with a whole variety of keywords and serps and in some cases can do almost nothing and they will rank with the weak competition some of them are in
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207621].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author nik0
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  They who? before you start talking about apples and pears maybe you should get the facts straight first nik. Only one person has said their minimum is $1,000 and I believe it was you that stated that Mike F charges minimum $500 per month. H e hasn't stated his prices himself yet. I can go as low as $399 and as High as $3,000 or more but you still have some more facts to get straight before you claim to be making a good comparison.
                  You shouldn't take words so literally, $500 $1000 it doesn't matter much for the example, it comes down to the point that most of the SEO companies (not linksellers) charge on average $5k/year. And then people start to compare our $100 linkpackages to a $5k/year service. That IS what I meant with comparing apples to pears.

                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  Right in this very thread you've had cheaper sellers claim that you should get more links and use other services as well. SO go ahead and add those into the mix, then take the time to do good keyword research which they don't do, analyze competition which they don't do, specify and go after one keyword rather than five which they don't do. Once you start adding up the costs of those things that have to be done you can easily go into the hundreds either in money spent or time spent.

                  We re not done yet though because almost all of them will have ongoing charges because none of them guarantee that the one time payment will last for any substantial period of time.

                  SO even in the cheaper packages you are not adding into it all the ongoing and hidden costs that your customers WILL end up spending. the Regular SEO in many cases is just being more upfront and clear about those charges while you don't have to include them but your customers still have to spend.

                  Then you can go ahead with your apples and oranges claim. jUst start at the right point or you are skewing it.
                  Yes you are right about that. Not many are prepared to pay that though. Still there is quiet a difference between being able to rank a client for $100,- for a couple of months. Do that 4 times a year and it's $400/year, not $4000/year and most of the sites that I rank certainly stick a couple of months. I have quiet a few SEO companies that outsource their work to me and they do charge amounts like $300+/month to their clients, and pay me $50/month. Before they outsourced it to me they used BMR and ALN only.


                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  ANd you keep them there no matter what as well for the same $100? Huge difference being if you luck out and get a few top positions you still are not doing what normal SEOs do and thats putting their rear on the line to actually deliver that ranking to a particular client and serp. When I see backlink providers saying they will deliver top three to all their customers then I'll be impressed cause seriously you take in enough cheap customers then you end up with a whole variety of keywords and serps and in some cases can do almost nothing and they will rank with the weak competition some of them are in
                  Yeah lol I shouldnt have made that $100 top 3 results example, although the client still ranks there after 4 months. Anyway, if they pay me $5k/year I'm also going out of my way to rank them and keep them there. With 5k or any monthly service there is a lot more possible. Like giving them spots at my private network (which is in the making), for a one time fee I ain't gonna give them prominent links at my sites, yes they can buy a guestpost in the near future but clients who would sign for monthly would get a fixed featured post kind of things and/or homepage links at relevant sites.

                  For one time fees thats just impossible. I would shoot myself in the foot, although I do offer a few spots for a onetime fee for a limited time (as in might quit offering it soon) the homepage links would stay forever.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207834].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author nik0
                    Banned
                    I would like to add something to all this.

                    You know how freaking easy it would be for me to rank a client and keep them there when I get a $500/month budget?

                    There are many ways but I could build them a little private network and invest the first 2-3 months payments into that .

                    Or I could spend half of the monthly budget on rented links at high relevant sites, for example TextLinkBrokers.

                    If I had more of these clients I would get a $3850,- subscription to PRweb for unlimited press releases and throw out a press release once in 3 months.

                    You make it sound like it's hard to get clients rankings and keep them there, it's dead easy when the budget is wide enough.

                    And this are just a few tricks, obvious I would use a bit more diversity to cover the rented links.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207875].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                      Originally Posted by nik0 View Post


                      You make it sound like it's hard to get clients rankings and keep them there, it's dead easy when the budget is wide enough.
                      Nik I didn't want to say it before but since you insist. I've read your posts and statements and the questions you have had and you are in absolutley no position to make any claims you know nothing about. You are relatively new to SEO and pretty clueless of what goes on out there.

                      The very fact that you think that $500 a month would give you the budget to build a network that could rank in a truly competitive serp is all anyone needs to see to know you are blowing smoke based on lack of knowledge. You could barely pick up two good Pr4s for that and in no way does that mean you will go charging to the top in a competitive serp.

                      Meanwhile take a look at the thread title and tell me again that how much people in this thread actually charge is not the point but some general idea you have of SEO salaries?

                      I better stop reading this thread because I always want to respond when I see nonsense and theres no end of it in this thread now. I realize you guys want to sell your services but the bottom line is alot of things that the $99 and below services offer right now is just plain toxic to many web sites. Its not the price -its that tanking someones site isn't even worth 50 cents unless you want run a negative SEO on someone.

                      I have nothing again price points but if what you can deliver for that is potentially detrimental to sites in spammy links, spun content links, and other assorted garbage that ALREADY HAVE had people get unnatural link reports then that stuff is FAR costlier to anyone making money from their sites than the $500+ per month SEOs.
                      Signature

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207995].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author nik0
                        Banned
                        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                        The very fact that you think that $500 a month would give you the budget to build a network that could rank in a truly competitive serp is all anyone needs to see to know you are blowing smoke based on lack of knowledge. You could barely pick up two good Pr4s for that and in no way does that mean you will go charging to the top in a competitive serp.
                        Can you show me where I mentioned that $500/month is enough for a truly competitive serp? There are SERPS where $50.000/month isn't enough. Let me ignore the first part cause it makes not much sense really. Just a fyi: I do have a client that pay me $4000/month and I have clients that pay me $1000/month they found me on this forum, beleive it or not. One of the reasons why I sell cheap services, it helps me to land large clients as they see proof of my work first and many are very impressed by what I accomplish with $100,-

                        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                        I realize you guys want to sell your services but the bottom line is alot of things that the $99 and below services offer right now is just plain toxic to many web sites. Its not the price -its that tanking someones site isn't even worth 50 cents unless you want run a negative SEO on someone.
                        Mike seriously, have you even looked at my signature links to see what I offer in the packages? You should before you make more assumptions. None of the links that I offer hurt a site. Go look for yourself and tell me then again, specifically what you find spammy about it okay? Maybe you looked a month or so ago but a lot has changed in the meanwhile, yes it used to be spammy but not anymore.

                        Btw for this 4k client I work on many of his sites and we target dozens of urls at the same time, so it's not like 1 competitive term we are after, more like 250 low competition keywords per site.

                        I do have a little side note about your first paragraph btw, how much experience do you think it gave me to work on 100+ sites in a few months? That are 100+ individual case studies, then add the experience I had before I joined this forum which makes me a pretty damn good linkbuilder.
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208054].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                          Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                          Can you show me where I mentioned that $500/month is enough for a truly competitive serp?

                          Then you have no point Nik. Real SEos don't take just the adsense weak serps. Once you get outside of that arena no you will not rank an average SEO customer with two PR4s.


                          I do have a client that pay me $4000/month and I have clients that pay me $1000/month they found me on this forum, beleive it or not.
                          Since you put it that way no I don't believe it. IF you worked for $4,000 a month then you would never go down to $19 and its nonsense to say that the low end like that leads to them upping their price to $4,000 . It happens but rarely. You are blowing deep dark smoke.

                          Mike seriously, have you even looked at my signature links to see what I offer in the packages? You should before you make more assumptions. None of the links that I offer hurt a site. Go look for yourself and tell me then again, specifically what you find spammy about it okay?

                          NIk. Seriously. LOL. I got to get out of this place. this is like the Twilight zone. What???? how about 2500 BOOKMARKS


                          Go look for yourself and tell me then again, specifically what you find spammy about it okay? Maybe you looked a month or so ago but a lot has changed in the meanwhile, yes it used to be spammy but not anymore.
                          Your wish is my command

                          2500 BOOKMARKS MEETS NO ONES (especially not Google's) definition of non spammy links.

                          Btw for this 4k client I work on many of his sites and we target dozens of urls at the same time, so it's not like 1 competitive term we are after, more like 250 low competition keywords per site.
                          Still not buying it. You make Thousands off of a few customers but do outsource work for $50 a month? Give me a break.
                          Signature

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208162].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author nik0
                            Banned
                            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                            Then you have no point Nik. Real SEos don't take just the adsense weak serps. Once you get outside of that arena no you will not rank an average SEO customer with two PR4s.
                            This gets real funny, I mentioned I would invest the first 2-3 monthly payments, that is $1000-1500,-. I could buy 15 PR3 domains for that money and I'm sure I can rank quiet a few keywords for that. Weren't you the one always saying that most people have enough on 5 or 10 strong links?


                            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                            Since you put it that way no I don't believe it. IF you worked for $4,000 a month then you would never go down to $19 and its nonsense to say that the low end like that leads to them upping their price to $4,000 . It happens but rarely. You are blowing deep dark smoke.
                            That $19 package is very effective for micro niche sites and takes me 3 minutes of my time. $4 for my VA so $15/3minutes makes a pretty good hourly dont you think? FYI: I ranked 20 micro niche EMD sites at the top 5 with that $19 package. I work for a micro niche site builder who is scaling up heavily cause of that package. He ordered it 20 times this month already. And whether I do 1 package or 20 packages it still makes me a few minutes so its very lucrative for me to offer that and people like cheap solutions and that is it and the rankings stay, it has nothing to do with spun content, it's my own secret method.

                            Do you ever think about the future? What if that 4k client quits using my services at some point? That would be like 50% of my revenue gone, so yes I still focus on the little ones as well. There are no guarantees in business, you should know that. Btw all the sites I worked on for him survived the Penguin update. That client bought 10* $100 package to test me btw and he liked what I did, he is a an SEO'er himself and tired of doing it, I learned quiet a lot from him to be honest. He also tested a few other guys and they failed. So yes I am proud of it and it proves that what I do works.

                            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                            NIk. Seriously. LOL. I got to get out of this place. this is like the Twilight zone. What???? how about 2500 BOOKMARKS

                            Your wish is my command

                            2500 BOOKMARKS MEETS NO ONES (especially not Google's) definition of non spammy links.
                            Yeah yeah yeah 2500 bookmarks in tier2, spreaded over 100 links, what is that, 25 bookmarks at the top 25 bookmark sites per link right? 100*25= 2500 yes correct. You think it's spammy to send 25 quality bookmarks to a page? Personally I dont think that is spammy. 500 BMD bookmarks to 1 page, that is spammy.


                            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                            Still not buying it. You make Thousands off of a few customers but do outsource work for $50 a month? Give me a break.
                            Huh? I don't understand you, I said SEO companies outsource their clients to me and pay me $50/month per client.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208248].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                              NIk you yourself said I could believe you or not. I choose not. I have said many times that people can say anything on a forum and that I rarely trust testimonials. At this point all that is happening is that you are posting self testimonial after self testimonial.

                              Despite what you claim I have looked at what you offer and when General SEO knowledge indicates that links are weak no amount of testimonials self or otherwise makes me change my mind

                              Which is fine for you. You certainly don't need me to believe you but I just don't again based on what I think lots of people know works and what doesn't especially now. It would be silly of me to change that based on testimonails form people I don't know of from the seller themselves.
                              Signature

                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208338].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                                Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                Which is fine for you. You certainly don't need me to believe you but I just don't again based on what I think lots of people know works and what doesn't especially now. It would be silly of me to change that based on testimonails form people I don't know of from the seller themselves.
                                Wait a minute, first you say I didn't have enough time to determine if something was working or not post penguin and now you're saying that we KNOW what works and what doesn't work right now. Which is it?
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208394].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                  Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

                                  Wait a minute, first you say I didn't have enough time to determine if something was working or not post penguin and now you're saying that we KNOW what works and what doesn't work right now. Which is it?
                                  Try and keep up Marc. there was no "we" and there was no post penguin there. I was talking to Niko not anyone of your failed points and no I was not referring to post penguin. We knew long before Penguin that bookmarks and other referred to link building were not strong links. If someone is going to claim they do great SEo work with then no I am not believing it because they said it or because a few people on a forum claim its so.

                                  But since we are on the subject care to expand on how you know whats in the Penguin update and what will give lasting good results as fact proven in two weeks? Normally it takes a little Seo knowledge to expose the smoke you blow but in this case I think even a newbie can figure it out. Thanks for that.
                                  Signature

                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208484].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author nik0
                                Banned
                                Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                NIk you yourself said I could believe you or not. I choose not. I have said many times that people can say anything on a forum and that I rarely trust testimonials. At this point all that is happening is that you are posting self testimonial after self testimonial.

                                Despite what you claim I have looked at what you offer and when General SEO knowledge indicates that links are weak no amount of testimonials self or otherwise makes me change my mind

                                Which is fine for you. You certainly don't need me to believe you but I just don't again based on what I think lots of people know works and what doesn't especially now. It would be silly of me to change that based on testimonails form people I don't know of from the seller themselves.
                                Let me get this straight, you are not accusing me of fake testimonials in my thread right?

                                I didn't ask you to look at my thread to read the client testimonials btw I asked you to look at the links in my packages and the only links you had a comment on were the bookmarks, which I explained only 25 per page from quality sites like Digg etc.

                                So as you had no comments on the other links I can only assume that you don't think they are spammy. And I like that

                                Thanks Mike, for confirming that my packages rock!


                                ps: I tested each type of link seperatly on a different page, each of these linkgroupes, like 25 docsharing, 25 video submissions, moved the keyword. And I tested it on pages that hadn't moved an inch for months to give it a fair test. All the things that didn't work or were a little too spammy I removed. So maybe weak links in your eye's, each of them works, I can't say that from senuke/amr/xrumer/scrapebox blasts. I did offer senukex as part of my package before for extra variety, just as a bonus really as I never gave it much value and recent tests showed it gave 0 movement and now post penguin it could even hurt a site, so I removed it completely.
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208436].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author nik0
                                  Banned
                                  Just a little thing I want to express

                                  Since I went more whitehat with only links that work guess what happened with the number of sales?

                                  They dropped

                                  People want to buy crap

                                  And this time you must believe me.
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208471].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                  Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                                  Let me get this straight, you are not accusing me of fake testimonials in my thread right?
                                  NIk testimonials do not have to be fake to be unreliable. Rest assured I was not making that accusation of you. I am sure you can point at some garbage products that got ton loads of testimonials. Fact is people are at different levels of understanding. I have seen people give testimonials based on moving oorm Page 3 to page two and early in the game when it was likely to be temporary. I have seen people give testimonials before they even used the product, plus frankly some SEO results are so easy to get based on some serps that anything would have ranked them.

                                  So as you had no comments on the other links I can only assume that you don't think they are spammy. And I like that

                                  Thanks Mike, for confirming that my packages rock!
                                  NIk I pointed the bookmarks as obvious.I applaud you for cutting out ton loads of other spammy kind of links but no sorry alot of those links I do not think "rock" and no I am not convinced that if you break up 2500 links and send them to multiple pages on the same that you cannot get the same notice. Mind you I will grant you that if your authority links are really authority links then it might be a decent package overall. However since you indicated you really don't have access to your own large network I would be suspicious of what you mean by authority.


                                  The reality of the economics is what I think kills the cheap backlink packages being good and not potentially harmful. Lets face it getting high quality authority links is either Time consuming in work to get links naturally or costly in dollars to buy. Almost all the cheap packages out there now are essentially built on running blasting software on cheap non authority pages and most of those link resources also tend to be exactly what Google calls unnatural links.

                                  Thats the dilemma and the reason why so many people are saying they are giving up on SEO here - because unfortunately that what alot of the SEO has been built on


                                  I did offer senukex as part of my package before for extra variety, just as a bonus really as I never gave it much value and recent tests showed it gave 0 movement and now post penguin it could even hurt a site, so I removed it completely.
                                  You again are to be commended for that but I think you are going to find that you are not going to be able to all three - cheap, safe and effective - into one package anymore

                                  Although I am sure some sellers will try and claim for as long as they can that the give all three.
                                  Signature

                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208608].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author nik0
                                    Banned
                                    Cheap, safe and effective is indeed hard to achieve indeed. I traded a bit of effectiveness for more safety, and more safety costs more money so the prices are increased last week.

                                    I have some awesome stuff coming up though, I'm building a network of 10.000 manually made customized web2.0s to help them rank my clients. I'm busy with this PRweb deal so I can offer my clients a $369,- professional pressrelease in a $200 package, how sick is that.

                                    And ofcourse building the private network where I already offer 100% unique written guestposts, as I dont want spun content at my site. We have an awesome way to create high relevant high unique spin and overall high readable articles that Google just can't detect, but you never know in a few years from now.

                                    Best thing about the network is that we have 150 sites and 5 sites per niche so we cover 30 niches, so each guestpost that I put there will fit and it should pass a manual review. No one at this forum is doing this stuff that I have coming

                                    Thats why I always get pissed of when I read all the services at WF are crap as I'm trying to make a difference.


                                    ps these bookmarks are not pointed at the website pages but at the web2.0s, doc sharing and video sites I talked with another SEO'er who is pretty hotshot and he got awesome results by dripfeeding 100 bookmarks to a web2.0 and then running the bookmark through a backlink boost service. It's not very cheap but it is pretty effective, and the bookmark buffer make it only more safe, thats why we specificially chose for bookmarks at the top25 sites.
                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208738].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                      Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                                      I have some awesome stuff coming up though, I'm building a network of 10.000 manually made customized web2.0s to help them rank my clients. I'm busy with this PRweb deal so I can offer my clients a $369,- professional pressrelease in a $200 package, how sick is that.
                                      Nik I know alot of people think I just like to give a hard time but I give credit where credit is due and that is in fact some nice stuff coming up for you. Depending on how you do it I might even say it rocks . I have to add though that I am not into the 10,000 number. However I HAVE seen some evidence that Web 2.0s have some new life I just don't think they are being done properly now. Early Penguin results show some added preference to Domain level authority and some WEB 2.0s may be getting the benefit of that.

                                      And ofcourse building the private network where I already offer 100% unique written guestposts, as I dont want spun content at my site.
                                      Again Kudos. You ARE learning quick. Its staggering how many service providers are trying to claim that spun content is still good on a network.

                                      We have an awesome way to create high relevant high unique spin and overall high readable articles that Google just can't detect, but you never know in a few years from now.
                                      Sentence spinning to me is the same as rewriting. I don't put it in the category of spinning it is readable so if you do something similar then you will be golden.

                                      Best thing about the network is that we have 150 sites and 5 sites per niche so we cover 30 niches, so each guestpost that I put there will fit and it should pass a manual review. No one at this forum is doing this stuff that I have coming
                                      Umm don't be too sure. Niche networks are out there. I admit openly I was late to that but I am getting into it.

                                      I talked with another SEO'er who is pretty hotshot and he got awesome results by dripfeeding 100 bookmarks to a web2.0 and then running the bookmark through a backlink boost service. It's not very cheap but it is pretty effective, and the bookmark buffer make it only more safe, thats why we specificially chose for bookmarks at the top25 sites.
                                      I really doubt the awesomeness of it with bookmarks but I will say in fairness that yes if there is any use for spammy links still left it s aiming them at web 2.0 and then to your money site. However to me it would be FAR more effective to run blog comments (and call me a prude but I prefer manual because I find more justice in moderation needed blogs.) to web 2.0 and then to money sites. I have an experiment going with that right now.

                                      Last post was a reasonable thoughtful SEO post Nik. Enjoyed it.
                                      Signature

                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208894].message }}
                                      • Profile picture of the author nik0
                                        Banned
                                        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                        Nik I know alot of people think I just like to give a hard time but I give credit where credit is due and that is in fact some nice stuff coming up for you. Depending on how you do it I might even say it rocks . I have to add though that I am not into the 10,000 number. However I HAVE seen some evidence that Web 2.0s have some new life I just don't think they are being done properly now. Early Penguin results show some added preference to Domain level authority and some WEB 2.0s may be getting the benefit of that.
                                        Thanks, it's very appreciated, I know you are a reasonable guy.

                                        Web2.0s are far from dead. I used to order a lot of senukex fiverr gigs. They did NOTHING to the rankings, really zero, not even in top 1000.

                                        Then as an experiment I builded 20 web2.0s manually (with 1 and the same unique piece of content) for a client that I kind of befriended with and I also rented some homepage links at a dubious russian network. (we always experiment a bit). He ranked poof at #2 for a 1 word product kw. Then I forgot to keep up with the money at that network and the links got removed. The 5* PR3 homepage links vanished (max 10 OBL btw), his rankings sticked. I was impressed.

                                        Then I started to play with long ass articles in huge paragraph + word spin level, grab 15 articles and spin it, this creates such kw rich content, it's amazing (1100+ words btw), we started to customize the web2.0's even more where possible and it worked awesomely well, where all this auto generated web2.0s never did anything this worked amazing. I offered it as a seperate service here, no one was interested so I merged the packages. Shows again that people really don't know what they buy.

                                        Now that these rank websites well I wanted to see how they perform on theirselves. I blasted it with 100 authority links ($19 package), the tumblr blog now ranks at #18 for "Mortgage calculator uk", check it yourself I would say (a 22k exact high comp. keyword). You can run it through backlink checkers, I bet you won't find a single link. And you can check how the spin looks btw.

                                        My plan with the web2.0s is that I go optimize them for niches, so I get a lot of longtail kw's and will blast many of them with 100 authority links. I chose only subdomain web2.0s btw. Then the ones that rank and get visitors, I will take out of the network and monetize with Amazon and keep for myself


                                        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                        Again Kudos. You ARE learning quick. Its staggering how many service providers are trying to claim that spun content is still good on a network.

                                        Sentence spinning to me is the same as rewriting. I don't put it in the category of spinning it is readable so if you do something similar then you will be golden.
                                        Hehehe, although I don't want spun on my own network I do use it above described way on web2.0s. Why? Is has to stay affordable, especially when you sell services here and for me it proved that my spun content is good. As the spun doesn't make a well storyline it's not usable for websites that you own, Google manual reviewers would notice it if they read the articles.


                                        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                        Umm don't be too sure. Niche networks are out there. I admit openly I was late to that but I am getting into it.
                                        Okay haven't spotted them really yet but would be a miracle if I was the first one indeed to come up with that idea.

                                        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                        I really doubt the awesomeness of it with bookmarks but I will say in fairness that yes if there is any use for spammy links still left it s aiming them at web 2.0 and then to your money site. However to me it would be FAR more effective to run blog comments (and call me a prude but I prefer manual because I find more justice in moderation needed blogs.) to web 2.0 and then to money sites. I have an experiment going with that right now.

                                        Last post was a reasonable thoughtful SEO post Nik. Enjoyed it.
                                        Blog comments might work well but it gets too expensive to use them as tier 2. I dont have clients with 1 site that want to rank for one real tough keyword. My large client has as previously said dozens of url's I have to target, the tiered way would not work. Agree completely with the moderated part btw.

                                        Not to brag but cause I sell SEO services many SEO companies contact me, and add me to Skype, whether to sell me something or to outsource their work to me. And I totally hear them out, always, that way I pick up some real great techniques along the way. They may find me noobish sometimes but they also see I love to learn and totally adapt to how they want to have it done. Thats why I landed large clients, they are just plain tiered of SEO, they tell me what they want and I organize it all with VA's and all the stuff.

                                        Oh about the bookmarks, I learned a lot from this guy who pointed me at it, and he ranked tough stuff with custom web2.0s tier1, bookmarks tier2, backlink booster tier3. Ofcourse he does a lot more then that, like pressreleases and many more things but he has many sites, has a few large clients and gets awesome results. He is also tired of doing SEO, come on it can get pretty boring sometimes, and wants to outsource all of his clients to me eventually with him being my mentor really.

                                        So that is how I land large clients really, I guess it makes a bit more sense after this explanation. I like bragging but only about things that are true. It makes no sense to spread nonsense, even on forums. This is not the typical insurance company clients, it are all SEO'ers theirselves just tired of dealing with VA's and all. And they are very succesfull so they can afford it.

                                        This forum has made me from 1 order a week, to 1 order a day but the larger clients triple the revenue. It's so terrible that I might have to call off on offering it at this forum as he has some big stuff waiting for me, but I dont like to get dependant on 1 or 2 people so I'll just open a new can of VA's

                                        Thank you Warrior Forum!

                                        ps I am sure I have penalized some client sites, and I hate it and I dont really understand why others keep selling the crap you know. At some point when you go to bed you have to think about what you're really selling right? People work hard for the money, dont want to spend much, so all I can do is try to get the best for them and learn some tough lessons along the road with deindexing, bad anchor diversity you name it.
                                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6209386].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Links were a target of the algo change just as unnatural link notices are a part of the overall equation now. the distinction is without meaningful merit. Fall in the serps is a fall in the serps.
          What you said was factually incorrect, nonetheless. I don't know why you can't just admit it?
          by that reasoning a decent rugby player will instant make a great NFL player. No rules change and we see if they can adapt not assume they will. Adaptation is easy to see. In this case no - "they" haven't. For the most part most service providers are offering the same stuff they offered before the changes and some are trying to pretend like they have things under control by sticking their heads in the sand. Some even started new services and networks with the same spun nonsense that helped other networks get deindexed. It s really quite insane when you think about it.
          If you want to use that analogy then you'd have to assume that this rugby player has transitioned from many sports and succeeded. Google didn't start making changes on 4/24 they have been doing it since 2002. We've gone through a ton of rounds of panda and now we have penguin. Changes are nothing new.
          No I assume they have been bamboozled by the general IM seo mentality into thinking that number 8 that statistically gets next to no traffic is success at ranking.
          Let's see, they order a service that gives them what they wanted and that's bad? Just because Michael says they shouldn't have wanted that in the first place? Get a clue Michael.
          its ot about people being stupid its about people having other areas of expertise and being entirely too trusting .
          No, it's about ROI.
          and are they now seeing value? with multiple threads complaining about tanking and some service providers (who you know well) refusing to remove the links they left that caused them to tank?
          First, you can't tell what links caused a site to tank. Secondly, everybody was hit by penguin even sites that weren't actively backlinking. Thirdly, not everybody was affected and it looks like we know why now.
          You are right its about what they are seeing as the value in their sites dropping in the ranks not what a service providers wants to spin about the value of their service now.
          But you are making the assumption that everybody who used a service on WF got hit when this is 100% baseless assertion. I can attest to this FACT with our customers. Some got hit, most didn't. Spin that.

          You don't have enough data points to make these assertions meaningful.

          Um anything that doesn't cause their sites to tank would be good - or um what good is it even at $5?
          See above.
          Depends if MCdonald told them it was a well balanced meal. In many cases link sellers here tell them it will cause the sites to be very healthy and rank. Wheres the "you need other links cause ours alone will just hurt you " in the sales copy? Can we expect to see it in sellers sales copy soon?
          Well, McDonald's doesn't say this. Website owners need to take responsibility for their sites. If a customer orders some article backlinks and only wants to target one keyword why should the service provider be responsible for the fact that this is very penguin unfriendly? Maybe he's trying to balance out his keywords? You'd hold McDonalds responsible for selling a fat guy a big mac.
          Frankly we don't agree.
          Not on a whole lot. lol
          I believe they should learn better SEo so that they can know a good offer before they buy whereas in countless conversations with you theres never been a time including now when something went wrong that you were not in favor of blaming the client.
          Yeah, you have so much data to go on don't you? lol
          So you use it merely to excuse the service and blame the client that should be smart enough to not rely on the seller's sales copy. I don't
          All I'm saying is the client should know more about SEO when they are using a service that only provides backlinks. We've got both kinds of services where we give links and one where we give page one results. The page one results speak for themselves as they keep rolling in because we ADAPTED the service without any change required by the customer. For the link service a customer needs to know a little more about SEO since it's just a tool and not an all inclusive service.
          What was that again? The "people are stupid" canard?
          Yeah, you think people can't determine value for themselves. You assume that most people who leave a testimonial is doing so because they have no idea how to determine ROI. They keep coming back over and over again because they see positive ROI.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6206719].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

      And with that your criteria you just shot yourself in the foot. Post Google's Penguin update 95% of what was and is being offered on WF will get you a notice from Google for Unnatural links and your site sent to Siberia. To the extent that testimonials ever did matter they matter even less now. The game has changed over the last three months and more in the last two weeks. Most of the SEO services offered on WF have people who have complained rightfully that those services caused their sites to tank and get unnatural links. Thats a fact.

      Asking that question generally is also not going to do you well. anyone can fly in who knows precious little about SEO and make recommendations and based on their dubious ideas of what success is.

      I would suggest you stay away from all SEO offers on WF until you know what you need to know about SEO and the latest Penguin update or you will just be trowing more money away just like you have been doing on packages. think about it - all you are going to get in this thread is testimonials - the very same kind of testimonials that you said led you the wrong way before.
      Wow, so confused now. So many great advice but not who to follow. So how do I learn the basics of seo but that applies today not the old seo methods?

      I was thinking of hiring an export keyword researcher, I know someone here on WF, give her my url, and let her choose the 5 keywords to give to Matt Laclear to rank my site on the first page. Obviously I think she will provide me for keywords that are profitable, easy to rank for. But then I am hearing that I shouldn't hire no one on WF for seo until I know the basics of it.

      I've been wanting to hire Matt service for a while but the problem is that I only have one keyword that I am trying to rank my money site with. I am not sure how to pick the other 4 keywords. Are the other 4 keywords suppose to be in the content of my site? Are this additional keywords consider the LSI keywords? I think I made a rookie mistake by optimizing my site for only one keyword. Sorry

      Anyways Matt if you come back in here, please advise me before trying out your service. How is your seo service working by the way with the new penguin algorithims update?

      Thank you all for helping me out
      Signature

      Affiliate Links are not allowed!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6199715].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
        Just some food for thought...

        I hope you realize that page one rankings are pretty close to meaningless. You need to be in the top 3 to get any worthwhile traffic. If you are ranked #6 for a keyword that gets 5000 searches a month, you might get 2-3 visitors a day. Is 2-3 visitors a day going to make you any money? In some niches, it might. In most, it won't.

        Also, if you are going to go the WSO route, I never would, but if you really want to, get a good understanding of what the WSO provider is giving to you. DO NOT just look at the results. Results can be temporary. Just because you get a high ranking today, is your site going to sustain that ranking?

        Are the methods being used by the backlink spammer, sorry I mean WSO provider, the kind of thing that Google could easily target in the future, if they haven't already? Something that works today only to get your site sent to page 10 of the rankings with the next update is not very useful.

        Lastly, if you are running a legitimate business and not just building some crappy made for AdSense site, are you comfortable with the work that the backlink spammer is providing? If one of your customers ran across an article the backlinker posted or a link they dropped somewhere else and followed it back to your site, would you be ok with what they found? If they are using articles, do the articles make sense? Are they readable? Are they factual about your business? What other links are around them? I have a client I'm trying to help recover rankings right now that used one of these backlink spammers. In one article that was posted by the wanna be SEO, we found his link right beside male enhancement product links and links that redirected to a porn site. Most of the other articles are complete garbage. They read like they were written by a 7 year-old for whom English is their third language.
        Signature
        SEO, AdWords Management, Social Media Marketing, and more.
        Get a FREE Quote.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6199831].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author nik0
        Banned
        A few tips of what works and what doesn't work Ray so that you know which links to avoid.

        What to avoid and why:

        Any linktype created with senukex, this includes web2.0 profiles, social networks (crappy web2.0's actually but they gave it a nice name), article submissions, forumprofiles. It's not that all of these links will specifically hurt your site but they just won't rank you, and many do hurt your site. Those senukex campaigns are what is sold like 80-90% at this forum.

        Avoid 100+ article submissions, when they talk about 600+ or 1000+ article submissions and guaranteed 100-150 live links then all alarmbells go of over here, it means in 99% of the cases that they use a software called Article Marketing Robot, which really had its best time a long time ago.

        Avoid 500+ bookmarks directly to your site, when people talk about these numbers it are always submission to mostly crappy / spammy sites, won't do any good although you can use them for tier2.

        Avoid wiki blasts, I see some very nice salesletters talking about high authority wiki links, don't let them fool you, the only high authority wiki site is wikipedia, at all the other sites your crappy spun article will land at a pr n/a page and hardly ever gets crawled, unless you do a lot of work to get them crawled / indexed. Most people sell these in packages like 1000 or 5000+, avoid these as the plague, even in tier2 / tier3 they hardly help.

        In general avoid any type of link that gets build with 100's or 1000's at the same time, it's never good really so avoid xrumer profile links and scrapebox comment blasts as well. Nothing good in those.

        Avoid retweets, there used to be a time that they worked, last week I tested 10 different retweet suppliers at Fiverr but also at other sites, nothing helped.


        Now that you know what doesn't work or that even hurts your site, let's go on to the things that do work, I still get good results with:

        - Video submissions (many tools available but try to find one that submits to strong video sites and not to 100+ cheap youtube clones), it helps your rankings.

        - Doc sharing (backlinktopia seems to be a good one for that and I do get ranking increases from it).

        - Repins at Pinterest, although I am afraid it will go the same route as retweets, they do work in some way, not too great though.

        - Web2.0's, make them manually, create a custom theme, upload an original piece of content or make sure you are able to create a masterpiece of a spinfile, spinning works as long as you know what you are doing, automatic spins with 1 click on the button do not work. Personally I am a fan on broken linkwheel web2.0's and I get very good results with them.

        - Other things that work are relevant guestposts, strong homepage links, posting at relevant forums, making relevant blogcomments (obvious these things are a little harder to outsource or a lot more expensive) but it works great.

        - Buying laser targetted domains to your keyword/niche works very well

        - Pressreleases also work very well, although PRweb works a lot better then E-mail wire. Both start at $99,- or $999/year for emailwire and $3000/year for PRweb for unlimited pressreleases.

        - Bookmarks, the good ones at sites like Reddit, Digg, Stumbleupon, voting these bookmarks up works even better, even when people use bots for that. I've seen many Digg bookmarks with votes even outrank the page itself so there is a lot of strength in those to rank on theirselves but also to rank your site. Without votes you won't see much ranking increase though but they help a great deal to get a site indexed fast. Although it's less then it's used to be.



        When you follow these guidelines you can't really go wrong! I've tested all of these links and I also had a learning curve and changed my packages a tons of times to be able to offer a package with only links that work and don't spam sites.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6199866].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author wilsonm
          Keep of hearing the term wiki link, what exactly is it?

          Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

          Avoid wiki blasts, I see some very nice salesletters talking about high authority wiki links, don't let them fool you, the only high authority wiki site is wikipedia, at all the other sites your crappy spun article will land at a pr n/a page and hardly ever gets crawled, unless you do a lot of work to get them crawled / indexed. Most people sell these in packages like 1000 or 5000+, avoid these as the plague, even in tier2 / tier3 they hardly help.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6200506].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author nik0
            Banned
            Originally Posted by wilsonm View Post

            Keep of hearing the term wiki link, what exactly is it?
            Wiki's are a platform where everyone can post what he wants, you could compare it to web2.0 sites in some way. The difference is that wiki sites can be spammed with 1000's of articles at the same time for prices like $5,-

            Most of those wannabee wiki's (inspired by wikipedia) have not much authority and cause they get spammed so hard Google doesn't really have time to crawl/index them.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6200736].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author DynoMutt
              Mike Grant, Mike Anthony, Mike Friedman, yukon and nik0. Based on personal experience with some and what I've read with the others, these are the guys I trust.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6201044].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author codecreative
          Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

          A few tips of what works and what doesn't work Ray so that you know which links to avoid.

          What to avoid and why:

          Any linktype created with senukex, this includes web2.0 profiles, social networks (crappy web2.0's actually but they gave it a nice name), article submissions, forumprofiles. It's not that all of these links will specifically hurt your site but they just won't rank you, and many do hurt your site. Those senukex campaigns are what is sold like 80-90% at this forum.

          Avoid 100+ article submissions, when they talk about 600+ or 1000+ article submissions and guaranteed 100-150 live links then all alarmbells go of over here, it means in 99% of the cases that they use a software called Article Marketing Robot, which really had its best time a long time ago.

          Avoid 500+ bookmarks directly to your site, when people talk about these numbers it are always submission to mostly crappy / spammy sites, won't do any good although you can use them for tier2.

          Avoid wiki blasts, I see some very nice salesletters talking about high authority wiki links, don't let them fool you, the only high authority wiki site is wikipedia, at all the other sites your crappy spun article will land at a pr n/a page and hardly ever gets crawled, unless you do a lot of work to get them crawled / indexed. Most people sell these in packages like 1000 or 5000+, avoid these as the plague, even in tier2 / tier3 they hardly help.

          In general avoid any type of link that gets build with 100's or 1000's at the same time, it's never good really so avoid xrumer profile links and scrapebox comment blasts as well. Nothing good in those.

          Avoid retweets, there used to be a time that they worked, last week I tested 10 different retweet suppliers at Fiverr but also at other sites, nothing helped.


          Now that you know what doesn't work or that even hurts your site, let's go on to the things that do work, I still get good results with:

          - Video submissions (many tools available but try to find one that submits to strong video sites and not to 100+ cheap youtube clones), it helps your rankings.

          - Doc sharing (backlinktopia seems to be a good one for that and I do get ranking increases from it).

          - Repins at Pinterest, although I am afraid it will go the same route as retweets, they do work in some way, not too great though.

          - Web2.0's, make them manually, create a custom theme, upload an original piece of content or make sure you are able to create a masterpiece of a spinfile, spinning works as long as you know what you are doing, automatic spins with 1 click on the button do not work. Personally I am a fan on broken linkwheel web2.0's and I get very good results with them.

          - Other things that work are relevant guestposts, strong homepage links, posting at relevant forums, making relevant blogcomments (obvious these things are a little harder to outsource or a lot more expensive) but it works great.

          - Buying laser targetted domains to your keyword/niche works very well

          - Pressreleases also work very well, although PRweb works a lot better then E-mail wire. Both start at $99,- or $999/year for emailwire and $3000/year for PRweb for unlimited pressreleases.

          - Bookmarks, the good ones at sites like Reddit, Digg, Stumbleupon, voting these bookmarks up works even better, even when people use bots for that. I've seen many Digg bookmarks with votes even outrank the page itself so there is a lot of strength in those to rank on theirselves but also to rank your site. Without votes you won't see much ranking increase though but they help a great deal to get a site indexed fast. Although it's less then it's used to be.



          When you follow these guidelines you can't really go wrong! I've tested all of these links and I also had a learning curve and changed my packages a tons of times to be able to offer a package with only links that work and don't spam sites.

          Hi nik0. I like what you wrote and my gut feelings agree with everything you pretty much said in the post I quoted. With regards " broken link wheel" I wanted to ask about the terminology used. Are you refering to a link pyramid or an open link wheel when say in an 8 spoke wheel site 1 doesn't like to 8.

          It seems that link pyramids are now the way to go forward. Or at least one way to go forward. I'm going to avoid pinterest cause i don't want to put efforst into something that is short term.

          Is youtube all you need for your video submissions? I know they make your links no follow.

          Also what type of docs do you tend to share on the doc sharing site backlinktopi. I have a few sites on page1 but I'm struggling to crack #1 and #2 they sit around #7 and #8.

          Can you recommend a specific pr release website
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6228796].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author nik0
            Banned
            Originally Posted by codecreative View Post

            Hi nik0. I like what you wrote and my gut feelings agree with everything you pretty much said in the post I quoted. With regards " broken link wheel" I wanted to ask about the terminology used. Are you refering to a link pyramid or an open link wheel when say in an 8 spoke wheel site 1 doesn't like to 8.

            It seems that link pyramids are now the way to go forward. Or at least one way to go forward. I'm going to avoid pinterest cause i don't want to put efforst into something that is short term.

            Is youtube all you need for your video submissions? I know they make your links no follow.

            Also what type of docs do you tend to share on the doc sharing site backlinktopi. I have a few sites on page1 but I'm struggling to crack #1 and #2 they sit around #7 and #8.

            Can you recommend a specific pr release website
            Broken linkwheel is indeed that we dont connect them in a circle!

            Yeah I think Pinterest might not last forever, same like Retweets died.

            We submit video's to a lot of sites, I wouldn't only depend on Youtube.

            Just random articles that we convert into pdf.

            PRweb is a good pressrelease site, although they ain't cheap, otherwise you can search in the for sales forums and you'll find many people who subscribed to unlimited pressrelease at Emailwire and SBwire. A good site for free pressrelease is Free Press Release Distribution Service - PRLog
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6229141].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tomocal2010
      Mike Please can you contact me with a pm with your email.
      I would like to discuss a proposition
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6330520].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
    Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

    Hi. I have spend a lot of money on backlink packages from the wf hire section. It pretty obvious that i do not know what I am doing as I just purchased different backlinks packages at different times based on the reviews. The same url and the same keyword. I lost all of my rankings and that is a costly mistake that I have learned from.
    There's your problem right there. You simply cannot go too heavy backlinking a few anchor text any longer, let alone a single one. This seems to be what penguin is all about, mostly. If you load up on a few anchor text and never have non keyword anchors pointing to your site you won't get you rankings that you want.
    I see so many great testimonials but then I also read from other wf members that their rankings have drop with that particular service.
    So sometimes I think that they are either fake testimonials or maybe those are people that know how to build backlinks in the right order and know which backlink package to buy from and they just want to outsource it.
    It wouldn't have mattered who you outsourced to if you only target a few keywords (or one). Penguin would have slapped your site down. Testimonials can be faked but they can also represent the fact that the people who were making them had selected the proper keywords, had their sites set up to rank and to take advantage of the traffic once they did rank. If you're ordering backlinking it is your job to make sure your site is setup for success.

    If you're ordering links from somebody and then you put in bad keywords and you "over optimize" your anchor text then that doesn't mean the links are bad or don't work.
    Also if you wanted to hire one person not only to get your site on page one but on position 1 or 2, who would you hire, why, and what would be the process?
    I'm not aware of a set package available that will do this for you. We don't offer this.
    I ask that question before to many seo wf members who provide seo services and they all say they don't do that type of service because is way too difficult or way to expensive.
    You'd have to get some kind of custom campaign going with something like this. But I guess it depends on your keywords on how hard this would be.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6191964].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author akazzz
    For a guy who has little experience in the seo world, your best bet would be just to follow the reviews and suggestions on the members here which clearly Matt's service is the most recommended here.

    However for me, I know what I want in my link building strategy and I just choose specific links that I want to my sites. I don't really bother about reviews, the most important for me is what the service has to offer & the report. and if someone gave me a choice to invest in Matt's service, I personally won't do it. Not because his service is bad or for any personal reason. I just don't want my links in his blogs.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6199839].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6199846].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
      Yeah... no one.

      None of the sellers here are "SEO's", they're just link sellers. Don't take SEO advice from them or trust their testimonials.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6199936].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
        Thank you MikeFriedman for that interesting post. You are right about that. I never thought about that even though I heard of it before but I totally forgot. What I mean is when you said that being on page 1 is not enough. Most of the traffic is position 1 and then 2 and 3. After that your chances get very slim. But no one offers that in here.

        Also what bnetword said, it does make sense as all I see is backlinks packages for sale. I think an seo guru is someone who knows and stay up to date with all of the latest algorithyms changes and understand what google is asking and how to implement a safe strategy using white hat methods and manual backlinks submissions to relevant sites related to your niche or keywords.

        Is hard to learn because even here on WF, some senior people who are knowledgeable about how seo works sometimes contracdict each other so you get confused who to listen to.

        Also Nik0 you seem very good at what yu are saying even though I was following your discussion with some guy name Nest28 and he talks about you can appear on page 1 on google with no backlinks at all and stay there. That makes sense to me in a way but not all of the time. For example, I had a brand new site and was ranking on position 2 for 3 1/2 months. Then I decided to buy from someone here with tons of great reviews and my site ended in page 24 and now is not even on the top 50 pages. My adsense earnings stop completetly. Now in that sense I do agree a bit with Nest28 and maybe I shouldn't haved purchased any backlink package. Maybe if I would of learn how to build 3 manual backlinks per day to relevant sites, it would of look very natural and I would of gotten to position 1 withina few days or weeks since my keyword has very low competition due to the fact that position 1 only had 154 backlinks and a pr 0 with less than 1 year of age domain.

        Anyways, another study I did was that last week I purchased some social bookmarks and wiki backlinks from fiverr to test another of my adsense sites and today is ranking on position 4. I will try the same package for another of my sites and see if this works as well.

        So in some of you are saying that seo services in here don't work and are a joke, then what route should I go if I wanted to outsource this to someone who knows how to rank a site on page one or better yet position 1 or 2.

        Thanks
        Signature

        Affiliate Links are not allowed!

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6200394].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author uzojvp
          Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

          Thank you MikeFriedman for that interesting post. You are right about that. I never thought about that even though I heard of it before but I totally forgot. What I mean is when you said that being on page 1 is not enough. Most of the traffic is position 1 and then 2 and 3. After that your chances get very slim. But no one offers that in here.

          Also what bnetword said, it does make sense as all I see is backlinks packages for sale. I think an seo guru is someone who knows and stay up to date with all of the latest algorithyms changes and understand what google is asking and how to implement a safe strategy using white hat methods and manual backlinks submissions to relevant sites related to your niche or keywords.

          Is hard to learn because even here on WF, some senior people who are knowledgeable about how seo works sometimes contracdict each other so you get confused who to listen to.

          Also Nik0 you seem very good at what yu are saying even though I was following your discussion with some guy name Nest28 and he talks about you can appear on page 1 on google with no backlinks at all and stay there. That makes sense to me in a way but not all of the time. For example, I had a brand new site and was ranking on position 2 for 3 1/2 months. Then I decided to buy from someone here with tons of great reviews and my site ended in page 24 and now is not even on the top 50 pages. My adsense earnings stop completetly. Now in that sense I do agree a bit with Nest28 and maybe I shouldn't haved purchased any backlink package. Maybe if I would of learn how to build 3 manual backlinks per day to relevant sites, it would of look very natural and I would of gotten to position 1 withina few days or weeks since my keyword has very low competition due to the fact that position 1 only had 154 backlinks and a pr 0 with less than 1 year of age domain.

          Anyways, another study I did was that last week I purchased some social bookmarks and wiki backlinks from fiverr to test another of my adsense sites and today is ranking on position 4. I will try the same package for another of my sites and see if this works as well.

          So in some of you are saying that seo services in here don't work and are a joke, then what route should I go if I wanted to outsource this to someone who knows how to rank a site on page one or better yet position 1 or 2.

          Thanks
          Me, will likely wanna hire Mervik Haums
          Signature

          Check this out for some of the best information on Kitchen Decoration Ideas | You wanna know the best Pest Control Service in Africa? see the Best Pest Control

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7696961].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author limestone614
        Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

        Yeah... no one.

        None of the sellers here are "SEO's", they're just link sellers. Don't take SEO advice from them or trust their testimonials.
        I'd say for the most part you are correct, however, there are more than a few on here that do know what they're doing.

        It is a minefield, reputation and referrals are all good signs to look for though.
        Signature
        The Best Organic Traffic Solutions.
        For yours, take the next step: Visit Safeserps
        .
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6333221].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author nik0
          Banned
          Originally Posted by limestone614 View Post

          I'd say for the most part you are correct, however, there are more than a few on here that do know what they're doing.

          It is a minefield, reputation and referrals are all good signs to look for though.
          Exactly, you can trust testimonials but you shouldn't look at those that are posted before all the updates as they are not very relevant anymore.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6333965].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Gram
      Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

      Unfortunately, most of the "SEOs" on this site are utter jokes.
      Agree.

      /Thread.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6218972].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
    "Senior member" doesn't always mean "knowledgeable". Not even close.

    MikeFriedman always posts good infos.

    My experience is that being in positions #4 to #9 for 5000 exact match keywords results in 10-20 visitors/day for those keywords. Not that it makes much difference (in most cases).

    raywarrior1978, hit me on skype @ "bnenquiries" and I'll talk you through some stuff (I don't sell anything). I should be back on skype from tomorrow (took a few weeks off).
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6200447].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
      Ok but I am work right now. I work m-fr 9am to 5:30 pm and don't get home till 7pm. I will add you on skype. I am on us eastern time so right now is 11:33am

      Let me know what time zone you are in
      Signature

      Affiliate Links are not allowed!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6200508].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

      "Senior member" doesn't always mean "knowledgeable". Not even close.

      MikeFriedman always posts good infos.
      As long as we are dropping names I would go with this. With Mr Friedman you are going to get a guy that knows more than one tactic and strategy. The major problem with most providers on here is they focus on one thing (as its all most know) and one thing only for every single customer, niche or situation. Its mass SEO. NO analysis , no checking your competition, no keyword research for you just mass cookie cutter one size fits all SEO. Their whole business model is about non adaptation and thats why many are offering the same exact stuff now as they did before the huge changes in SEO this year.

      I've got wind of Mike's prices as well and last time I checked they were very reasonable.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6201778].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JKflipflop
    Some good names in this list here. SEO is an ever changing beast - so those who are experienced with Google's "mood swings" if I may say so, would be the best ones to look out for outsourcing your SEO to.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6201202].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6201787].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    Most (90%+) of people selling services on forums are not even SEOs, they have no fricking clue of the process as a whole. They sell "backlink packages" and call themselves SEOs, working off some internet cafe in Pakistan.

    You know its true.
    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[6201841].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
      Well let me ask you this.

      For example if you choose to go with Matt service and give him 5 keywords but all of those keyword have medium to hard competition, then it night not be worth it because after your site gets to page one for just one of those keywords, then who knows how long it will sit there. Now you have to look for someone who does monthly seo service.

      But maybe if you pick 5 keywords and you analize the seo competition for the top 10 results, maybe better the top 3 results, and they haradly no backlinks, no page rank, no age domain, the keyword is not in the title, url, description and head, and then you give those keywords to Matt, probably not only would you get to page one super fast but you might stay there for a very long time and no one in the top 3 is building any type of backlinks and there on page seo is bad.

      Am I wrong for thinking like that?

      Not sure, I'm just going from what I have learn from here on other threads

      Correct me if I am wrong, still learning the seo process...lol
      Signature

      Affiliate Links are not allowed!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6201964].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

        But maybe if you pick 5 keywords and you analize the seo competition for the top 10 results, maybe better the top 3 results, and they haradly no backlinks, no page rank, no age domain, the keyword is not in the title, url, description and head, and then you give those keywords to Matt, probably not only would you get to page one super fast but you might stay there for a very long time and no one in the top 3 is building any type of backlinks and there on page seo is bad.

        Am I wrong for thinking like that?
        Given those conditions you could probably get a guy on Fiverr to rank you and save the cash. Real world you are not going to find that many lucrative keywords so bone dead weak.

        That's cheaper than what I start at. I go no lower than $1,000 a month. Anything lower is simply not worth my time and or headache.
        Thats some steep costing clubs. So how much PR do I get from Penguin clubs.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6202254].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Given those conditions you could probably get a guy on Fiverr to rank you and save the cash. Real world you are not going to find that many lucrative keywords so bone dead weak.



          Thats some steep costing clubs. So how much PR do I get from Penguin clubs.
          One round of clubs and you get an automatic PR17!

          PS you think it's expensive? I think it's pretty damn cheap if each post is 100% unique handwritten, and not spun bull****.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6202997].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by Mike Grant View Post

            PS you think it's expensive? I think it's pretty damn cheap if each post is 100% unique handwritten, and not spun bull****.
            Nah man. I was just pulling your leg on the minimum $1,000 a month thing and the clubbing offer. Both are cheap in many circles so no qualm on what you do or the price you charge. From what I have seen you offer quality.

            Originally Posted by mattlaclear View Post

            I have heard a lot of gibberish from certain so called experts across the Internet that backlinking is dead. But we have now grabbed over 91 page one rankings for Warriors since the "dreaded" Penguin update. That's only from a couple of weeks ago. So don't believe everything you happen to read here on the forum about backlinking.
            No experts have ever claimed Link building is dead. Just for balance to the advertising claims there have been several people in this forum that specifically tanked citing your service as well. Gottat take the good with the bad. IF you still do I would suggest you stop using spun content with links blasted through AMR. Theres no doubt whatsoever that in 2012 such backlinks are getting people tanked AND (just helping Marc to see the word this time) unnatural links notices.

            The key is to use diverse amounts of keywords as your anchor text and to use as many different forms of backlinks as you can muster.
            Extremely bad and I mean HORRIBLE advice. Using as many forms of backlinks as you can will have people using the very kind of spammy backlinks that are targeted by Google now.


            Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

            What you said was factually incorrect, nonetheless. I don't know why you can't just admit it?
            Marc I said two things. you want to select one. I stated sites will be reported for unnatural backlinks AND the pages will be tanked to Siberia. the fact that you can't understand two things were being talked about with the word "and" clearly inserted unfortunately is not surprising to me given previous conversations.

            Whats more you are being silly in trying to make a hard distinction. There have been by most estimations over a million notices sent out. Think they were all manual reviews? Its quite obvious theres an overlap of detectable principles incorporated into the algo that are the same principles behind the notices. You are living in deep denial.

            I'll leave it there - As Mike Grant indicated its getting old going back and forth with you. even more for the people reading it and definitely for mods. SO with great relief to regulars here I confess. I am bored with it. I didn't even bother reading the rest of your post. If I need help running AMR I will consult you.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207412].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
              Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

              Marc I said two things. you want to select one. I stated sites will be reported for unnatural backlinks AND the pages will be tanked to Siberia. the fact that you can't understand two things were being talked about with the word "and" clearly inserted unfortunately is not surprising to me given previous conversations.
              HAHA Ok Michael. I'll quote it again.
              "Post Google's Penguin update 95% of what was and is being offered on WF will get you a notice from Google for Unnatural links and your site sent to Siberia."
              Which "and" makes the distinction you are claiming?
              Whats more you are being silly in trying to make a hard distinction. There have been by most estimations over a million notices sent out. Think they were all manual reviews? Its quite obvious theres an overlap of detectable principles incorporated into the algo that are the same principles behind the notices. You are living in deep denial.
              Even the obvious stuff where you were obviously wrong about you can't simply just admit that you stated it wrong and you knew that penguin had nothing to do with unnatural link notices.
              Extremely bad and I mean HORRIBLE advice. Using as many forms of backlinks as you can will have people using the very kind of spammy backlinks that are targeted by Google now.
              Proof is in the pudding Michael. We've started doing exactly this and have only seen our results get better.

              Matt isn't saying get thousands of profile links and thousands of blog comments or thousands of (any other form of link) but a steady trickle of all sorts of links. It works and you don't know what you're talking about.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207696].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

                Proof is in the pudding Michael.
                Yes it is - heres some of the proof thats in the pudding and notice this isn't coming from me or from your claims but from end users. You can argue all you want but its not a matter of your service in particular. Its that in 2012 some techniques are just plain dangerous to people's sites. Evolve, change. Don't run around pretending like theres no issues with conducting Seo as in the past. Anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of SEO can see through that tactic. Here are just two of quite a few others that you are leaving out of your "testimonials" in this thread. took a few minutes to find and like I said theres more for those who want to go looking.


                http://www.warriorforum.com/adsense-...ping-fast.html

                http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-...ntinued-2.html

                Matt isn't saying get thousands of profile links and thousands of blog comments or thousands of (any other form of link) but a steady trickle of all sorts of links. It works and you don't know what you're talking about.
                To put it blunt - garbage and this time obvious garbage easily exposed by the fact that the algo has only been out about two weeks. A steady TRICKLE would have shown no such thing as a fact. You haven't even had the time to evaluate whether such a rise was temporary before a permanent crash yet. You just plain don't know how SEO research is done. the premature nature of your conclusions cements this is more about your sales than SEO fact of what works.

                Add to that the asinine position that somehow Google looks at various links from a number of spammy link sites and boosts you based on your ability to use multiple variety of spam links further marks your advice as probably the crappiest I have ever seen.
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207781].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author katarina1
          I would hire myself because I am good at it. It would cost you but you would get 100% guarantee for keywords you want and you would be no1. on Google for all of them in about month or two.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207821].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author mattlaclear
        I have heard a lot of gibberish from certain so called experts across the Internet that backlinking is dead. But we have now grabbed over 91 page one rankings for Warriors since the "dreaded" Penguin update. That's only from a couple of weeks ago. So don't believe everything you happen to read here on the forum about backlinking.

        The key is to use diverse amounts of keywords as your anchor text and to use as many different forms of backlinks as you can muster.

        Plus make sure your site is not overoptimized for your money keywords. In fact we're telling our clients now to remove all their keywords from their site and instead cater their content towards their human readers rather than the crawlers.

        The results speak for themselves.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6206513].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
      Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

      Yeah... no one.

      None of the sellers here are "SEO's", they're just link sellers. Don't take SEO advice from them or trust their testimonials.
      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      Most (90%+) of people selling services on forums are not even SEOs, they have no fricking clue of the process as a whole. They sell "backlink packages" and call themselves SEOs, working off some internet cafe in Pakistan.

      You know its true.
      This is officially the 1st time ever that I agree with GeorgR. Wo-ah!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6202136].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jimgk
    the upside with warriors for hire and fiver gigs is that they are very affordable. the downside is that they WILL hurt your site and have been the cause for many site's dropping off the SERP ledge after googles feb and april algo updates.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6205620].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tristatemedia
    GREAT THREAD
    i would say mattclear (they are great)but i can not get a hold of him and his team. maybe they are loaded with work.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6206588].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jon Paella
    Both Mikes (or even 3 of them), Yukon, niko and even Matt (who may differ from the rest),

    One thing I wish is for you all to share more of your SEO knowledge and experience with all of us. Even through a WSO!

    I think there are people who would really appreciate your wisdom on these matters. We've read a lot of WSOs (either directly related to SEO or products that talk about other stuff but which inevitably toucheon SEO - the latter being more subtle but perhaps more powerful in impacting our thinking on SEO) and all, and we know what's being taught out there. But we also are not satisfied. We want more advanced thinking even if it's contrary to popular teaching.

    I know many of you (above names) think a lot of what's out there in the WSO market (either the theory or the actual backlinking WSOs or those under Warriors for Hire) is not good or even crap. I really want to learn from you all what you think are good methods. Thanks niko for some of your tips. But the rest, maybe you guys can write a a more detailed post or article on what you believe.

    The truth is that many Warriors do accept a lot of what's out there. You guys can help all of us by really contributing to the discussion - not just writing posts (which I appreciate and I try to read what you all write), but maybe even putting something more detailed and systematic out there.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207051].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Jon Paella View Post

      Both Mikes (or even 3 of them), Yukon, niko and even Matt (who may differ from the rest),

      One thing I wish is for you all to share more of your SEO knowledge and experience with all of us. Even through a WSO!

      I think there are people who would really appreciate your wisdom on these matters. We've read a lot of WSOs (either directly related to SEO or products that talk about other stuff but which inevitably toucheon SEO - the latter being more subtle but perhaps more powerful in impacting our thinking on SEO) and all, and we know what's being taught out there. But we also are not satisfied. We want more advanced thinking even if it's contrary to popular teaching.

      I know many of you (above names) think a lot of what's out there in the WSO market (either the theory or the actual backlinking WSOs or those under Warriors for Hire) is not good or even crap. I really want to learn from you all what you think are good methods. Thanks niko for some of your tips. But the rest, maybe you guys can write a a more detailed post or article on what you believe.

      The truth is that many Warriors do accept a lot of what's out there. You guys can help all of us by really contributing to the discussion - not just writing posts (which I appreciate and I try to read what you all write), but maybe even putting something more detailed and systematic out there.
      I don't there is much magic and tricks in SEO, yes there are a few tricks and such when concerning onpage SEO and there are a few linkbuilding methods that I use that I keep to myself or it will get heavily abused.

      Ranking tough keywords is not that hard, but it's insanely time consuming and/or expensive, as you know it's all about ROI.

      If you invest $500 and you get $100/month back it's a good deal imo. But most people don't like to spend money or invest many hours. So if people buy a $100 package from me and they know what they are doing they can expect a $20/monthly return and in some cases MUCH more. Like local businesses that I ranked. Okay the keyword is maybe only 200 searches month for those businesses, but that are 200 real people, and if only 10 people decide to do business with them and buy a $1K+ service then the ROI is HUGE.

      But when you have to deal with Adsense CPC and 4% Amazon sales that every single IM'er is after, yeah then a 20% monthly ROI is still pretty good imo.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207156].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author teachingking
    Matt,

    Any problem using your service on a new (less than a month old) EMD domain?

    Thanks,
    Aaron
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207121].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
    Michael,

    You've got to be kidding me. You prove Nik0's point with your "analysis". One shouldn't expect more than what they pay for. We're talking a one time $99 charge here for crying out loud. You're talking about $3000 a month campaigns at the high end and $399 on the low, OF COURSE there will be more work involved for these types of campaigns. It's absolutely stunning how you think this is a point worth pointing out.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207747].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

      Michael,
      You're talking about $3000 a month campaigns at the high end and $399 on the low, OF COURSE there will be more work involved for these types of campaigns. It's absolutely stunning how you think this is a point worth pointing out.
      lol. As usual you completely miss the point. I'll respond to these because they are pertinent to the thread. Stunning how often you can't read simple English. The point is the customer ENDS UP PAYING REAL DOLLARS that makes the difference much less than it is. let me see if I can break it down simpler for you.

      regular SEO $399
      all inclusive



      Cheap one off link builder = $99
      Cost of doing keyword research = easily in time another $50-$100
      Competition research = as per above lets say $50
      On page changes = knowledge of SEO to do it and implementation time =lets say 100
      additional link building packages (since YOU admitted more would be needed than your own) = $100

      Total go figure = $399

      and a good chunk of this IS ongoing - normally to stay ranking you will need to continue building the other links and services like yours offer "maintenance" prices.

      So my statement would be simple to a child. First since the customer has to pay these things one way or the other anyway you have to add those factors up before you claim how different they are from the customer's perspective. There still are differences (the biggest being real ranking instead of often meaningless traffic at the bottom of the first page) but before you get to those you have to factor in the similarities.

      So silly to have to explain that again but there you go. all wrapped up in a bow for you.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6207882].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        lol. As usual you completely miss the point. I'll respond to these because they are pertinent to the thread. Stunning how often you can't read simple English. The point is the customer ENDS UP PAYING REAL DOLLARS that makes the difference much less than it is. let me see if I can break it down simpler for you.
        Thanks
        regular SEO $399
        all inclusive
        This was a monthly charge, not a once off so you lose already.
        Cheap one off link builder = $99
        Cost of doing keyword research = easily in time another $50-$100
        Competition research = as per above lets say $50
        On page changes = knowledge of SEO to do it and implementation time =lets say 100
        additional link building packages (since YOU admitted more would be needed than your own) = $100

        Total go figure = $399
        I'll even give you these estimates and your point is lost because the 399 figure is a monthly recurring charge. You can't win here Mike. Bottom line is the $99 price point works for a lot of people and I mean A LOT. You also don't need the additional link packages when you buy our page one service as it is not needed at all.
        and a good chunk of this IS ongoing - normally to stay ranking you will need to continue building the other links and services like yours offer "maintenance" prices.
        Not if you ordered the page one service.
        Yes it is - heres some of the proof thats in the pudding and notice this isn't coming from me or from your claims but from end users. You can argue all you want but its not a matter of your service in particular. Its that in 2012 some techniques are just plain dangerous to people's sites. Evolve, change. Don't run around pretending like theres no issues with conducting Seo as in the past. Anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of SEO can see through that tactic. Here are just two of quite a few others that you are leaving out of your "testimonials" in this thread. took a few minutes to find and like I said theres more for those who want to go looking.
        Like I have already said some of our customers were hit with Penguin but this shouldn't be surprising at all. We've got THOUSANDS of customers Michael. Thousands. Most of our customers were not hit at all. Who on earth is not changing? Business as usual is not going to work, no kidding. Penguin especially changed that. You continually throw up strawmen and beat away at them for a paragraph or two when nobody is making points close to what you are saying. Point is you don't have enough data points to make any reasonable conclusion about a trend about our customer's sites. Yet you keep doing it.
        To put it blunt - garbage and this time obvious garbage easily exposed by the fact that the algo has only been out about two weeks. A steady TRICKLE would have shown no such thing as a fact. You haven't even had the time to evaluate whether such a rise was temporary before a permanent crash yet. You just plain don't know how SEO research is done. the premature nature of your conclusions cements this is more about your sales than SEO fact of what works.
        I couldn't care less. It is working and since penguin we've had around 100 page ones completed. PERIOD. Unlike you we've got many data points to make these assertions.
        Add to that the asinine position that somehow Google looks at various links from a number of spammy link sites and boosts you based on your ability to use multiple variety of spam links further marks your advice as probably the crappiest I have ever seen.
        Pudding, meet Michael.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208285].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

          Thanks

          This was a monthly charge, not a once off so you lose already.

          I'll even give you these estimates and your point is lost because the 399 figure is a monthly recurring charge. You can't win here Mike.
          Hopelessly lost as usual Marc. I have said multiple times there are differences. I've even listed them out not just in price but in services. I merely pointed out to NIk that they are not as high as the numbers would suggest because of the hidden costs to the client. Despite your nonsense there are ongoing costs of ranking for anyone that wants to stay there. You rather dishonestly skirt that. One time fee? Do you guarantee they will stay on the first page? No you don't so stop fibbing.

          As for the them not needing other links You yourself bemoaned people thinking they can get it all from one service and that they should diversify. You just ran around the block to hit against your own self running the other way. Do you continue providing such links as well for the same one time fee?

          So stop the dishonesty.

          There are ongoing fees that you conveniently leave out if someone wants to continue ranking. they may not be as much as someone providing full service and egads actual ranking rather than position 8 but they are there hence you must add them before you start talking differences. Well if you want to be fair and honest I mean.

          Incidentally having thousands of customers has nothing to do with changing the fact that many of them got unnatural links notices. Its the darndest thing with google - they will tank a site for unnatural links regardless of how many people have signed up with a backlink service.

          Winning I don't know about but I am content either way that none of my customers have received such a notice. Its not as big a deal for adsense and affiliate marketers to get it but for real businesses it must be devastating.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208435].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            As for the them not needing other links You yourself bemoaned people thinking they can get it all from one service and that they should diversify. You just ran around the block to hit against your own self running the other way. Do you continue providing such links as well for the same one time fee?
            I will respond to this. The customer from the thread where I said that was for a pure backlinking service.

            If he would have bought the page one service he would not have needed to buy other links. The drip feed article service is being sold for $15 a month. It is not an all inclusive SEO package, never was meant to be.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208621].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
              Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post


              If he would have bought the page one service he would not have needed to buy other links.
              Actually that might be true in one respect. Once you get an unnatural link warning like those threads I referenced you don't need anymore links. Your site is tanked. Outside of that you are just flat out lying. There are no links in all of SEO that will ensure that you will not need to continue acquiring links going forward. Stop fibbing for sales.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6212816].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                Actually that might be true in one respect. Once you get an unnatural link warning like those threads I referenced you don't need anymore links. Your site is tanked. Outside of that you are just flat out lying. There are no links in all of SEO that will ensure that you will not need to continue acquiring links going forward. Stop fibbing for sales.
                I make enough sales without coming in here and posting responses to your nonsense. I also don't need to lie to make sales.

                You want to compare apples vs lumps of coal. The guy you linked to wasn't on our page one service. You linked to a guy who was paying $15 a month for drip fed articles.

                As for your asinine comparison between a $399 a MONTH service vs a one time $99 service the math is dead simple, genius. But who gives a crap? If you charge more then you should do more for clients. The clients should expect more. This is my point, expecting all of those extras at the one time fee of $99 is absurd.

                I never ever never said that links wouldn't be required after a page one campaign was completed. How on earth can you come to this conclusion?

                So, in conclusion you're comparing different things and acting like they are the same which makes your argument dishonest.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6217065].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                  Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

                  I make enough sales without coming in here and posting responses to your nonsense. I also don't need to lie to make sales.
                  Anyone that claims that you can buy one package and never ever need any other links in SEO again is lying . Period. Deal with it. That was the point being made. I laid out the cost differentials and stated point blank professional SEO was more expensive but that before you can figure out how much more you first need to assess the ongoing cost of using the cheap service because going forward they are there. You flipped out your package and insisted thats all they would need - one off. Wrong. There are ongoing costs of keeping a rank. They will need more links to maintain so there are additional costs - Thats called fibbing

                  You want to compare apples vs lumps of coal. The guy you linked to wasn't on our page one service. You linked to a guy who was paying $15 a month for drip fed articles.
                  Both links? - crapola. Those were not the only two either. They were the only two I bothered to search and find. Furthermore in the last update Google made it crystal clear that they are looking at links within spun and unrelated content so stop running around blaming everything else clients might have done. We all have to adjust. Want to talk testimonials then you got to live with the negative ones not continue the long MO of crying them down. You can deny it and do the Macarena to slide out of it but its right there in their Penguin update that such links are targeted.

                  This is my point, expecting all of those extras at the one time fee of $99 is absurd.
                  I can't help you grasp basic logic. Leaving out the other costs the customer has to pay is absurd and a dishonest comparison. the point always was to add up the similarities before you quote the differences for the third time never to deny price differences. The guy paying $99 is going to have to get some other links or maintenance. The cost going forward has to be assessed. You are just playing games. You know exactly what I am talking about because you have offered maintenance packages which is more money over the $99. Not factoring in those additional and ongoing costs even after they are pointed out to you IS dishonest.

                  So, in conclusion you're comparing different things and acting like they are the same which makes your argument dishonest.
                  NO its just another example of your fabrications and hot air.

                  I never ever never said that links wouldn't be required after a page one campaign was completed. How on earth can you come to this conclusion?
                  How? Lets see your Post 77 when I said

                  and a good chunk of this IS ongoing - normally to stay ranking you will need to continue building the other links and services like yours offer "maintenance" prices.
                  you replied

                  Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post


                  Not if you ordered the page one service.
                  Maybe just too much in sales mode to see you were denying the obvious? anyway far from being honest about the ongoing prices. truth is there is no one off link building package that will not require additional links. Its a myth thats propagated to sell products. SEO has ongoing costs no matter how you deny it.
                  Signature

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6218245].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                    Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                    Anyone that claims that you can buy one package and never ever need any other links in SEO again is lying . Period. Deal with it. That was the point being made. I laid out the cost differentials and stated point blank professional SEO was more expensive but that before you can figure out how much more you first need to assess the ongoing cost of using the cheap service because going forward they are there. You flipped out your package and insisted thats all they would need - one off. Wrong. There are ongoing costs of keeping a rank. They will need more links to maintain so there are additional costs - Thats called fibbing
                    First thing is I never ever never nunca said that all a site would ever need is a one time fee. Where did I say this? You accuse me of lying and yet you create these fantasies on what was said.
                    Both links? - crapola. Those were not the only two either. They were the only two I bothered to search and find. Furthermore in the last update Google made it crystal clear that they are looking at links within spun and unrelated content so stop running around blaming everything else clients might have done.
                    The HUGE problem here, Michael, is that if this was the case more than these few people would have been slammed. I'm not sure if you know how many sites we've worked with but it has been thousands. So it shouldn't be surprising that people's sites got affected with penguin.
                    We all have to adjust. Want to talk testimonials then you got to live with the negative ones not continue the long MO of crying them down. You can deny it and do the Macarena to slide out of it but its right there in their Penguin update that such links are targeted.
                    The evidence that "spun" content was targeted is not compelling. If you have any evidence besides the interpretation of their announcement please share it.
                    I can't help you grasp basic logic. Leaving out the other costs the customer has to pay is absurd and a dishonest comparison. the point always was to add up the similarities before you quote the differences for the third time never to deny price differences. The guy paying $99 is going to have to get some other links or maintenance. The cost going forward has to be assessed. You are just playing games. You know exactly what I am talking about because you have offered maintenance packages which is more money over the $99. Not factoring in those additional and ongoing costs even after they are pointed out to you IS dishonest.
                    You're insane Mikey. lol

                    I don't give a rip about favorably comparing our page one service with a full monthly SEO package. The point of the matter is that one costs less and the customer should expect less and YOU should expect less. I NEVER have said that after the page one service has been successfully completed then there wouldn't be any more need for any more work. This is asinine to suggest this Michael.


                    NO its just another example of your fabrications and hot air.



                    How? Lets see your Post 77 when I said



                    you replied


                    Sigh....

                    You won't believe me but I don't need to come in here to make sales. We make enough sales AS IS without me coming in here and responding to your posts. What I was saying was that DURING the active page one campaign there is nothing more for the customer to buy. I wasn't saying that there would never be a need to get any other SEO done on their site. In fact, I've stated that for $99 getting to page one is a good start for rankings and shouldn't be the end goal of a customer. The fact that you think I am saying that for $99 that this is all they will ever need to rank and keep ranked their sites is evidence that you don't have a clue.

                    My point was, and is, that with one $99 payment one should expect less work done on their site. And for you to compare a $399 a month campaign vs a one time fee of $99 is stupid. Some of these campaigns take months. If a campaign takes 3 months (or even more) to complete then you're at $399 x 3 =$1197 vs $99. Any maintenance link package would never cost $1100.
                    Maybe just too much in sales mode to see you were denying the obvious? anyway far from being honest about the ongoing prices. truth is there is no one off link building package that will not require additional links. Its a myth thats propagated to sell products. SEO has ongoing costs no matter how you deny it.
                    No its you assuming I'm trying to increase sales when all I'm doing is responding to your stupid remarks. Our sales are fine, I don't need to go into "sales mode".
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219526].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                      Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                      Thanks for the nice words in that post Mike!
                      Hey man more power to you. If you deliver some of the things you are working on hit me up for a testimonial. LOL

                      The HUGE problem here, Michael, is that if this was the case more than these few people would have been slammed.
                      Marc there is No huge problem because ton loads of people have been slammed not a few. I only pointed out two threads due to time and frankly the ton loads of people I hear from don't post threads so lets just drop the misrepresentations. Lots of link seller customers got their bell rung not just yours but rung they were and if you don't know it its because you don't like to hear it. SO who should people believe the seller of links in spun content claiming its not compelling (because it means they would have to change) or the Search engine that actually dropped the sites?

                      anyway.........skimmed over your post of denial but .........Officially bored. You denied what you stated in Post 77 and its obvious. When posts get that infantile I call for the nanny to take over but shes busy so I'll just call a halt to our back and forth. Good luck with the spinning AMR blasts. Thats quite an adaptation to the new realities.
                      Signature

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219733].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author nik0
                        Banned
                        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                        Hey man more power to you. If you deliver some of the things you are working on hit me up for a testimonial. LOL
                        I will definetly do
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6223283].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author R. Shawner
                      I'd choose Mike Anthony as my seo consultant ( +1 for your ego).

                      Why? because what he's got to say makes by far the most sense in my personal oppinion. I'll edit this post later and add a few paragraphs to support my statement. As of now: One way ticket to bed.


                      ~R. Shawner
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6221324].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
    How do you guys have so much free time to argue about nothing all day long? And to Mike - seriously, why do you care so much? There's a new **** post here (on WF) every 3-5 SECONDS when it's busy...

    Also, backlinks hurting your website is a myth. A myth. So I was told.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208186].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
    LOL Michael. I've had enough, for now. Have a good one.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208581].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TheFBGuy
    Hahahaha, you guys are funny...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208647].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GyuMan82
    Can't we all just get along
    Signature
    Need SEO Help? Monthly Plans From $299/mo (PM Me)
    Pickings From My SEO Brain @ www.RichardYoshimura.com
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208924].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mosthost
      Originally Posted by GyuMan82 View Post

      Can't we all just get along
      They're fighting for their lives over the same scraps.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6208991].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by GyuMan82 View Post

      Can't we all just get along
      All the Mike's in the SEO section get along famously and have a very similiar outlook on SEO so obviously the problem is with the rest of you

      Even when the names begin with M but switch vowels on the second letter theres a clear problem - You guys need to look into that and make appropriate changes.

      Oh-oh just as I spoke another M with the wrong vowel came along. lol

      Originally Posted by mosthost View Post

      They're fighting for their lives over the same scraps.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6209018].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        All the Mike's in the SEO section get along famously and have a very similiar outlook on SEO so obviously the problem is with the rest of you

        Even when the names begin with M but switch vowels on the second letter theres a clear problem - You guys need to look into that and make appropriate changes.

        Oh-oh just as I spoke another M with the wrong vowel came along. lol
        Our brother Mike thinks you're full of ****. :p He must be an outlier. haha.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6209267].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

          Our brother Mike thinks you're full of ****. :p He must be an outlier. haha.
          Reading is as they say fundamental. He isn't in this forum so he isn't an outlier he's just out - just as you mostly are unless you are talking up your service or trying to shut up clients that don't give glowing testimonials. As for full of...... You guys certainly should know all about that.

          But umm have a good night. I'm moving on to better entertainment for the evening
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6209345].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mattlaclear
    Guess what folks...we can all look forward to these exchanges every time Google tweaks their algorithm. I'm tuning out to watch Dog the Bounty Hunter. Good night Warriors.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6209647].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Zibblu
    After the results I've seen from outsourcing SEO to Warrior Forum people... unfortunately I'd have to say "no one." I wish the results were anywhere near as good as all of the glowing reviews they get (hmmm?) ... not even close.

    ~~~

    I posted this before reading the arguments here back and forth. I have to admit I am now curious about what Nic0 and MikeAnthony have to offer (despite their arguments with each other.) They said a lot of things in this thread that make a lot of sense.

    Some of the other people arguing here ... well I have tried their services with terrible results. Lesson learned. If something sounds too good to be true, it almost certainly is.
    Signature

    Try My Diet Affiliate Program: http://www.TheDayOffDiet.com/affiliates

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6209955].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
    I built a niche network of over 80 blogs - all high PR, relevant domains with high quality unique content (themed properly - fitness, personal health blogs, health mag, family health, etc). All paid for by selling cheap SEO for about 4 months... go figure. Sometimes you just have to get off your high horse and get grinding.

    As for web 2.0's - I have about 200 manually built web 2.0's from way back (like 2009). They're all still online AND indexed (apart from a few where sites don't exist anymore - shame). All I did back then was throw about 20k xrumer profile links and 500 BMD bookmarks at them (in batches of 20 properties). Not sure why they stayed indexed, maybe some of the links are still around? Maybe it's unique content and the fact that they have 3-5 articles/property.

    Throwing comment spam helps increase PR over time. I tested this with a good list on 30 properties - 12 of them are PR2/3 right now, others all PR0 still. Manual commenting should help a lot more, just need another good VA...

    I only do manual, niche related commenting to my money sites and blog network - those stick and work great! Comment on new articles - there's no need to look for aged pages. Most of the new pages get PR anyway (on good blogs).

    Here's a funny story - I sell very few of my niche blog network packages, because most clients have such bad sites I have to reject them (far lower quality than blogs in the network). If they still want SEO work done we look at their sites, competition, keywords and restructure, change things up a bit, redesign... it costs a lot of money, most choose to buy 500 blog post blasts from someone else.

    It's funny and sad at the same time.

    edit: I also have a lot of failed projects, bad domain buys (at first), dead sites, penalized websites, **** backlinks, bad software buys, **** hosting accounts, unused crappy content, unused super-spun readable articles, failed authority site ideas/projects and a list of about 100 domains that I'm letting expire... So it's not like this stuff is very easy, lol.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6211292].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Great post Bnetwork and good you show that it doesn't go without some struggling indeed. You are going fast though, congrats!

      And yeah I whole heartly agree with that selling "cheap" services here did make it possible.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6212401].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

      All paid for by selling cheap SEO for about 4 months... go figure. Sometimes you just have to get off your high horse and get grinding.
      One thing that has never been in dispute in this thread is that selling cheap garbage to newbies doesn't sell. Its no great virtue. Trying to characterize having some integrity in what you offer as High horse is a common tactic around here and whether you meant to or not you just fell into it. Someone asked before why the Mikes don't get together and offer a WSO. Thats easy. Good stuff rarely sells well in WSOs.

      A huge part of the market wants it cheap, with a push of a button and very little other work involved. That pretty much rules out 95% of the most effective long term SEO tactics. Plus mainline SEOs tend to hate hype and....well... I won't get into that further.

      and yeah I concur on the quality of sites. I get people PMing all the time with their sites and what to do, how it has great content etc etc. then they send over the URl and its a blog with a crummy theme, poor writing and very few signs of any real thought.

      This is a serious network issue for providers and another reason why alot of them particularly those offering cheap services will get dinged over and over again. Its simply not credible that your legitimate PR4 authority sites would ever link to junk. The customer's site themselves without anything the network provider does screams the link just had to be bought. Seriously anyone linking to an average MFA , affiliate site is almost certainly selling links on some level and don't think Google sees it any different.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6212700].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        snip
        Nah, you assume way too much. Cheap != bad. What I used to sell did help people rank and never got anyone penalized. It just wasn't a long term or a "complete" SEO solution, which is what many buyers expect for $30 a pop. When it comes to these ready-made SEO packages, it's up to the buyer to use them correctly.

        Pretty much agree with the rest. Site quality issue is a HUGE problem.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6213599].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jon Paella
    Someone asked before why the Mikes don't get together and offer a WSO. Thats easy. Good stuff rarely sells well in WSOs.
    Mike, I wasn't thinking about you guys making money off the WSO so sales wouldn't matter that much as the desire to see the Warrior Forum community and IM community learn something useful and good So it's more of a contribution to the community than anything else! But I'm sure it'll still sell because of the reputation you guys have in this sub forum.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6212729].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by Jon Paella View Post

      Mike, I wasn't thinking about you guys making money off the WSO so sales wouldn't matter that much as the desire to see the Warrior Forum community and IM community learn something useful and good
      Thats what the forums are for and collectively we drop a ton load of knowledge for free. I'll help out sick Warriors and those in some distress but by and large LOL no I don't see a bunch of Internet marketers as a worthy charity case. I can't speak for all the Mikes but I think they would think helping orphans in the Sudan, Feeding hungry children, Cancer research etc is a worthy charity not "the Warrior Forum Community" of people looking to make money online.

      However its not just about money. No offense but frankly many marketers here and I mean MANY destroy everything they touch and the more free/cheap something is the more they destroy it. We could share wonderful resources for high authority links where you need to be respectful of the webmaster and within a few days the webmaster would have to shut down the page because of it getting slammed.

      Its a general rule in life and in business that what costs you something makes you value it. So yeah it would have to sell not be a "contribution to the community". Price is not perfect and you should always try to help out the truly unfortunate but it helps to weed out precisely the kind of people you need to weed out sometimes. The course I offer now mostly to WF people and not in a WSO proved that point to me again. Due to price I ended up with a very serious set of guys (and one Gal) and they have been a pleasure to work with with only one refund request in a nearly year. I get a kick out of seeing what they do with it because they actually are serious enough to do something with it.


      So it's more of a contribution to the community than anything else! But I'm sure it'll still sell because of the reputation you guys have in this sub forum.

      I think reality will have to set in for a few more months before people totally abandon their push button/ one package fits all ways. Even on my own forum theres a little resistance and they are much more serious about SEO than people here. I told them months ago to stop auto spinning on your networks and a few were like - "Really? You can't be serious". Thankfully most listened and they all still have their networks still going strong.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6213151].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    Bnet my only assumption is that most cheap systems use automation systems to place links and you and I both know thats not a faulty assumption. Its the norm. I am sure you will disagree but those kinds of links have been weak for a long long time. The fact that it helped some people move up means nothing to me. I have seen sites rank with no backlinks given a very weak serp.

    Thats one of the main reasons I consider testimonials of very limited value (Actually pretty close to worthless). People don't think it through enough but when they do the lights come on. observe -

    Obviously the best results are chosen to be highlighted by the seller (And some try to bury any dissent from customers who have had horrible experiences) and obviously the weak serps are going to give the best results. So generally the sellers are going to highlight the best cases which for logical reason are going to be the weakest serps - Instantly skewing the reviews.

    The fact that the customer for legitimate reason is usually not going to give the keywords means you can almost never guage what kind of competition they ranked over and hence the proliferation of almost meaningless testimonials.

    Thats why I have always said Prove it in the serps not hide behind reviews where all the data is hidden. You can go to google and see the sites that rank and whenever you see any competition you don't see sites relying on those weak links and haven't for years.

    Now why is there a disconnect between what you see in the serps and what you hear in testimonials? Obvious as I said , IN the serps you are picking decent competition in the testimonials its skewed to weak serps that in many cases the person could have ranked doing almost anything with links. That setup has allowed multiple poor SEO offers get ton loads of good reviews. We have all seen it.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6213776].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

      I am sure you will disagree but those kinds of links have been weak for a long long time.
      + long rant.

      This is what I mean, another random assumption. lulz.

      I agree with you - they have been weak for a VERY long time and that's why I said in my previous post that how the customer chooses to use cheap SEO packages is up to him/her. Some of the links have never penalized anyone and never will - they simply stopped working.

      You don't buy $30 services to rank your money sites forever. I mostly use them to boost web2.0's, because sometimes I simply lack the manpower to build high quality manual backlinks on the scale I do things. Simple as that. And, for the most part, it gets the job done.

      Your whole rant about testimonials has nothing to do with my post (which you quoted). I've never sold SEO here. In fact, I don't sell any SEO or backlink packages right now, at all. You completely missed my point or were answering someone else?

      As far as testimonials go - I don't read testimonials for <$100 services. I don't have to - I know exactly what I need, why I need it and HOW MUCH it's worth to me.

      You seem to have long rooted issues/disagreements with some popular backlink sellers here, which I sort of understand. Most of them sell **** to newbies and use really dodgy sales tactics. Heck, most of the time they don't even tell you what type of links they're building OR provide reports. It's still a huge waste of time though.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6214196].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
        Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

        ...some popular backlink sellers here...

        Most of them sell **** to newbies and use really dodgy sales tactics. Heck, most of the time they don't even tell you what type of links they're building OR provide reports. It's still a huge waste of time though.
        +1

        If I could clap, I would.
        Signature
        SEO, AdWords Management, Social Media Marketing, and more.
        Get a FREE Quote.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6214449].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Prowebstakht
          Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

          +1

          If I could clap, I would.
          Hey MikeFriedman, I know that you are extremely good at what you do, and you are more than just a regular SEO guy as I consider you to be one of the Best SEO guys here on the WF! You provide very solid seo tips and educating our fellow warriors on SEO. "Power of the pen is mightier than the sword" is very true. This is the age of technology and information is within our fingertips so people should start to scour through information and go on fact finding missions on how SEO works and grasp the fundamental concepts. Learning white hat and high quality based SEO takes time but its worthwhile because it will only help you in the long term.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7723732].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post


        This is what I mean, another random assumption. lulz.
        Actually thanks for that it perfectly illustrates what I meant. You don't address yourself to the fact that the serps clearly show that what you said isn't factual and yes you were making a testimonial - a self testimonial of what you claimed to rank. It is what it is. Theres no assumptions whatsoever. Its all based on whats in the serps today and for well over a year - people are free to go and look.

        Its important for people to know that as far as real serps those links haven't worked for awhile. It helps them to move on. Thats all

        Look most people coming in here are not interested in a few bucks you make off some long tail weak serp. They want to make real money. thats the distinction lost on a lot of people. If you are hobbyist looking a little spare change or cash to buy a video game then sure twiddle with the cheap stuff. Its fine for the kiddies but for those who want to make a real go of internet marketing you've needed more for years.

        Some of the links have never penalized anyone and never will - they simply stopped working.
        Now there is an assumption. You know no such thing. Fact is Google doesn't care when you left the links. People have cried bloody murder in multiple threads that they got notices and tanked on sites they had done no recent link building to. You have absolutely no idea whatsoever that cheap links now won't hurt later. You are just putting words out.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6214605].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
    Meh, I have too many posts in this thread already. Pointless. Have a good day/evening everyone!

    edit - ****, I'll leave this here:

    Mike, you're quite well versed in a lot of SEO stuff, but seriously... you'd need to sell over 200 of your blog network guides to make anywhere close to what some of us were making per month selling pligg blasts back in summer 2011. And yes, those links worked (for a while - but everyone involved made a ****load of money which was mostly re-invested into long term projects). Good days were 100+ orders, mostly repeat business. Most of that money went into bigger projects, both what I made and what my clients made. No one has any complaints, believe me. That's not a self testimonial, because I don't sell them any longer and have no plans to ever provide cheap SEO ever again.

    Now, I do understand your frustration with dodgy providers, scamming newbies, false claims and all that. That's a whole different world though and I know very little about it - who the players/sellers are, where they sell and how much money they make... I know there are some in the WSO/Hire sections here - those are laughable.

    But you have got to understand that some services don't need testimonials to get sales - you post a thread and you're SWAMPED with orders more than you can handle. You don't even have sales copy or testimonials there - just a list of features and a buy link. That's how you know it works. These are mostly buyers who know EXACTLY what they're buying and WHY (as I mentioned previously is the case when I buy links). They don't need to be hand held or educated.

    Now I will leave you guys to it, have a very good evening!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6214630].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

      Mike, you're quite well versed in a lot of SEO stuff, but seriously... you'd need to sell over 200 of your blog network guides to make anywhere close to what some of us were making per month selling pligg blasts back in summer 2011.
      Bnet you keep coming from it with a sellers mentality rather than a customers. Whats the point of how many Courses I would have to sell? Its not even my main line. I do Seo for businesses. Pligg blasts were garbage precisely because like much of those things people over sold it and blasted it the same sites to kingdom come. The flip side to what you just said is a confession to that very point.

      And yes, those links worked (for a while - but everyone involved made a ****load of money which was mostly re-invested into long term projects).
      Sept 2011 - worked for what? See you are back to the self testimonials again. Heres my problem with buying that - I am up to my neck in keyword and competition research each month for a long time before Sept 2011 and no I saw no worthy serps being dominated by pligg blasts. I don't doubt it killed in sales because Imers love hopping on to the latest fad and riding it like its the key to a pot of gold but I have serps I have followed for like nearly two years and nope none of that stuff has worked very good for just short of two years. Some weak serps ? Ok but like I said some serps you do almost anything and you will rank.

      Heres the deal though if all these thing worked as late as 2011 and its all people were selling then why still so many people making nothing in IM and not getting much traffic ? You keep telling me how much money you made selling and you were only one person with hundreds peddling similar links . SO what happened to the customers?


      I know there are some in the WSO/Hire sections here - those are laughable.
      LOL...Alright I hear you but you know what? Thats kind of why I am responding to you. I am not just yanking your chain to yank it. Heres what I know about how that works. It takes MONTHS for people to stop using bad SEO. Look at where we are now. Clearly the game has changed but go ahead and look around - don't you still see the same old offers and sellers even in this thread trying to massage how they still work just do this or that. they'll hang on for months after the last guy says it worked for them and thats exactly why I am pointing out the evidence has been in for a long time regarding some link building. Only now its reached the point where the links themselves can not only work but be toxic. They are going to and already are saying - No just vary the anchor text more our links still work. NO mix up the spammy link with other spammy links and the variety of spammy links will help you.:rolleyes:

      Shucks we still have some people running around with ANgela and Paul backlinks and how they still work. LOL


      You don't even have sales copy or testimonials there - just a list of features and a buy link. That's how you know it works.
      Bnet I'll call you on it because although you probably don't know that s EXACTLY how the sellers you just disparaged do it. They point to the sales numbers and then cite it as proof that it must work. Thats one of the main things that prolong Product launches even when the product reeks. Sales number mean nothing but that people will run down a fad like no ones business.

      Thats big part of how the game is played. I realize where you are coming from and that you don't use that stuff anymore but My point is when people realize for how long something hasn't been working and then add that to recent changes they are better off and more likely to finally move on.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6216078].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author nik0
        Banned
        This is a good thread for me btw, I don't know if its coincedence or not but normally I get 7 orders a week and yesterday I had 7 orders in 1 day lol.

        Thanks for the nice words in that post Mike!

        The more clients I get the sooner that I can provide even better SEO services. And yes, every client counts, doesn't matter whether it is $19, $69, $129,- or $5k
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6216114].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

          Thanks for the nice words in that post Mike!
          Hey man more power to you. If you deliver some of the things youare working on hit me up for a testimonial. LOL

          The HUGE problem here, Michael, is that if this was the case more than these few people would have been slammed.
          Marc there is No huge problem because ton loads of people have been slammed not a few. I only pointed out two threads and frankly the ton loads of people I hear from don't post thread so lets just drop the misrepresentations. Lots of link seller customers got their bell rung not just yours but rung they were and if you don't know it its because you don't like to hear it. SO who should people believe the seller of links in spun content claiming its not compelling (because it means they would have to change) or the Search engine that actually tanked the sites?

          anyway.........skimmed over your post of denial but .........Officially bored. You denied what you stated in Post 77 and its obvious. When posts get that infantile I call for the nanny to take over but shes busy so I'll just call a halt to our back and forth. Good luck with the spinning AMR blasts. Thats quite an adaptation to the new realities.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219679].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            Marc there is No huge problem because ton loads of people have been slammed not a few. I only pointed out two threads and frankly the ton loads of people I hear from don't post thread so lets just drop the misrepresentations.
            But Michael, and this is a running problem in your logic routines, you've got only a few data points. We're working with thousands of sites and a handful of people got dinged. Don't you think that more people would come out if it is as bad as you're assuming? Bottom line I have a firmer grasp on our business and our customers than you do.
            Lots of link seller customers got their bell rung not just yours but rung they were and if you don't know it its because you don't like to hear it. SO who should people believe the seller of links in spun content claiming its not compelling (because it means they would have to change) or the Search engine that actually tanked the sites?
            I was hoping that you would provide some actual evidence instead of Mike Anthony speak.
            anyway.........skimmed over your post of denial but .........Officially bored. You denied what you stated in Post 77 and its obvious. When posts get that infantile I call for the nanny to take over but shes busy so I'll just call a halt to our back and forth. Good luck with the spinning AMR blasts. Thats quite an adaptation to the new realities.
            Because your mind creates these absolutely ridiculous scenarios. You assume the worst of your "opponents" and accept as evidence against them the slimmest of threads to condemn them. You then harp on this over and over like your assumptions are correct when in fact all you have is a bag of sand.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6224726].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
              Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

              But Michael, and this is a running problem in your logic routines, you've got only a few data points. We're working with thousands of sites and a handful of people got dinged. Don't you think that more people would come out if it is as bad as you're assuming? Bottom line I have a firmer grasp on our business and our customers than you do.
              Marc - briefly because people are tired of the back and forth

              I don't care how often you claim that it was just a handful. I know better. Lots of link sellers got hit hard and you have provided nothing but a self testimonial that you beat that wave. The reality is of the thousands of people who used BMR only a fraction named them in threads here - does that mean thousands were not affected? No. Most people just move on. You and I both know if people SEARCH they will find far more examples but I am not going to take this into entirely talking about your service. Despite what you think it isn't. We've been talking all kinds of services in this thread.

              Facts are facts. Mass spammy links from spun content is no longer a viable SEO stategy. IF you have not seen that then you have on blinders and are just looking to protect your business model from having to adapt.

              Typical, you don't believe him because he's defended us. You should take a long hard look at this.
              Typically you haven't learned to read yet. You should take a hard look at basic logic. I've said it countless times. A forum poster making a claim is just that a forum poster making a claim. I make ten million dollars a month. Believe me? Its forum talk. No one has to provide zip to back it up and on an IM board especially anyone taking income statements as fact is a fool. SO let me say it again. I don't believe income statements on WF AT ALL, They could say they use your service or they could Say Matt Cutts gave them an inside tip. Go ahead and look around I have never backed anyones income statements. You are as insane as you claim I am if you think anyone should.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225027].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                Marc - briefly because people are tired of the back and forth

                I don't care how often you claim that it was just a handful. I know better. Lots of link sellers got hit hard and you have provided nothing but a self testimonial that you beat that wave. The reality is of the thousands of people who used BMR only a fraction named them in threads here - does that mean thousands were not affected? No. Most people just move on. You and I both know if people SEARCH they will find far more examples but I am not going to take this into entirely talking about your service. Despite what you think it isn't. We've been talking all kinds of services in this thread.
                You've made claims against our service and this is what I am talking about. I don't care about your general comments about WF offerings.
                Facts are facts. Mass spammy links from spun content is no longer a viable SEO stategy. IF you have not seen that then you have on blinders and are just looking to protect your business model from having to adapt.
                Yes adaptation is the key to success and so far what we've done is working better than ever. You just don't know anything about what we have been doing lately and you're acting like I'm advocating zero change. Another Michael Anthony misrepresentation.

                But I am still waiting for your actual evidence IN THE SERPS that spun content from backlinks is being penalized. The majority of our clients who has gotten spun content has not gotten penalized. All the analysis I've seen says that having "over optimized" anchor text pointing to your site is the major problem with penguin. I've not seen any evidence that spun content was targeted at all, as far as backlinks is concerned.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225406].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                  Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

                  But I am still waiting for your actual evidence IN THE SERPS that spun content from backlinks is being penalized.
                  Sigh - Are you serious about no proof? Your conspiracy theory that Google didn't really mean what they said you think requires me to do backlink research for you? Oh well....OK......Here go look. If you keep up on SEO issues you will know why I point to this serp. Theres a site that was there a few weeks ago everyone was talking about and its been tanked.

                  https://www.google.com/#hl=en&output...w=1280&bih=643

                  Hint - its the same serp Google used to announce the Penguin update where it indicated the algo would now look at the source page of the link. Guess what? it was as spot three and is nowhere to be found now.So CLEARLY Google made good on what it said about checking the link source of sites that that links to you.

                  I know you've bought into this idea that Google is so stupid that all you have to do now is dilute your anchor text with more other spam and you will be good to go but they are a little bit more sophisticated than that and you have completely overlooked that to the extent that any of your results are in competitive serps having links with spun content will open them up to link spam reports from their competitor. In fact thats how anyone can figure out that you don't rank very much in compettive serps - if you did the sites would be reported at a quick clip.

                  On that point since I played your game where is the serps I have been asking for for months that shows that those kind of links rank sites in good competition? (will he answer or run away again?)

                  I don't care about your general comments about WF offerings.
                  Too bad thats what we are talking about. Its not a Laclear WSO thread and please don't try the self testimonial stuff again. No one knows what those 100 keywords are that ranked or even if the number is truthful. Could be "tulip seeds for the rich". You asked me to show my point in the serps so its your turn to show your point in the serps or be hypocritical.
                  Signature

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225875].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                    Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                    Sigh - Are you serious about no proof? Your conspiracy theory that Google didn't really mean what they said you think requires me to do backlink research for you? Oh well....OK......Here go look. If you keep up on SEO issues you will know why I point to this serp. Theres a site that was there a few weeks ago everyone was talking about and its been tanked.
                    LOL, so it has to be the spun content!? Hell, All you showed me was a serp but this doesn't prove spun content in general is getting smoked. Here's one of your problems, you accept the flimsiest of evidence when it suits you then question anything else beyond reason. If it's the site I'm thinking of (have to guess since you didn't provide it) it was still ranking in the top 3 after 4/24 for payday loans. Just like a virtually blank page was ranking number one for make money online. These most likely got cleaned up manually and has nothing to do with the algo.
                    I know you've bought into this idea that Google is so stupid that all you have to do now is dilute your anchor text with more other spam and you will be good to go but they are a little bit more sophisticated than that and you have completely overlooked that to the extent that any of your results are in competitive serps having links with spun content will open them up to link spam reports from their competitor.
                    So is the spun content factor manual or algo? Here you're moving towards manual.
                    On that point since I played your game where is the serps I have been asking for for months that shows that those kind of links rank sites in good competition? (will he answer or run away again?)
                    You didn't even send me one domain or backlink. How did you play my game? I couldn't care less about the other discussions we had months ago.
                    Too bad thats what we are talking about. Its not a Laclear WSO thread and please don't try the self testimonial stuff again.
                    I am only responding to direct references to our service and don't like you haven't made any.
                    No one knows what those 100 keywords are that ranked or even if the number is truthful. Could be "tulip seeds for the rich". You asked me to show my point in the serps so its your turn to show your point in the serps or be hypocritical.
                    You didn't show me anything close to what could be considered evidence against spun backlinks. The little information you did provide still leads me to believe (if it's the site I am thinking) that this was a manual action by google and not algo based. I can only assume.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225971].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                      Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

                      LOL, so it has to be the spun content!? Hell, All you showed me was a serp but this doesn't prove spun content in general is getting smoked............ These most likely got cleaned up manually and has nothing to do with the algo.
                      LOL. Yes I know . When the facts don't fit your theory go ahead and make up another conspiracy theory to massage said facts into place. Of course the algo took a while to work. For those who have been around the block thats how it ALWAYS works. It can take weeks to settle out. SO I'll leave it to the readers. believe Google with what they know and what we can see happened in the serps or go with the link seller that finds it convenient to use spun content so wants it not to be true. Either way the site tanked.

                      So is the spun content factor manual or algo? Here you're moving towards manual.
                      Its always been both Marc. Google has always used both. in fact they pretty much use the link spam reports to come up with data for the algo

                      You didn't even send me one domain or backlink. How did you play my game? I couldn't care less about the other discussions we had months ago.
                      Ducking and running - you just started you knew the serp so you know what I am talking about. I gave you a serp, you knew what it was so you are just fudging so as to back out of giving any proof in the serps yourself

                      I can only assume.
                      Yes and an additional assumption to slide out of evidence presented is just a duck and weave not dealing with evidence which you asked for and got.
                      Signature

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6226142].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                        anyway gents. Enough already. This going and gone into old territory. MA signing out
                        Signature

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6226159].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                        LOL. Yes I know . When the facts don't fit your theory go ahead and make up another conspiracy theory to massage said facts into place. Of course the algo took a while to work. For those who have been around the block thats how it ALWAYS works. It can take weeks to settle out. SO I'll leave it to the readers. believe Google with what they know and what we can see happened in the serps or go with the link seller that finds it convenient to use spun content so wants it not to be true. Either way the site tanked.
                        Dude you'd make a ****ty scientist. The first thing is that your "evidence" doesn't prove anything. You've got a single data point and then you extrapolate from that? I have not seen any analysis of penguin that "targets" spun content. Apparently you haven't either or you would have provided it.
                        Yes and an additional assumption to slide out of evidence presented is just a duck and weave not dealing with evidence which you asked for and got.
                        You didn't provide one domain. I would LOVE to "deal" with the evidence.

                        You're delusional if you think what you provided PROVES spun content is being targeted by the algo. But that's par for the course I guess.

                        Anyway I did look at the site and here it is.

                        This is the backlink page.

                        Get Fit Using These Simple And Easy Methods. | Profit Monarch

                        The backlink is for the domain

                        dergimea.info

                        Which redirects to

                        checkintocash.com

                        Backlink domain has been deindexed which most likely was a manual action but that's irrelevant.

                        56 out of the 75 domains pointing to that dergimea.info site were deindexed. I'd wager that they got deindexed on or around 4/30 which is when checkintocash.com lost it's rankings.

                        Now if you want to argue that this site got smoked by the algo because it had spun content you have some facts to account for.

                        It ranked one week after penguin hit.
                        Most of it's backlinks were deindexed. (is there anyway to see when a site got deindexed?)

                        Given these two things it is simply impossible to conclude that the site lost rankings because it had spun backlinks. It's more logical to assume that it lost rankings because it's backlinks got deindexed.

                        In science you have to have a control in this situation there are far too many moving parts to think any one of them was the cause of the site to lose it's rankings.

                        I've dealt with the "evidence". Why is spun backlinks a better explanation than having backlinks be deindexed?
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6227906].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                          Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post


                          Now if you want to argue that this site got smoked by the algo because it had spun content you have some facts to account for.

                          Dude your clueless. I have multiple data points and the search engine themselves that state that penguin had to do with unrelated and spun content. Plenty sites with spun content fell. A whole pile of marketers who relied on it are crying all over this and other boards. The burden of proofthat content has nothing to do with penguin is on you to prove your theory. So what if you want to believe in your silly little conspiracy theory that Google said it was about spun and unrelated content in the very post they announced it in but oh no thats just Google trying to fool us. Thats a standard IM SEO ploy.

                          Give it up because heres the rub - whether its notices of unnatural links, or its the algo or its deindexing it STILL would prove that spun content is garbage going forward. So any which way you are fried or left trying to float some laugher like spun content on a network site doesn't make it more susceptible to link spam reports, deindexing and unnatural link penalties.

                          Don't even bother crowing about scientific approach to things. Scientifically it couldn't be clearer from the data of what has happened in 2012. Spinning content on a network or a service is garbage and the only people defending it are service providers that don't want to provide better content. Period.

                          So pick your poison -shimmy and dance with algo , deindexing or unnatural links notices. They are all telling anyone with half a block of common sense That spinning in any network or services is garbage SEO in 2012.
                          Signature

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6228151].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author scottmacair
                            Agreed - spun content is just asking for trouble and I wish people would move away from it.

                            When link building, I prefer to put out content I think may be valuable if someone reads it. Who wants to put time into spamming the net with spun gibberish anyway.

                            When looking at SEO services, if they use spun content, I am just not interested.

                            Nik0 - I looked at your product and appreciate that your offering something that has more quality than most of the SEO services on warrior. Personally I am always happy to pay more for quality.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6228535].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Bambu
                            I would stay far away from any SEO who says they understand Google's latest algorithm change. It is simply too early to know how the latest algorithm update works. The best we can do is examine what data we have access to, develop a hypothesis, and test it. This takes much longer than the two or so weeks that have passed since the algorithm rolled out.

                            You say backlinks in spun content are a no no? So what is the cut off? Would a 99% unique article get you into trouble? How about 80%, 60%, 40%, 30%, 20% uniqueness? Don't know you say? If that is the case, I would avoid blanket statements.

                            I, like you, and just about everyone else here has very little evidence to stand on. Any data you are relying on now most likely includes too many variables that you can not control (or did not take into account) and thus you can't make any solid conclusions (take it from an MIT science graduate- I understand the scientific method).

                            Please feel free to pull one sentence out of what I wrote above, use it out of context, pick it apart, and ignore the rest of what I wrote in your rebuttal. You are good at that.

                            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                            Dude your clueless. I have multiple data points and the search engine themselves that state that penguin had to do with unrelated and spun content. Plenty sites with spun content fell. A whole pile of marketers who relied on it are crying all over this and other boards. The burden of proofthat content has nothing to do with penguin is on you to prove your theory. So what if you want to believe in your silly little conspiracy theory that Google said it was about spun and unrelated content in the very post they announced it in but oh no thats just Google trying to fool us. Thats a standard IM SEO ploy.

                            Give it up because heres the rub - whether its notices of unnatural links, or its the algo or its deindexing it STILL would prove that spun content is garbage going forward. So any which way you are fried or left trying to float some laugher like spun content on a network site doesn't make it more susceptible to link spam reports, deindexing and unnatural link penalties.

                            Don't even bother crowing about scientific approach to things. Scientifically it couldn't be clearer from the data of what has happened in 2012. Spinning content on a network or a service is garbage and the only people defending it are service providers that don't want to provide better content. Period.

                            So pick your poison -shimmy and dance with algo , deindexing or unnatural links notices. They are all telling anyone with half a block of common sense That spinning in any network or services is garbage SEO in 2012.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6228661].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
                              Wooo page five! None of you "SEO scientists" are scientists, drop that ****ing act lol. It's embarrassing. :rolleyes:
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6228684].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author PimpinRice
                                Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

                                Wooo page five! None of you "SEO scientists" are scientists, drop that ****ing act lol. It's embarrassing. :rolleyes:
                                I second this!
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6245691].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                              Originally Posted by Bambu View Post

                              I would stay far away from any SEO who says they understand Google's latest algorithm change. It is simply too early to know how the latest algorithm update works.
                              You don't have a choice to stay away. I never offered you my services. You would have a point if in fact anyone ever said they completely understood the latest algorithm but no one did. SO actually you are the one making up the strawman. But you would have to be deaf and blind not to know some of the things it targets if you look around.

                              You say backlinks in spun content are a no no? So what is the cut off? Would a 99% unique article get you into trouble? How about 80%, 60%, 40%, 30%, 20% uniqueness? Don't know you say? If that is the case, I would avoid blanket statements.
                              Oh oh someone else is hurt that their treasured way of doing SEO has been challenged. You quoted an entire post where I mentioned three things - the algo, unnatural link notices and deindexing - now whos taking one line and running with it and twisting it?

                              We have had MONTHS of sites getting deindexed
                              WE are coming up on nearly a year of Unnatural link notices

                              We can't learn anything yet? Thats silly not scientific. SO to your question . why would I say I didn't know? Your whole "cut off" premise is weak. the answer is easy 100% no spinning. You are reasoning like alot of imers - how far can I lean over the line without getting caught. Then next update Google moves a line and you topple over. I mean God forbid that people pay $3 to have their articles rewritten (but people have been so brainwashed by link sellers they think they need thousands of links to rank with quantity over quality)

                              Any data you are relying on now most likely includes too many variables that you can not control (or did not take into account) and thus you can't make any solid conclusions (take it from an MIT science graduate- I understand the scientific method).
                              LOl. Appealing to your own authority is not the sign of a science grad. Appeals to authority are fallacious in any textbook on logic and the facts are with Google's algo you always have variables so you are off anyway. IF you had a clue about the scientific method you would know that you can never completely apply it to an unknown , always changing algo. By the way I am a neurosurgeon, a physicist and picked up my degree in constitutional law last weekend. You should all believe me because I wrote it in a forum.

                              In reality the three factors I mentioned are all related. Take unnatural links notices - Anyone that think s Google went through millions of sites manually is drunk. They utilized signals from links and content and sorry that data has been in for a long time and it does implicate spun content Want to believe in the fairy tale that they started over again and used nothing they learned in the algo be my guest. It doesn't matter. my point to you is the same as Marc -

                              Pick your poison

                              because if it isn't the algo telling you spun content gets you in trouble the data from deindexing and unnatural link notices (which we have had for close to a year) certainly does. Either way your beloved spinning is toast.

                              Don't be so hurt and offended. There are many people in this thread that have offered me hugs. I am sure they will oblige and give you the same offer. Either way SEO will go on.
                              Signature

                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6229628].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                                Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                LOl. Appealing to your own authority is not the sign of a science grad. Appeals to authority are fallacious in any textbook on logic and the facts are with Google's algo you always have variables so you are off anyway.
                                Only when you use your authority to prove that you are right and the opponent is wrong. He didn't do that.
                                IF you had a clue about the scientific method you would know that you can never completely apply it to an unknown , always changing algo.
                                I think this was his point. He's saying that you're being far too absolute given that you can't be sure it wasn't something else that tanked that site. But this shows your scientific ignorance, which is fine I guess.

                                When you do have an unknown it is the scientific method that allows you to try and define it, to discover it. The scientist devises tests and collects data.

                                Although since the unknown is always changing it would be impossible to conduct any sort of meaningful scientific tests on it. To that, you're correct. But, this was Bambu's point.
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6230450].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author retsek
                              Originally Posted by Bambu View Post

                              I would stay far away from any SEO who says they understand Google's latest algorithm change. It is simply too early to know how the latest algorithm update works.
                              I would stay away from any SEO who doesn't. There's no big secret behind this algo update that's yet to be learnt.

                              So now that you know, you can stop saying that.
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6229898].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author nik0
                                Banned
                                Originally Posted by retsek View Post

                                I would stay away from any SEO who doesn't. There's no big secret behind this algo update that's yet to be learnt.

                                So now that you know, you can stop saying that.
                                People still think that Google will do some rollback cause there are a few skewed results at the first page while others think it takes like a month before an update is fully rolled out.

                                Guess they can't handle the truth after losing their sites or something.

                                Personally I have a dutch site where I used dutch anchor txt in english articles that were distributed at ALN and HPRS, in fact the exact example that Matt showed at his blog. Not surprised my site isn't ranking anywhere anymore. Add a lot of spammy links to that and a poor anchor diversity and then we cover about every topic that the latest updates were all about.

                                Last time I builded spammy links to that site was a long time ago btw so if new sites start to rank with the same crap it will only be a matter of time before the alghorytm gets triggered.
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6229959].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author retsek
                                  Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                                  People still think that Google will do some rollback cause there are a few skewed results at the first page while others think it takes like a month before an update is fully rolled out.

                                  Guess they can't handle the truth after losing their sites or something.

                                  Personally I have a dutch site where I used dutch anchor txt in english articles that were distributed at ALN and HPRS, in fact the exact example that Matt showed at his blog. Not surprised my site isn't ranking anywhere anymore. Add a lot of spammy links to that and it makes the decision easy to just buy another domain.
                                  Yup, they keep hoping and praying there's a roll back. But it's not gonna happen.

                                  If you're a real SEO, you build and promote in the right ways so you aren't always in chaos everytime Google rolls out a black and white animal from the zoo.

                                  Just about everyone on these forums claiming they have an "innocent" site is guilty of something which they purposely do not disclose. Just take a look at the google webmaster forums which people post their URLs publicly -- I've yet to see a truly "innocent" site get hit.
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6229996].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author nik0
                                    Banned
                                    Agreed, many times I work at micro niche sites and the worse part is that many feel real proud of their 1 page sites and make it sound like they are offering true value to the visitors. I don't know, but all I see is a crappy MFA site, perhaps people feel better about it when they make theirselves beleive in it or something.

                                    I mean, 99 out of 100 time when people build a micro niche site they are in it for the money, makes no sense to fool yourself.
                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6230050].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                            Dude your clueless.
                            If you are going to insult somebody at least take the time to spell correctly. I wonder if Google's bad grammar filter flagged this sentence.
                            I have multiple data points and the search engine themselves that state that penguin had to do with unrelated and spun content.
                            I like how you slip "unrelated" in there. I think this is a bigger problem than spun content itself. But you have to admit that your "data points" could all have something else in common. Over optimized anchor text backlinks. There is no way for you to say that the "spun" aspect of these backlinks, at least legitimately, had anything to do with rank decreases.
                            Plenty sites with spun content fell.
                            Plenty didn't. Now what?
                            A whole pile of marketers who relied on it are crying all over this and other boards. The burden of proofthat content has nothing to do with penguin is on you to prove your theory.
                            Very subtle Michael but I'm talking about spun content and spun content alone. I have never claimed that the content itself had nothing to do with Penguin. I think you're realizing that you over spoke about spun content itself, which is good.
                            So what if you want to believe in your silly little conspiracy theory that Google said it was about spun and unrelated content in the very post they announced it in but oh no thats just Google trying to fool us. Thats a standard IM SEO ploy.
                            That isn't what they said.
                            Give it up because heres the rub - whether its notices of unnatural links, or its the algo or its deindexing it STILL would prove that spun content is garbage going forward. So any which way you are fried or left trying to float some laugher like spun content on a network site doesn't make it more susceptible to link spam reports, deindexing and unnatural link penalties.
                            I know for a fact that "spun content" itself is not tanking sites. You have done nothing to disprove this. All you have is a typical Michael Anthony cherry picked uncritical bit of evidence.
                            Don't even bother crowing about scientific approach to things. Scientifically it couldn't be clearer from the data of what has happened in 2012.
                            You have no idea how science works then. You can't if you think that.

                            You've came up with a hypothesis and to support it you show one site. You're claim that your hypothesis best explains the evidence has been challenged by what I consider a better explanation of the data. You haven't touched this hypothesis except to tell me that I'm stupid. There is data that you don't account for, you cherry pick evidence. You'd be a ****ty scientist if you tried this in scientific research.
                            Spinning content on a network or a service is garbage and the only people defending it are service providers that don't want to provide better content. Period.
                            Michael said "period" so that must be it. HAHA.
                            So pick your poison -shimmy and dance with algo , deindexing or unnatural links notices. They are all telling anyone with half a block of common sense That spinning in any network or services is garbage SEO in 2012.
                            This is as good as I'm going to get I guess. You'll never admit that the algo itself is not targeting spun content as you claimed. You're covering your tracks here though which is what I'd expect from Mr. Anthony.

                            Bottom line, you're "evidence" can be explained better by what I am saying. The site in question had most of it's backlinks deindexed and this is why it tanked. The site didn't drop until a week after penguin which shows most people that it wasn't an algo hit based upon "spun content".

                            I'll leave this here, I'm sure you're going to come up with great stuff like "your clueless" or whatever. Mike's either super critical when looking at data (stuff that disproves his point) and super uncritical when looking at data that supposedly supports his way of thinking.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6230289].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
                              Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

                              If you are going to insult somebody at least take the time to spell correctly. I wonder if Google's bad grammar filter flagged this sentence.
                              Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

                              you're "evidence"
                              :p

                              I'm just trolling. This thread is so much fun, lulz!
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6230329].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                                Originally Posted by bnetwork View Post

                                :p

                                I'm just trolling. This thread is so much fun, lulz!
                                hahaha

                                :p
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6230453].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                Very subtle Michael but I'm talking about spun content and spun content alone. I have never claimed that the content itself had nothing to do with Penguin. I think you're realizing that you over spoke about spun content itself, which is good.
                                Logic isn't getting any better. No one is backing down or changing anything. The discussion has always been about content. Content of the link source. You know a way that spinning is done without content : You got some new plugin for AMR that doesn't spin CONTENT?

                                Lol. anyway seriously is there anyone that believes ALL FOUR -

                                1)Spun content doesn't help network sites get deindexed and links removed.
                                2) links within spun content doesn't open you up to unnatural link notices?
                                3)Spun content is not monitored by the algo?
                                4)and spun content is not noticed by your competitor who can put a link spam notice and tank your site

                                I mean ladies and gents thats what you have to believe - ALL FOUR in order to go forward with spinning your link sources

                                meanwhile the internet is filled with more data points. Shucks even this thread has em.

                                I had 6 friends ...............all tanked with Unnatural Links Detected Penalties - when they asked for the links to be removed the answer was 'sorry we can't do that'
                                Go figure? imagine the odds of that? and the statistical anomaly of all those 6 friends getting hit off a service that allegedly just affected a hand full. What an unlucky group. lol Yeah right. Theres 6 more data points right there.:rolleyes:

                                Seriously though Marc - its a crying shame. Even BMR removed links. its the least you could do.

                                Only when you use your authority to prove that you are right and the opponent is wrong. He didn't do that.
                                Buttressing a point on the basis of an alleged education on a forum is an appeal to authority and fallacious. go read up. like others have said though drop the scientist garbage. clicking buttons in AMR does not make you a scientist....well maybe a mad scientist but clicking mouse buttons isn't going to cut it. ROFL.

                                This thread is hilarious. I give Bnet that.
                                Signature

                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6230566].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author Bambu
                                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                  Lol. anyway seriously is there anyone that believes ALL FOUR -

                                  1)Spun content doesn't help network sites get deindexed and links removed.

                                  Two Issues: 1) This is the first time you mentioned networked sites; and 2) The networked sites (e.g., ALN, BMR, and HighPRSociety) were deindexed, not the sites that the backlinks that were embedded in the spun content were linking to (hide the ball much or did you just confuse yourself?)

                                  In all of the rest of your posts I bothered to read you simply state that backlinks embedded in spun content will get your site deindexed, which I don't believe. Networks intended to manipulate rank that use(d) spun content were targeted and deindexed. I don't know of any site not belonging to a network that was deindexed strictly due to backlinks embedded in spun content. Do you? I don't think so.


                                  2) links within spun content doesn't open you up to unnatural link notices?

                                  ALL links intended to manipulate search engine rankings "open you up" to unnatural link notices. LOL. At the moment, it is not clear whether any/all backlinks embedded in spun content trigger unnatural link notices (questions of link velocity, uniqueness, and anchor text variation are also factors that need to be dissected from the issue of spun content). We can expect to learn if this is the case as the filter is updated. Maybe you are right; maybe not.

                                  3)Spun content is not monitored by the algo?

                                  I don't know the answer to this question yet. I am still not clear whether the spun content Google is referring is spun content on money sites (e.g., autoblogs) or backlinks embedded in spun content on third party sites. We will have to wait and see to learn with more certainty if this is the case.

                                  4)and spun content is not noticed by your competitor who can put a link spam notice and tank your site

                                  Again any fishy link can attract the attention of your competitor. That is the nature of this game. Links embedded in garbage content or with easily identifiable foot prints (spinning is one example, but there are numerous other examples) are easier to spot.

                                  I mean ladies and gents that(')s what you have to believe - ALL FOUR in order to go forward with spinning your link sources

                                  Buttressing a point on the basis of an alleged education on a forum is an appeal to authority and fallacious (Your ad hominem argument is also a logical fallacy. You crack me up, dude. I am assuming it has been some time since you took your critical thinking class...). go read up. like others have said though drop the scientist garbage. clicking buttons in AMR does not make you a scientist....well maybe a mad scientist but clicking mouse buttons isn't going to cut it. ROFL.

                                  Whether I have two degrees in science (chemistry and synthetic organic chemistry to be exact) is irrelevant, the point I made above is accurate and still stands. Please feel free to read up on the scientific method and correct me if I am mistaken.

                                  Scientific method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                                  This thread is hilarious. I give Bnet that.
                                  Thanks for the LOLs
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6231338].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                    Originally Posted by Bambu View Post

                                    Two Issues: 1) This is the first time you mentioned networked sites; and 2) The networked sites (e.g., ALN, BMR, and HighPRSociety) were deindexed, not the sites that the backlinks that were embedded in the spun content were linking to (hide the ball much or did you just confuse yourself?)
                                    No issues LOl you are the one hopelessly confused - the service providers were always what we were talking about. the customer suffers from deindexing because THEIR LINKS ARE GONE - deindexed. try and keep up. If you think the sellers are the only ones that suffer from deindexing then you are clueless.

                                    In all of the rest of your posts I bothered to read you simply state that backlinks embedded in spun content will get your site deindexed, which I don't believe.
                                    Hilarious. Again we were always talking about THE SERVICE PROVIDER and who cares what you believe. Links within spun content is a DEAD giveaway the links are unnatural and the sites with them DO get deindexed. Theres not a person here that has a clue about checking up backlinks that can't spot a network site that uses spun content in about two seconds. Because you need to do research on this in no way affects those of us who have done research and known this for well over a year.

                                    ALL links intended to manipulate search engine rankings "open you up" to unnatural link notices. LOL. At the moment, it is not clear whether any/all backlinks embedded in spun content trigger unnatural link notices
                                    its exceedingly clear. You are wrong and obviously wrong. Heres something they might not have covered at MIT :rolleyes: in regard to the scientific method- Intentions cannot be seen on a page . LOL - Its amazing the self evident things people have to have pointed out to them. So no not all links intended to manipulate search engine ranking will open you up -the only thing that will open you up to an unnatural link notice are links that LOOK unnatural. Does spun content look very unnatural? yes? DIND DING DING DING. one point awarded.

                                    Whether I have two degrees in science (chemistry and synthetic organic chemistry to be exact) is irrelevant, the point I made above is accurate and still stands
                                    Well I said I have three degrees so whats the point listing two (or any for that point)? Throw in some degrees for physics and zoology in there next time. Its a forum board so we all know it must be the truth. Whats funny is you trying to talk about the scientific method while trying to side step the data. Its one thing in regard to the algo but sorry "dude" the unnatural link notices have been going out for well near a year and anyone that has been involved in building even less networks than I have been involved with knows that spotting spun content in a network is THE EASIEST way to identify a network. The idea that that has not been proven yet because you don't know it is laughable.

                                    Thanks for the lols
                                    You are much too modest. Believe me you have been much more of an entertainment. So in truth I should be thanking you.

                                    P.S. its much easier to highlight your responses if you take the time to learn the quote system.
                                    Signature

                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6231966].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author Bambu
                                      This will be my last post in this thread. I have already spent more time than this discussion is worth.

                                      There are countless small private networks that rely on spun content that fly under the radar. Who knows if Google will ever identify them. The big networks got too big for their britches and got hit. They had readily identifiable footprints beyond the use of spun content. This is where they most likely got hit.

                                      It is still not clear how Google identified ALN, BMR, HighPRSoceity, and others. It certainly wasn't algorithm based and I am guessing Google most likely did not use the foot print that the spun content provided (although it probably did provide confirmation after the fact). There are easier and less taxing ways of identifying networks and deindexing them.

                                      BMR did not use spun content, but it was hit.

                                      Given the service in you are selling in your signature, I understand why you might want to come across as an authority on this topic. So I will end here.

                                      P.S. I actually have three degrees. In a previous life, I was a patent attorney that did work in the pharma, biotech, and chemistry sectors (and dabbled with other technologies). So I also have a JD. I did not mention it, because it didn't seem relevant at the time.

                                      I am disappointed that you got so hung up on my education that you did not have time to provide any evidence to support your theories. I think you would have attracted new customers if you posted an analysis along the lines of what the guys from Micro Site Masters researched, prepared, and posted:

                                      Penguin Analysis: SEO Isn't Dead, But You Need to Act Smarter | Microsite Masters

                                      Best of luck with your Warrior Forum persona.

                                      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                      No issues LOl you are the one hopelessly confused - the service providers were always what we were talking about. the customer suffers from deindexing because THEIR LINKS ARE GONE - deindexed. try and keep up. If you think the sellers are the only ones that suffer from deindexing then you are clueless.



                                      Hilarious. Again we were always talking about THE SERVICE PROVIDER and who cares what you believe. Links within spun content is a DEAD giveaway the links are unnatural and the sites with them DO get deindexed. Theres not a person here that has a clue about checking up backlinks that can't spot a network site that uses spun content in about two seconds. Because you need to do research on this in no way affects those of us who have done research and known this for well over a year.



                                      its exceedingly clear. You are wrong and obviously wrong. Heres something they might not have covered at MIT :rolleyes: in regard to the scientific method- Intentions cannot be seen on a page . LOL - Its amazing the self evident things people have to have pointed out to them. So no not all links intended to manipulate search engine ranking will open you up -the only thing that will open you up to an unnatural link notice are links that LOOK unnatural. Does spun content look very unnatural? yes? DIND DING DING DING. one point awarded.



                                      Well I said I have three degrees so whats the point listing two (or any for that point)? Throw in some degrees for physics and zoology in there next time. Its a forum board so we all know it must be the truth. Whats funny is you trying to talk about the scientific method while trying to side step the data. Its one thing in regard to the algo but sorry "dude" the unnatural link notices have been going out for well near a year and anyone that has been involved in building even less networks than I have been involved with knows that spotting spun content in a network is THE EASIEST way to identify a network. The idea that that has not been proven yet because you don't know it is laughable.



                                      Your much too modest. Believe me you have been much more of an entertainment. So in truth I should be thanking you.

                                      P.S. its much easier to highlight your responses if you take the time to learn the quote system.
                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6233580].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                  Go figure? imagine the odds of that? and the statistical anomaly of all those 6 friends getting hit off a service that allegedly just affected a hand full. What an unlucky group. lol Yeah right. Theres 6 more data points right there.:rolleyes:
                                  This is confirmation bias showing clearly. You accept any evidence AGAINST your opponent without any scrutiny whatsoever then take any evidence that supports your opponent and run it through a skeptical grinder that nothing could ever come out looking true. It's amazing really and this shows it better than anything else you have said.
                                  Buttressing a point on the basis of an alleged education on a forum is an appeal to authority and fallacious.
                                  The point wasn't in dispute.:p You have no idea how these fallacies work do you?
                                  go read up. like others have said though drop the scientist garbage.
                                  Drop the absolute statements then.
                                  clicking buttons in AMR does not make you a scientist
                                  You realize that I didn't appeal to my authority right? That was somebody else. I didn't claim to be a scientist.
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6233162].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author nik0
                                    Banned
                                    I thought you guys made your end statement?
                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6233226].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                                    Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

                                    This is confirmation bias showing clearly. You accept any evidence AGAINST your opponent without any scrutiny whatsoever then take any evidence that supports your opponent and run it through a skeptical grinder
                                    You mean we can only believe some testimonials? I believe it because as I a said before I have similar data. its called correlation. This is your bias MO. You cite testimonial constantly but try and run all over the Internet trying to squelch the sizable testimonials that say what you dont want them to say.

                                    You realize that I didn't appeal to my authority right?
                                    Umm who said you did? I was referring to all the science lectures like we all don't know. Basically all the hand waving to avoid a simple , verifiable confirmed fact - spun content helps to identify an unnatural link.

                                    Originally Posted by Bambu View Post

                                    There are countless small private networks that rely on spun content that fly under the radar.................. They had readily identifiable footprints beyond the use of spun content. This is where they most likely got hit.
                                    terribly poor logic and more fallacious reasoning. The fact that some sites/networks survive "flying under the radar" with spun content in no way eliminates spun content. sheesh thats like watching traffic and seeing some cars driving 90 miles an hour with no flashing lights behind them and then concluding that speeding has nothing to do with being pulled over by a cop. MIT? Really? Did anyone in this thread say that spun content was the only thing that could get a network dinged? BMR used short garbage articles on multiple subjects with lots of links. Thats ONE way to identify a network, Spun content is another. Its a clear footprint and its hilarious how you jump over it staring you in the face to get away from the obvious while talking about the scientific method. Ignoring footprints/data is the exact opposite of any kind of scientific approach.

                                    I am disappointed that you got so hung up on my education that you did not have time to provide any evidence to support your theories.
                                    LOL. I didn't get hung up. You have now posted what? three times and you bring it up in every post like for some odd reason you think that other people in WF don't have degrees, gone through college and even been trained in science. Its a FACT that spun content helps to identify a network. Its something I and others have tested and evaluated for well over a year. It couldn't be more established under a "scientific method"

                                    Unravelling a network takes no rocket scientist ( include that degree the next time you post ). Its easy . verifiable and repeatable. once you find one site with spun content you cross check all the backlinks and you unravel an entire network. I've done it many times so have multiple people in this thread. All that data has been in for over a year.

                                    if you posted an analysis along the lines of what the guys from Micro Site Masters researched, prepared, and posted:
                                    Most of us have read it already from another thread but thanks fo r citing that because it shows clearly how bogus your objections are and were. You claim its too early to know much about the algo but then recommend to me an article drawing conclusions wrote over a week ago

                                    lol 180s like that always expose peoples real issues. You have a history of buying spammy links and you are offended.
                                    Signature

                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6234674].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
                                      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                                      You mean we can only believe some testimonials? I believe it because as I a said before I have similar data. its called correlation. This is your bias MO. You cite testimonial constantly but try and run all over the Internet trying to squelch the sizable testimonials that say what you dont want them to say.
                                      "sizable"? lol

                                      Hey believe what you want but it's plain to see that you have a double standard. Any of our clients comes in here saying that they like what we do for them then you attack them. Any clients come in here that aren't happy and you welcome their claims with open arms. You're not consistent.
                                      Umm who said you did? I was referring to all the science lectures like we all don't know. Basically all the hand waving to avoid a simple , verifiable confirmed fact - spun content helps to identify an unnatural link.
                                      Moving goal posts fallacy. We were talking about penguin but this is typical of you. You're original statement didn't hold water and your "evidence" in support of it was absurdly inadequate. (unless one applies Michael Anthony confirmation bias filters).

                                      I was making a point about what evidence you accept 100% without question and which evidence you run through a skeptic wringer that always makes it look like its wrong. This Michael Anthony Trait is what would make you a lousy scientist.

                                      Another point here. I think "spun content" is being used too loosely. You can have spun content and not have it be garbage. Badly spun content is another thing entirely. It looks like when you say "spun content" you really mean "poorly spun content".
                                      Unravelling a network takes no rocket scientist ( include that degree the next time you post ). Its easy . verifiable and repeatable. once you find one site with spun content you cross check all the backlinks and you unravel an entire network. I've done it many times so have multiple people in this thread. All that data has been in for over a year.
                                      I think you could do this even if the content was 100% unique. A bunch of articles with a link to the same site made on or around the same day on multiple blogs. It isn't the spun content that is the problem.
                                      Most of us have read it already from another thread but thanks fo r citing that because it shows clearly how bogus your objections are and were. You claim its too early to know much about the algo but then recommend to me an article drawing conclusions wrote over a week ago
                                      They don't make any hard conclusions Michael. They present the data that they have and make some observations about it. By the way you misrepresented what bambu said. He didn't say anything about "much" of the algo but the algo itself. These are entirely different things.
                                      Originally Posted by bambu

                                      I would stay far away from any SEO who says they understand Google's latest algorithm change. It is simply too early to know how the latest algorithm update works. The best we can do is examine what data we have access to, develop a hypothesis, and test it. This takes much longer than the two or so weeks that have passed since the algorithm rolled out.
                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6235746].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author scottmacair
              From the posts i've read there is nobody active on Warrior who understands SEO better then Mike Anthony. I don't know Mike and i'm not connected with him in any way but I do know he speaks a lot of sense.

              I had 6 friends all using Matt LaClear's services and their sites all tanked with Unnatural Links Detected Penalties - when they asked for the links to be removed the answer was 'sorry we can't do that'
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225910].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

          Thanks for the nice words in that post Mike!
          Hey man more power to you. If you deliver some of the things you are working on hit me up for a testimonial. LOL

          The HUGE problem here, Michael, is that if this was the case more than these few people would have been slammed.
          Marc there is No huge problem because ton loads of people have been slammed not a few. I only pointed out two threads and frankly the ton loads of people I hear from don't post thread so lets just drop the misrepresentations. Lots of link seller customers got their bell rung not just yours but rung they were and if you don't know it its because you don't like to hear it. SO who should people believe the seller of links in spun content claiming its not compelling (because it means they would have to change) or the Search engine that actually tanked the sites?

          anyway.........skimmed over your post of denial but .........Officially bored. You denied what you stated in Post 77 and its obvious. When posts get that infantile I call for the nanny to take over but shes busy so I'll just call a halt to our back and forth. Good luck with the spinning AMR blasts. Thats quite an adaptation to the new realities.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219691].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
        Couldn't reply earlier - busy day. And WF is SLOW today!

        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        Heres the deal though if all these thing worked as late as 2011 and its all people were selling then why still so many people making nothing in IM and not getting much traffic ? You keep telling me how much money you made selling and you were only one person with hundreds peddling similar links . SO what happened to the customers?
        I get your point, and again keep in mind I have no idea what sort of customers you get here on Warrior, but my customers made a lot of money ranking sites and flipping them. I know it.

        BUT - I do understand where you're coming from, believe me. We moved on to other stuff, because the plan was always to build a real business and provide long lasting value to customers. I saw an opportunity to help make it happen and went for it. So did my clients.

        Clearly the game has changed but go ahead and look around - don't you still see the same old offers and sellers even in this thread trying to massage how they still work just do this or that.
        True. Not something I want to be a part of though - selling to gullible newbies that don't know what they're doing. Not my thing.

        Bnet I'll call you on it because although you probably don't know that s EXACTLY how the sellers you just disparaged do it. They point to the sales numbers and then cite it as proof that it must work.
        Yea I see this tactic used a lot - ebooks, backlinks, software, blah... But, once again, my clients stopped buying and I stopped selling (when things stopped working, lulz).

        My point is when people realize for how long something hasn't been working and then add that to recent changes they are better off and more likely to finally move on.
        Sure. Everyone should have a business plan of some kind before starting out. This is exactly what happens when people refuse to think for themselves and merely follow crafty sales letters promising #1 rankings or $100 days for a one-time-only $17 investment.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6218883].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rafiseo
    Banned
    If you want to hire one guy who would not tank your site and provide you real SEO Service(when I say real SEO service I mean TRUE SEO service, not just link building or talking like Einstein knowing near of nothing) I would recommend you to hire Mike Friedman.

    Mike is not like other so called SEO guys but he is a hyper knowledgeable well you would be able to know it from his posts.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6214729].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GyuMan82
    So after reading through this thread and yes there are a lot of good points here but I think what everyone is forgetting is that there are different markets in this world of "SEO Services".

    There are a lot of people I have respect for in this thread, and I am sure everyone here provides SEO services that are great, but you guys are really comparing Apples and Oranges.

    People in this thread are comparing "high end" and "low end" services as if they are equal, but they are not.

    Of course everyone would LOVE to have a service that only created high PR quality homepage links, well-written manual guest blogging, low OBL high PR manual links on relevant niche topics etc, however all this comes with a high price. Whether or not that merits the cost is a business decision the individual webmaster has to make.

    It's sort of like asking someone that if they could have a free car, which would they pick, a Ferrari or a Kia? Of course if it was free most people would choose the Ferrari all things being equal. But in the real world these things are not possible.

    In internet marketing there are TONs of ways to make money, and there are high end and low end SEO services. Maybe if you have only 1 website that is your "baby", hiring someone for big $$$ each month may be a worthwhile investment.

    However what about the guy who has hundreds of micro-niche sites that pops off a clickbank sale maybe once a week? Investing $1,000/month per site is probably not an option for him. To be honest people in these niches can probably get by with "Trash SEO Services". Is his business model necessarily wrong? Of course not. You can build a TON of micro-niche sites and rank them with "Trash SEO Services" and make bank. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

    Like any industry there are more than one way to make money. For example in the restaurant industry you can own a fine dining establishment or a McDonald's. If both makes money, who cares? Recognize there is more than one way to get to where you want to go.

    Different strokes for different folks.

    At the end of the day it is all about risk vs. reward. There is a place in the SEO world for both.
    Signature
    Need SEO Help? Monthly Plans From $299/mo (PM Me)
    Pickings From My SEO Brain @ www.RichardYoshimura.com
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6215702].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TheFBGuy
      Hahaha, okay people, this is getting ridiculous. Spending hours arguing and debating while the OP has packed up and left? LOL.

      You should be spending that time and energy focusing on your sites/businesses instead. But hey, what do I know, lol.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6215817].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by GyuMan82 View Post

      Of course not. You can build a TON of micro-niche sites and rank them with "Trash SEO Services" and make bank. There is more than one way to skin a cat.
      .........Different strokes for different folks.At the end of the day it is all about risk vs. reward. There is a place in the SEO world for both.
      Gyu wake up and smell the coffee. I've heard that argument for a long time but it no longer has even a small amount of traction. Why? because There are now links that can hurt your site. Most of us have laid our cards on the table so for full disclosure you sell packages with some of those weak links so you have some vested interest in their viability.

      Lets get down to the dirty facts. cheap link services are cheap because they don't require much work to place. For the most part they utilize automation software which utilizes specific kinds of links. They are not cheap because of the goodness of the seller's heart. So lets not pretend like its cheap versus expensive. Its links that software can drop fast as opposed to other links.

      the real problem is that those kinds of links are PRECISELY the kind of links Google has been gunning for and whether people want to admit or not in the last 9-10 months they've taken probably the biggest bite they ever have. So no its no longer different strokes for different folks. The "folks" over at Google now have one stroke for webmasters utilizing those kinds of links and from the crying on the forums its not a nice stroke.

      We are at the critical point where as providers we evolve or pretend that the same ole same ole works if we put some lipstick on it. From what I am seeing alot of providers made their choice and are just visiting the cosmetic counter to see what shades are available.

      P.S. the guy with the hundreds of Micro niche sites will soon be a fossil. Its a lousy business model going forward. One of the huge differences between a link seller and a SEO is that we have to make the customer aware of certain realities like that.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6216190].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author GyuMan82
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        Gyu wake up and smell the coffee. I've heard that argument for a long time but it no longer has even a small amount of traction. Why? because There are now links that can hurt your site. Most of us have laid our cards on the table so for full disclosure you sell packages with some of those weak links so you have some vested interest in their viability.

        Lets get down to the dirty facts. cheap link services are cheap because they don't require much work to place. For the most part they utilize automation software which utilizes specific kinds of links. They are not cheap because of the goodness of the seller's heart. So lets not pretend like its cheap versus expensive. Its links that software can drop fast as opposed to other links.

        the real problem is that those kinds of links are PRECISELY the kind of links Google has been gunning for and whether people want to admit or not in the last 9-10 months they've taken probably the biggest bite they ever have. So no its no longer different strokes for different folks. The "folks" over at Google now have one stroke for webmasters utilizing those kinds of links and from the crying on the forums its not a nice stroke.

        We are at the critical point where as providers we evolve or pretend that the same ole same ole works if we put some lipstick on it. From what I am seeing alot of providers made their choice and are just visiting the cosmetic counter to see what shades are available.

        P.S. the guy with the hundreds of Micro niche sites will soon be a fossil. Its a lousy business model going forward. One of the huge differences between a link seller and a SEO is that we have to make the customer aware of certain realities like that.
        Again lets agree to disagree. We will probably never agree, but I respect your opinion.

        Good day to you sir!
        Signature
        Need SEO Help? Monthly Plans From $299/mo (PM Me)
        Pickings From My SEO Brain @ www.RichardYoshimura.com
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6216463].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
          Well just went into fiverr the other day and both of my sites are now on page 1. It works better than GyuMan backlinks a I purchased a few months ago. He was a nice guy to talk to though and he did issue me a refund. So I thank him for that. I know most of the fiverr gigs are sucks, but what I did was go into the warrior for hire section and looked at the backlink packages this seo people were offering and I just copy their campaign, went into fiverr and purchased a few wiki link, social bookmarks, edu, web 2.0 and video and wholaa now my sites are on page 1. Oh yeah I also copy and pasted all of my links and pay someone on fiverr that has a linklicious account to drip feed all of my links. My site is getting higher today it was position 3 and i see some adsense clicks. Hooray, what a clever trick
          Signature

          Affiliate Links are not allowed!

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6216487].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author nik0
            Banned
            Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

            Well just went into fiverr the other day and both of my sites are now on page 1. It works better than GyuMan backlinks a I purchased a few months ago. He was a nice guy to talk to though and he did issue me a refund. So I thank him for that. I know most of the fiverr gigs are sucks, but what I did was go into the warrior for hire section and looked at the backlink packages this seo people were offering and I just copy their campaign, went into fiverr and purchased a few wiki link, social bookmarks, edu, web 2.0 and video and wholaa now my sites are on page 1. Oh yeah I also copy and pasted all of my links and pay someone on fiverr that has a linklicious account to drip feed all of my links. My site is getting higher today it was position 3 and i see some adsense clicks. Hooray, what a clever trick
            This position 3, was that for the kw you sended to me a few days ago? The 2 word one?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6216592].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author teachingking
            Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

            Well just went into fiverr the other day and both of my sites are now on page 1. It works better than GyuMan backlinks a I purchased a few months ago. He was a nice guy to talk to though and he did issue me a refund. So I thank him for that. I know most of the fiverr gigs are sucks, but what I did was go into the warrior for hire section and looked at the backlink packages this seo people were offering and I just copy their campaign, went into fiverr and purchased a few wiki link, social bookmarks, edu, web 2.0 and video and wholaa now my sites are on page 1. Oh yeah I also copy and pasted all of my links and pay someone on fiverr that has a linklicious account to drip feed all of my links. My site is getting higher today it was position 3 and i see some adsense clicks. Hooray, what a clever trick
            You mind sharing which fiverr gigs you purchased?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6218877].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
              Originally Posted by teachingking View Post

              You mind sharing which fiverr gigs you purchased?

              seosupremacy will manually Build 150 High PR Backlinks for $5wuname will add 600+ social bookmarks in 24 HOURS to your sites, up to 3 sites, and add links to Linklicious for $5

              create 850+ TR Wiki backlinks from 850 different sites ,use powerfull strategy

              create 20 dofollow profile backlinks from edu and gov domains

              Someone says they work temporarily but I will be the judge of that
              As time passes by will see if their statement is true and holds up.

              Fiverr gigs are not all bad. You just have to test and see which ones work and stick with those. Right now I am just testing. So far so good. The only seo person I would trust anyways is Matt Cutts which is one of the main Google engineers, but of course he is not thereto rank your site but to give you advice on what google is looking for and their guidelines.

              Don't be mad at me for testing, you might be right and within time I might get penalized but like I said I am just testing it out and I am choosing the gigs carefully and by rating and reviews. I am not buying 1000's of backlinks blast or pyramids. I am sticking to low counts and drip feed to leave less footprint
              Signature

              Affiliate Links are not allowed!

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219401].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author nik0
                Banned
                Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

                seosupremacy will manually Build 150 High PR Backlinks for $5wuname will add 600+ social bookmarks in 24 HOURS to your sites, up to 3 sites, and add links to Linklicious for $5

                create 850+ TR Wiki backlinks from 850 different sites ,use powerfull strategy

                create 20 dofollow profile backlinks from edu and gov domains

                Someone says they work temporarily but I will be the judge of that
                As time passes by will see if their statement is true and holds up.

                Fiverr gigs are not all bad. You just have to test and see which ones work and stick with those. Right now I am just testing. So far so good. The only seo person I would trust anyways is Matt Cutts which is one of the main Google engineers, but of course he is not thereto rank your site but to give you advice on what google is looking for and their guidelines.

                Don't be mad at me for testing, you might be right and within time I might get penalized but like I said I am just testing it out and I am choosing the gigs carefully and by rating and reviews. I am not buying 1000's of backlinks blast or pyramids. I am sticking to low counts and drip feed to leave less footprint
                Dude serious, this is definetly NOT the way to go.

                100's of this, 100's of that. Please don't use that crap on the site that you showed me in PM okay? You will be sorry, trust me!
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219650].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author nik0
                Banned
                Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

                seosupremacy will manually Build 150 High PR Backlinks for $5wuname will add 600+ social bookmarks in 24 HOURS to your sites, up to 3 sites, and add links to Linklicious for $5

                create 850+ TR Wiki backlinks from 850 different sites ,use powerfull strategy

                create 20 dofollow profile backlinks from edu and gov domains

                Someone says they work temporarily but I will be the judge of that
                As time passes by will see if their statement is true and holds up.

                Fiverr gigs are not all bad. You just have to test and see which ones work and stick with those. Right now I am just testing. So far so good. The only seo person I would trust anyways is Matt Cutts which is one of the main Google engineers, but of course he is not thereto rank your site but to give you advice on what google is looking for and their guidelines.

                Don't be mad at me for testing, you might be right and within time I might get penalized but like I said I am just testing it out and I am choosing the gigs carefully and by rating and reviews. I am not buying 1000's of backlinks blast or pyramids. I am sticking to low counts and drip feed to leave less footprint
                At least had copied it from my salesthread man, this what you've just done is exactly what everyone is referring to when it comes down to crappy links that hurt now or in the very near future.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219661].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author shanekel
    What does this mean ( A site been tanked)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6218143].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by shanekel View Post

      What does this mean ( A site been tanked)
      That means that a site lost all it's rankings.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6218267].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
        NikO no this was a test on 2 different sites I have.

        I will test the same on the site I mention to you but this one will required more as is a more competitive keyword.

        But so far so good with the fiverr gigs. I chosed them by rating and look at the reviews also.
        Signature

        Affiliate Links are not allowed!

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6218452].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author raywarrior1978
        No Nik0, this was a test I did on my other 2 sites. The fiverr gigs actually work.
        Signature

        Affiliate Links are not allowed!

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6218458].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author nik0
          Banned
          Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

          No Nik0, this was a test I did on my other 2 sites. The fiverr gigs actually work.
          Yes there are definetly good fiverr gigs, although you have to be carefull, 500 forumposts for example still work pretty well (not to confuse with forum profiles) but they are way too spammy imo to point directly at your site.

          I am now testing them to see what effect they have to use as buffer, for example:

          Tier1: web2.0
          Tier2: bookmarks
          Tier3: forumposts

          And also running a test of:

          Tier1: web2.0
          Tier2: forumposts

          Let's see what that will do!
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6218728].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by raywarrior1978 View Post

          No Nik0, this was a test I did on my other 2 sites. The fiverr gigs actually work.
          Work for what and work how? This is the huge problem with these reports and testimonials. Its highly selective. By your own admission you only did this "the other day". You have no clue whats going to happen. it might be an abysmal failure.

          So often this is like the company that paid half a million dollars for TV ads and the phones started to ring off the hooks. They are excited and say it worked and then time goes on and at 3 months they realize they never recouped the costs and the poor ad they went with actually hurt their business.

          In the serps its even worse. Sites can go up temporarily and then amonth later vanish to position 612 and now they can go to position three and you get a notice for unnatural links and never recover the site to rank higher than 100 again. Thats not my or a lot of other people's definition of "works". too many short term testimonials skew the value of these links.

          Post penguin if you are making any real money with your business and you are fooling around with trying out fiverr Gigs you are insane.

          Originally Posted by Paul Gram View Post

          Agree.

          /Thread.
          Sorry Paul. I know Mike. He was not talking about all the participants in this thread but making a general statement about those mostly outside of it.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219035].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ettienne
    Well, if not me, I'd go for Matt Laclear. He's got some haters, but the guy's certainly not stupid when it comes to SEO
    Signature
    Need SEO and Backlinks?
    Get a 30-Day FREE Trial
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219384].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mantasmo
    ^^ bro, no. Just no. I'm outta here.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219451].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author herms
    I saw this thread and I was sooooooooo looking forward to the new seo expert I was going to hire for my business.

    Sigh...
    Signature
    "Don't ban me, bro!"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6219754].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jimgk
    isn't a big difference between packages and a true full time SEO - the fact that packages typically provide links that generally are not niche related and are generally not quality - where as - a true SEO is doing the opposite for long term serp staying power?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6220308].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    ...nobody's right If everybody's wrong. :rolleyes:



    Signature
    Hi
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6220464].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    ...nobody's right If everybody's wrong.
    Signature
    Hi
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6220469].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jimgk
    it seems to me that post google's feb and april algo changes, quality backlinks are NOW needed. prior to these algo changes, big quantity of low quality BLs was able to move a kw/url up in google's serps, but those days appear to be OVER. so buying packages of BLs that are not specific to your niche and/or are from low PR pages, will likely do more harm than good.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6220798].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Zibblu
      Originally Posted by jimgk View Post

      it seems to me that post google's feb and april algo changes, quality backlinks are NOW needed. prior to these algo changes, big quantity of low quality BLs was able to move a kw/url up in google's serps, but those days appear to be OVER. so buying packages of BLs that are not specific to your niche and/or are from low PR pages, will likely do more harm than good.
      This is definitely the conclusion I'm coming to as well.

      I think at this point a lot of the SEO services out there hurt far more than they help (at least when pointed directly at your main URLs... perhaps some of them are still effective pointed at web 2.0s...)
      Signature

      Try My Diet Affiliate Program: http://www.TheDayOffDiet.com/affiliates

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6257666].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author deezn
    Lots of good information in this thread but reading Mike Anthony's post gives me a headache. Mike you sure you're not a lawyer? Politician? Lots of spinning man, and way too much negativity.

    I've tried a few services in WF and use Matt's service for over 8 websites. The one website that tanked for me, is the one I used another service for. My mistake. I definitely had some dancing.

    But even on one website, with just two pages, highly over-optimized, keyword stuffed, with just TWO anchors, yes two anchors pointing at the homepage, I've danced but haven't been de-indexed. It's been dancing before Penguin so I haven't even really noticed it. Just using their daily drip feed articles.

    Penguin should snuff that out in a heartbeat. Two articles, one keyword stuffed all over, two anchor text combinations, thousands of links.

    Nope. Still chugging. I have 3 more sites similar, but with a few more pages and not as optimized still plugging away.

    Kind of pissed that my big site however seems to be penalized. It's the one site I used someone else's service on, and it's the one that I make serious money on (I'm a professional so one lead can convert to thousands in fees or hundreds of thousands, more often just thousands though).

    So you can call me a liar, a sham, a plant, and really I just don't give a damn. I only post because man you have so much hate in your system. Get it all out brother. Kiss your wife, your girlfriend, your mom, pet your dog, something. Attack me all you want because I no have skin in this SEO game. I only do it for my business I will never sell anything here. So proceed to tear apart my credibility or reputation (I have none) it doesn't matter!

    I paid Matt $99 in the middle of last year and it's made me tens of thousands. It wasn't all them, I wrote over hundred relevant articles to the site. And I have to attract the client, convert them and do the work. This isn't passive income. But I'm pissed at myself. For not putting up 10 websites instead.

    Seriously, cheers bro. But just focus on your business and let them worry about theirs. Theirs works. I'm sure yours worked too or you wouldn't be so enthusiastic. Everyone has happy customers! Let's have a beer summit.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6221013].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by deeznuts View Post


      So you can call me a liar, a sham, a plant, and really I just don't give a damn. I only post because man you have so much hate in your system.
      LOL. He said sucking on his Mike Anthony Hate voodo doll. Bro if you don't give a damn then why get a headache reading? Anyway what you said is ridiculous. Just because I care enough about people's success (and thats what it comes down to) doesn't make you the Love guru. In fact not giving a rip is pretty much close to hating.

      You are right though I don't believe you. I'm not required to believe anything you write nor you me. If we all had a nickle for everyone that stated they made "tens of thousands" :rolleyes: using a service we'd all make well...."tens of thousands".

      In fact even from your own post you've proved my point . Your reliance on spammy link building tanked your main money maker. Think my point is limited to one service provider? Never was. Want a shocker - I've actually told Matt before that his service wasn't half bad for the money if he didn't hype it beyond what it was. Go figure. But things change , google changed and somethings that had marginal benefit now are dangerous. All that has to be done by service providers is a few changes. SO instead of crying foul realize it might help. I mean who you think first nudged Matt into acquiring High Pr domains in a fairly popular thread here on WF? Umm surprise The SEO Mikes .

      It alright man you didn't know. Send us a thank you E-card at your earliest convenience.

      So man get some excedrin chill out and frankly use your own advice. If you tell people to concentrate on their own business then its incoherent to think you can tell someone over a forum how to handle their posts.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6223881].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        You are right though I don't believe you. I'm not required to believe anything you write nor you me. If we all had a nickle for everyone that stated they made "tens of thousands" :rolleyes: using a service we'd all make well...."tens of thousands".
        Typical, you don't believe him because he's defended us. You should take a long hard look at this.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6224762].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author deezn
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post


        You are right though I don't believe you. I'm not required to believe anything you write nor you me. If we all had a nickle for everyone that stated they made "tens of thousands" :rolleyes: using a service we'd all make well...."tens of thousands".
        I know you won't believe me because it doesn't fit your narrative in this thread.

        You can't make tens of thousands I make because you didn't pay $100,000 for this professional degree. I would also make those tens of thousands through ads on craigslist, or networking, or whatever.

        I'm just trying to help you out bro. I was in another thread and was reading up, and lo and behold another hating post. By you. Seriously. Someone give this man a hug.

        Yes the spammy links from another provider is causing some of my rankings to dance. Matt's spammy links are still going strong But I have more than 125 handwritten by me articles on the site and add 2-3 a day. Visitor counts haven't been affected because frankly my customers don't shoot for the glamour keywords. Still I like them higher because they bring me different visitors.

        I've figured out the formula for my business. I don't rely just on putting up a page and then buying backlinks. That hasn't worked for my business, at least not for me. At all. I have 3 test sites, all page 1, thin sites, but they don't convert. My deep site does.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225090].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          [QUOTE=deeznuts;6225090
          You can't make tens of thousands I make because you didn't pay $100,000 for this professional degree. I would also make those tens of thousands through ads on craigslist, or networking, or whatever.

          [/QUOTE]

          You are right I did't pay $100,000 for a professional degree that has me talking about craigslist as a way to make money. I 'd ask for my money back if I did. An um you have no clue what I make, can or can't make. Thats the whole point. No one should believe an income based on it being posted on a forum. Just plain ole ordinary common sense.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225142].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author deezn
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            You are right I did't pay $100,000 for a professional degree that has me talking about craigslist as a way to make money. I 'd ask for my money back if I did. An um you have no clue what I make, can or can't make. Thats the whole point. No one should believe an income based on it being posted on a forum. Just plain ole ordinary common sense.
            Haha, you obviously have no clue what you are talking about then, which is fine I don't expect you to know the nature of my business or the many avenues to advertise.

            I never said you DIDN'T make tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands. I said you don't make the kind I make, because you have to be licensed. You can make more than me. A brand new doctor might make $50,000 a year but I'll never make that $50,000. You have to be a doctor and I'm not!

            I will never ever make $1 of what you make, because I don't sell SEO services!


            BTW, are you monitoring this thread? You responded in like a minute earlier. I can see this thread has a huge effect on your ego/emotional state. :p
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225179].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by deeznuts View Post

      I paid Matt $99 in the middle of last year and it's made me tens of thousands. It wasn't all them, I wrote over hundred relevant articles to the site. And I have to attract the client, convert them and do the work. This isn't passive income. But I'm pissed at myself. For not putting up 10 websites instead.
      I share your love for Matt and for many other who offer the same type of links as they open the eye's from the clients which then end up with me. Actually they just teach people what doesn't work. I mean, experience is the best teacher isn't it?


      And yes I admit, I also used to sell crappy links but it's never to late to change.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6224106].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
        Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

        I share your love for Matt and for many other who offer the same type of links as they open the eye's from the clients which then end up with me. Actually they just teach people what doesn't work. I mean, experience is the best teacher isn't it?


        And yes I admit, I also used to sell crappy links but it's never to late to change.
        The one guy in here actively trying to sell his services and Michael gets on me about being in "sales mode".

        Our "crappy links" are still getting results, friend. But things have changed and everybody needs to be smarter about SEO. We've already made changes to our page one service and have 100+ page ones post penguin. We made these changes before penguin, by the way. We're not standing pat.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6224816].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author nik0
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

          The one guy in here actively trying to sell his services and Michael gets on me about being in "sales mode".
          Hahaha, I am a salesman, you can't blame me
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225627].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
          Originally Posted by Marc_L View Post

          and have 100+ page ones post penguin
          I have one client that used this service before working with me. Since Penguin, his site had 100+ keywords that were mostly ranking on pages 1-3 all drop to page 20 and beyond. So I guess you broke even since Penguin. :rolleyes:

          No, I will not reveal the client, nor do I want him to make himself known. The last thing I want is you trying to remedy this cluster ****.

          There's my testimonial.
          Signature
          SEO, AdWords Management, Social Media Marketing, and more.
          Get a FREE Quote.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6243490].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author nik0
            Banned
            Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

            I have one client that used this service before working with me. Since Penguin, his site had 100+ keywords that were mostly ranking on pages 1-3 all drop to page 20 and beyond. So I guess you broke even since Penguin. :rolleyes:

            No, I will not reveal the client, nor do I want him to make himself known. The last thing I want is you trying to remedy this cluster ****.

            There's my testimonial.
            That broke even sure gave me a good laugh
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6243567].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author retsek
            Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

            I have one client that used this service before working with me. Since Penguin, his site had 100+ keywords that were mostly ranking on pages 1-3 all drop to page 20 and beyond. So I guess you broke even since Penguin. :rolleyes:

            No, I will not reveal the client, nor do I want him to make himself known. The last thing I want is you trying to remedy this cluster ****.

            There's my testimonial.
            Just wondering

            ...how do you recover a site that used their service ..whether it was affected by a unnatural links notice or penguin ?

            Since they obviously refuse to remove links, that pretty much leaves you with the only option of abandoning the domain name and moving the content without a 301 ?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6243568].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author nik0
              Banned
              Originally Posted by retsek View Post

              Just wondering

              ...how do you recover a site that used their service ..whether it was affected by a unnatural links notice or penguin ?

              Since they obviously refuse to remove links, that pretty much leaves you with the only option of abandoning the domain name and moving the content without a 301 ?
              I heard double 301's worked well but many clients don't want to abandon their site, especially offline clients where their clients know to find them by that domainname.

              So yeah, would be very interesting to hear how to recover a site, the tests I did with adding real strong links the page only drop furthered and by renaming the url and building new links it ranked back in no time. To bad can't rename the homepage.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6243633].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
              Originally Posted by retsek View Post

              Just wondering

              ...how do you recover a site that used their service ..whether it was affected by a unnatural links notice or penguin ?

              Since they obviously refuse to remove links, that pretty much leaves you with the only option of abandoning the domain name and moving the content without a 301 ?
              Here's the thing. Nobody knows. Anyone that says they know how to recover a site hit by Penguin is full of ****. There are theories and many have beliefs how to do it, but it is too new to be certain about anything.

              Also, most indications are that Penguin is similar to Panda in that it is not updated in real time. Sites get evaluated by the Panda update, but it doesn't improve or diminish their rankings until the next Panda refresh. Penguin is believed to be similar. So until Google flips its little switch and runs its next Penguin refresh, we won't know what actions can or cannot bring a site back.
              Signature
              SEO, AdWords Management, Social Media Marketing, and more.
              Get a FREE Quote.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6243709].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

                Here's the thing. Nobody knows. Anyone that says they know how to recover a site hit by Penguin is full of ****. There are theories and many have beliefs how to do it, but it is too new to be certain about anything.
                Well we know one thing though - doing the same ole same ole won't work and yet its stunning but from what I see sellers expect to do just that. I actually saw a very popular lady last night claiming that her forum profile links were not only effective but I tell no lie - her words - "perfectly safe". Saw another seller claim his service was penguin safe and it included a 1,000 BMR BLAST
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6243788].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author nik0
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  Well we know one thing though - doing the same ole same ole won't work and yet its stunning but from what I see sellers expect to do just that. I actually saw a very popular lady last night claiming that her forum profile links were not only effective but I tell no lie - her words - "perfectly safe". Saw another seller claim his service was penguin safe and it included a 1,000 BMR BLAST
                  Wow that is absolutely stunning, when one would think there is nothing worse then Matt's / Marc's services then there is even worse :p
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6243990].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                    Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                    Wow that is absolutely stunning, when you think there is nothing worse then Matt's / Marc's services then there is even worse :p
                    actually probably to a lot of people's shock - no I don't think that their service is the worse out there. Lets not target one service above all others. Lots of people, services and techniques have been hit pretty hard over the last year.
                    Signature

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6244683].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author nik0
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                      actually probably to a lot of people's shock - no I don't think that their service is the worse out there. Lets not target one service above all others. Lots of people, services and techniques have been hit pretty hard over the last year.
                      I didn't mean that you would think that specifically, just more in a general meaning and obvious just teasing hence the ton of smiley's. Yeah at least about all of the providers at this forum have been hit hard, me included. I would be the last one to deny it. It sucks but we just continue in a more legitimate way. Although some are really ununderstandable.

                      These 2 examples that you showed, are these still showing at the first pages (as in still active) or is the 1000 BMR post one digged up from far behind?


                      EDIT: Changed it from "you think" to "one would think" as that is what I actually meant to say.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6245053].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
              Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

              I have one client that used this service before working with me.
              I have several refugees and like i said all you have to do is SEARCH. They pretty much come to me because they can't be bothered anymore. They know if they do it themselves its guaranteed to run the way they want it.

              Originally Posted by retsek View Post

              Since they obviously refuse to remove links, that pretty much leaves you with the only option of abandoning the domain name and moving the content without a 301 ?
              Pretty much and I would be sympathetic with them IF they had not said they run their own network. IF you don't then perhaps you can't remove the links but its really weak and horrible customer service to refuse to remove links from your own network if theres even the slight possibility they are bringing down any customer's sites.

              I know Marc will respond (with some more spin dancing) but you guys don't have to worry about anymore back and forth. True to my word I put him on ignore when he tried to run away from the conclusions given by the very link he and Bam referenced. At that point even I could see the futility of the dialogue.
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6243734].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kickmoney
    LOOOOOL.

    When I saw this thread go up fresh I knew it would become a 20 page measuring contest.

    All the "big WSO'ers"

    Mike Anthony putting up his walls of text etc...

    Props to OP who is probably a pro-troll
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225067].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jeff Lenney
    Banned
    Matt laclear. I use his services constantly. spent Over $2500 so far and well worth it. I've got one seo client paying me $650 a month. So far month 2 and they're in page 3 using nothing but my own on page seo and Matt's link network. Total cost to me so far $75 total gained picking up Check 3 today. Do the math
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225133].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by eljeffe77 View Post

      I've got one seo client paying me $650 a month. So far month 2 and they're in page 3 using nothing but my own in page seo and Matt's link network. Total cost to me so far $75 total gained picking up Check 3 today. Do the math

      Did it. Thanks. Exactly my point about testimonials. Page 3 is stellar :rolleyes:. Rock on. I'm sure your customer would love the work you are putting into it though.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225169].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Jeff Lenney
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

        Did it. Thanks. Exactly my point about testimonials. Page 3 is stellar :rolleyes:. Rock on. I'm sure your customer would love the work you are putting into it though.
        Page 3 for a new site after 2.1/2 months, I'm not complaining, it's a medium competitive phrase I'm going after. For what it's worth I used him before and got a clients site to pAge 1 after 2 months for an equally competitive phrases. I've put over $2500 of my own cash Ito his services, mostly for my own sites but some clients sites too. Overall great results

        Edit: sorry for any typos above, wrote that on my iPad 2. Just wanted to say, I've paid outsources in Asia or India $300 a month for the same amount of time (2-3 months)- I'm much more inclined to pay $75 or $100 one time for Matt's services.

        And as for the work I put into it - how much of your own SEO do you do? Do you build every single link yourself? If not, do you outsource? I'm sure your clients love the work you put into it....:rolleyes:

        Seriously man, quit drinking the haterade - just because somebody charges a low price does not mean it's a poor quality service. I just ordered 3 months last night for a friends site for $75, I'm going to order another 3 month package later today for another site. You should really try his service before you knock it. If you need a hug or anything, let me know...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225190].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by eljeffe77 View Post

          Page 3 for a new site after 2.1/2 months, I'm not complaining, it's a medium competitive phrase I'm going after. For what it's worth I used him before and got a clients site to pAge 1 after 2 months for an equally competitive phrases. I've put over $2500 of my own cash Ito his services, mostly for my own sites but some clients sites too. Overall great results
          Past performance is not even really the point being discussed in this thread. The penguin update is about two weeks old. Game has changed significantly for those of us that follow SEO and things that worked before don't work now long term and/or put your clients in jeopardy down the line. You should know that if you are charging clients $650 a month.

          Forget Matt's service entirely. Anyone charging their clients good money a month and putting all their links in any one network like you just claimed you do is a pretty poor SEO. You just have to look at the deindexings before panda to know that you should not put a clients business at risk utilizing one service.

          Page 3 means nothing to me and as a matter of fact for most SEOs page one is nothing either. With real companies top three is the aim. Keep picking up checks and not doing your due diligence. If you are catering to real businesses you won't be picking them up for long.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225289].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Jeff Lenney
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            Past performance is not even really the point being discussed in this thread. The penguin update is about two weeks old. Game has changed significantly for those of us that follow SEO and things that worked before don't work now long term and/or put your clients in jeopardy down the line. You should know that if you are charging clients $650 a month.

            Forget Matt's service entirely. Anyone charging their clients good money a month and putting all their links in any one network like you just claimed you do is a pretty poor SEO. You just have to look at the deindexings before panda to know that you should not put a clients business at risk utilizing one service.

            Page 3 means nothing to me and as a matter of fact for most SEOs page one is nothing either. With real companies top three is the aim. Keep picking up checks and not doing your due diligence. If you are catering to real businesses you won't be picking them up for long.
            I forgot to mention, before penguin the main phrase was on page 4, the 2ndary on page 5 - now they're both at the to of page 3 (24 & 25)

            The links are being more diversified now - they're being put onto blogs within specific categories - ie: I'm not having an article talking about Quitting Smoking, and then a link for "Los Angeles Plastic Surgery" (for example)

            Why don't you share what you're using? You mentioned backlinktopia before - how are the results of that? Have you tried commission autopilot which is fairly similar?

            How about outsourcing, what are you having your outsourcers do.

            BTW - I'll notify you when the site reaches page 1 - it's up 2 & 3 pages SINCE penguin so far
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225320].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Marc_L
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            Past performance is not even really the point being discussed in this thread. The penguin update is about two weeks old. Game has changed significantly for those of us that follow SEO and things that worked before don't work now long term and/or put your clients in jeopardy down the line. You should know that if you are charging clients $650 a month.
            100+ page one's since 4/24
            Forget Matt's service entirely. Anyone charging their clients good money a month and putting all their links in any one network like you just claimed you do is a pretty poor SEO. You just have to look at the deindexings before panda to know that you should not put a clients business at risk utilizing one service.
            Thank goodness that none of our clients rely on "any one network".
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225458].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by eljeffe77 View Post


          And as for the work I put into it - how much of your own SEO do you do? Do you build every single link yourself? If not, do you outsource? I'm sure your clients love the work you put into it....:rolleyes:
          Well seeing as how I build my own truly private networks, do link exchanges, use a variety of techniques as a matter of fact - Yes. I do build most of my own links. LOL I am always amazed by how many people who claim to be SEOs really have no idea how it is done outside of blasting and hiring some VA "outsourcer" in India.

          If you need a hug or anything, let me know...
          no shortage of hugs on this side bro. thanks for the offer but um no thanks. If I did roll that way you still wouldn't be my type.

          Why don't you share what you're using? You mentioned backlinktopia before - how are the results of that? Have you tried commission autopilot which is fairly similar?
          ROFL. Seriously were you just sent to this thread by someone ? Cause you certainly didn't even bother to read anything in it. I never mentioned anywhere using baklinktopia . You clearly believe in one spammy link service after the next and have no clue what is going on. You could reach postion one using spammy links and still totally destroy the business of people you are taking money from.

          I mean I welcome your participation though because the more you post the more people can see what I am talking about how easy it is to get testimonials from people who don't really know a lick of SEO.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225390].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Jeff Lenney
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            Well seeing as how I build my own truly private networks, do link exchanges, use a variety of techniques as a matter of fact - Yes. I do build most of my own links. LOL I am always amazed by how many people who claim to be SEOs really have no idea how it is done outside of blasting and hiring some VA "outsourcer" in India.
            So a private link network, similar to the one Matt LaClear offers? Surely you must know the power of said networks then...

            no shortage of hugs on this side bro. thanks for the offer but um no thanks. If I did roll that way you still wouldn't be my type.
            I'm not your bro, bro. (Sorry, zoolander quote)


            ROFL. Seriously were you just sent to this thread by someone ? Cause you certainly didn't even bother to read anything in it. I never mentioned anywhere using baklinktopia . You clearly believe in one spammy link service after the next and have no clue what is going on. You could reach postion one using spammy links and still totally destroy the business of people you are taking money from.
            I suppose I should have read the entire thread first - I saw somebody posted saying they used backlinktopia, confused their post with yours - my bad.

            I mean I welcome your participation though because the more you post the more people can see what I am talking about how easy it is to get testimonials from people who don't really know a lick of SEO.
            Oh of course, I use somebody else's private link network & give it praise - therefore I don't know a lick of SEO - smart conclusion.

            For what it's worth, I used to do 100% of my own stuff before I started making money with my sites - I also work a day job at one of the top 3 seo companies in the USA (because I enjoy it, not so much because I have to anymore). While the methods they use there are different than what I do personally...I'm helping them build their own private blog network now, and i'd like to think that I know just a LITTLE bit about SEO myself.

            I know that in itself doesn't qualify me in your eyes as I clearly know nothing about SEO. How stupid can I be, I would rather pay others to do the grunt work for me... omg!

            Results are Results. Do I achieve them? Yes, can I achieve them on my own still without outsourcing? Absolutely.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6225523].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author nik0
              Banned
              Originally Posted by eljeffe77