web 2.0s as buffer sites - Opinions?

50 replies
  • SEO
  • |
Hey guys,

I want to know your opinions on a few things. Before I ask my questions, I will explain a little bit about the 2.0s and the strategy I would like to employ.

I have about 25 keywords for a niche. For those 25 keywords I have created a corresponding article that is optimized for each specific keyword. All content is unique and not spun. I have also created a specific inner page on my money site for each article that is targeting a keyword.

Here is my plan...

Create 5-10 web 2.0s and have them point to 1 article inner page on money site. Drip feed (14 days) those 5-10 2.0s with about 50-100 high PR contexual links each. Then juice those contexual links with low quality stuff. Rinse and repeat for all 25 keywords.

The web 2.0s would all be created (hand made) on high PR platforms (wp, blogspot, blah blah). They would all include 2-5 UNIQUE (not spun) articles relating to my keyword/niche including images and videos. All will be set up with different emails and all the other crap so we don't leave a footprint.

Finally, my questions:

1) In your opinion will google think all my web 2.0s (25 keywords x 5 each = 125 web 2.0s) are spammy...Even if I have unique and genuine content on each one?

2) Do you think creating authority 2.0s (with 2-5 articles + videos) with real genuine content that readers will enjoy will be better than a simple 1 article 2.0s??

Thanks for you time. I appreciate any responses.
#20s #buffer #opinions #sites #web
  • Profile picture of the author RyanLB
    1. I don't think so. You seem to have taken the precaution of drip feeding, and if the web 2.0s are sporting some original content it provides actual value, right? As long as you are providing value I wouldn't worry too much.

    2. It depends on your budget, but it will certainly make them look a little less spammy. For my clients that are very particular about not seeming spammy I've built out web 2.0s with dozens of articles and seen some pretty decent succcess. Plus, the web 2.0s tend to stick around for a lot longer with more articles as well.
    Signature

    I'm a Freelance Copywriter that helps Agencies, Startups and Businesses Educate Their Audience and Grow Sales
    Skype Me: r.boze
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8847266].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
    What do you mean the web 2.0s tend to stick around longer? They get deleted?

    Ryan, also..do you think it's worth stocking these sites with unique content or just spinning the articles?

    I know it costs more to get unique stuff..but I feel for long term rankings unique is better.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8847697].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author RyanLB
      Originally Posted by Dirty380s View Post

      What do you mean the web 2.0s tend to stick around longer? They get deleted?

      Ryan, also..do you think it's worth stocking these sites with unique content or just spinning the articles?

      I know it costs more to get unique stuff..but I feel for long term rankings unique is better.
      I would say it depends. As a disclaimer, I'll just say that I've completely given up on spun content and automated links and focus on building links that come from websites/properties that actually provide some value. That was a choice I made after getting slapped around pretty good these last few updates.

      That doesn't mean that spun links aren't going to give you some sort of benefits but that was just a choice I made to mitigate risk. Personally for long term success I would stick with unique stuff, but if your looking for bang for your buck and know what you are doing you could go spun.
      Signature

      I'm a Freelance Copywriter that helps Agencies, Startups and Businesses Educate Their Audience and Grow Sales
      Skype Me: r.boze
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8850059].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
    Anyone else have some opinions?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8847699].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author larryboy03
      Originally Posted by Dirty380s View Post

      Anyone else have some opinions?
      Create content which attracts links, solves the entire problem.....
      Signature
      Do you have a website making money and want to sell it? Contact me, I'm looking to buy sites monetized by Amazon and Adsense!!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8871546].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author BillAngelos
        Most people don't seem to want to get that involved with things.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8872000].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author danparks
    Originally Posted by Dirty380s View Post

    Create 5-10 web 2.0s and have them point to 1 article inner page on money site. Drip feed (14 days) those 5-10 2.0s with about 50-100 high PR contexual links each. Then juice those contexual links with low quality stuff. Rinse and repeat for all 25 keywords.
    If you can get so many high PR contextual links (you say 50-100 for each web 2.0), why not just point all those links directly to your articles?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8847823].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by danparks View Post

      If you can get so many high PR contextual links (you say 50-100 for each web 2.0), why not just point all those links directly to your articles?
      Most probably some mass blog network like ALN/FBL where you can get 100 high PR contextual posts for 10 bucks or something. You don't want to spam your money site with that.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8848068].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
    Anybody can find reasonable links from fiverr like the ones I mentioned..but I want to be able to remove links if for some reason I don't want them or the algo changes etc. Have you ever tried to manually remove 2000 bot generated links? Not gonna happen. This way I can just remove my links from the web 2.0 sites. What I am trying to say is I have more control over my link profile having buffer sites like this.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8847832].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Dirty380s View Post

      Anybody can find reasonable links from fiverr like the ones I mentioned..but I want to be able to remove links if for some reason I don't want them or the algo changes etc.
      I get what your saying but step back for a min. & look at the big picture. Why would your links ever be a problem in the future? Are they links from random sites that have nothing to do with your money page/niche? If so, there's the problem waiting to happen.
      Signature
      Hi
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8850202].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
    When I say high PR, I don't mean amazing PR 7,8,9 sites..those are costly and impossible to get in mass quantities unless you own some network.

    I meant PR 2,3,4 sites.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8847836].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author rschmitz
      Your doing exactly what your suppose to be doing. Web 2.0s can be deleted, even some good ones, it happens. The more built out your web 2.0 is though, the more natural it will look and the less likely it is to be deleted. I would say 15+ if you want to be 100% certain, however 5 is usually good enough as long as you make it look natural.

      Make sure that you mix in some other links to your money site though. Relevant blog comments, doc submissions, and high PR bookmarks, and you are set.

      My personal method, is that I will make 10 web 2.0's from my preferred sites, and post twice a day to each for a week, so 14 articles in total to each site. I will begin building links exactly how you built them, over two weeks. One week after the blog is finished I go back an insert my contextual links to my site.

      A few pro tips
      1. Make sure that you your web 2's are linked out to authority sites. You will lose page juice but you will gain authority and relevance. This also is a must for making your site look natural.
      2. Point high PR bookmarks to your web 2's. Helps to get them indexed faster and it will make your links stronger(social signals). 50-100 is very conservative. I suppose its safer, but from testing I've found that you can usually go as high as 300 and still have a nice little buffer. Weebly you can blast to hell.
      3. Social signals are optional, but they help a lot and add to making your sites look natural. I'm talking teens, not hundreds.

      The future is owning your own sites, building out your own private blog network. Look into it, but this is perfectly fine for now, especially if you are just starting out and have a small budget.
      Good Luck
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8847908].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author BillAngelos
        Originally Posted by rschmitz View Post

        Your doing exactly what your suppose to be doing. Web 2.0s can be deleted, even some good ones, it happens. The more built out your web 2.0 is though, the more natural it will look and the less likely it is to be deleted. I would say 15+ if you want to be 100% certain, however 5 is usually good enough as long as you make it look natural.

        Make sure that you mix in some other links to your money site though. Relevant blog comments, doc submissions, and high PR bookmarks, and you are set.

        My personal method, is that I will make 10 web 2.0's from my preferred sites, and post twice a day to each for a week, so 14 articles in total to each site. I will begin building links exactly how you built them, over two weeks. One week after the blog is finished I go back an insert my contextual links to my site.

        A few pro tips
        1. Make sure that you your web 2's are linked out to authority sites. You will lose page juice but you will gain authority and relevance. This also is a must for making your site look natural.
        2. Point high PR bookmarks to your web 2's. Helps to get them indexed faster and it will make your links stronger(social signals). 50-100 is very conservative. I suppose its safer, but from testing I've found that you can usually go as high as 300 and still have a nice little buffer. Weebly you can blast to hell.
        3. Social signals are optional, but they help a lot and add to making your sites look natural. I'm talking teens, not hundreds.

        The future is owning your own sites, building out your own private blog network. Look into it, but this is perfectly fine for now, especially if you are just starting out and have a small budget.
        Good Luck
        Rschmitz makes some good points, but something I have not seen really touched upon is that what these 2.0 sites are really good for is diluting your anchor text so that you do not over optimize. I put together a video not that long ago to show people how you can run a 2.0 network without killing your money sites, or your tier 1 domains (pr sites): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKsthoGEpCo I would also say do not just go with weebly. When you use a tool like FCS you can make a lot of 2.0's quick and easily, and as long as you log into them once and a while the ones that make it past the first week without being deleted tend to stick around for months if you take care of them.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8871540].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
    Ok, thank you for the tips.

    15 unique article is expensive!

    Do you think if I have 2-3 web 2.0s pointing to each of my 25 keywords that would be enough with good contexual stuff and juicing them on tier 3??

    I am trying not to spend too much..
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8848056].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
    Yes, I understand that. Did you read the post?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8849849].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Make Money Ninja
    Hey,

    I know this will go against the grain now, but this stuff worked superb 1-2 years ago. I was the biggest proponent of tiered link building when it was working really good. Now on the other hand, i don't think its the most effective method to generate traffic, and for the most part, results just dont come or they don't last.

    The reason behind this is Google can now detect which sites are self post sites. For example, forums, web 2.0, wikis, article directories, link directories, social bookmarks etc.

    If you go over a certain theshold you will get penalized. Even if you think you are doing it smart.

    Instead go for creating your own private blog network and start your own niche site empire. I currently make $10k+ month doing that. I have given up 100% on link building tools completely. I just build sites, buy domains, and sometimes buy the odd premium niche relevant link.

    The days of mass spam links are becoming doomed. Get ahread of the competition now and ditch it, and move towards something more long term and sustainaible. Personally, i love googles latest changes because its start to reward putting some serious effort in to your sites. Which is always a good thing imo. 2 cents.
    Signature

    The Ultimate Guide To Link Building

    Get More Links - Generate More Traffic - Make More Money!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8850230].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Steve Waller
      Originally Posted by Make Money Ninja View Post

      Hey,

      I know this will go against the grain now, but this stuff worked superb 1-2 years ago. I was the biggest proponent of tiered link building when it was working really good. Now on the other hand, i don't think its the most effective method to generate traffic, and for the most part, results just dont come or they don't last.

      The reason behind this is Google can now detect which sites are self post sites. For example, forums, web 2.0, wikis, article directories, link directories, social bookmarks etc.

      If you go over a certain theshold you will get penalized. Even if you think you are doing it smart.

      Instead go for creating your own private blog network and start your own niche site empire. I currently make $10k+ month doing that. I have given up 100% on link building tools completely. I just build sites, buy domains, and sometimes buy the odd premium niche relevant link.

      The days of mass spam links are becoming doomed. Get ahread of the competition now and ditch it, and move towards something more long term and sustainaible. Personally, i love googles latest changes because its start to reward putting some serious effort in to your sites. Which is always a good thing imo. 2 cents.
      I'm partly with this guy - building your own network of private blogs hosted on old expired domains with decent quality links will serve you a lot better.

      On the other hand, and this is mainly theory and conjecture, you need a variety of different links sources so I would let my blog network do the grunt work in getting my site to a certain stage and then tactically drip things such as infographic links, press releases, web 2.0s and even blog comments to it. This will help you with IP diversity without the need to buy even more domains and hosting.
      Signature


      Crawl Your Way To Cheaper Expired Domains - PM Me To Access My Personal Crawler/Scraper


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8852485].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
        Originally Posted by Steve Waller View Post

        I'm partly with this guy - building your own network of private blogs hosted on old expired domains with decent quality links will serve you a lot better.

        On the other hand, and this is mainly theory and conjecture, you need a variety of different links sources so I would let my blog network do the grunt work in getting my site to a certain stage and then tactically drip things such as infographic links, press releases, web 2.0s and even blog comments to it. This will help you with IP diversity without the need to buy even more domains and hosting.

        When you say "drip to it" do you mean the network or your money site?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8852723].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Steve Waller
          Originally Posted by Dirty380s View Post

          When you say "drip to it" do you mean the network or your money site?
          I meant to my money site...I wouldn't waste too much money linking to my network sites since they already have quality backlinks.
          Signature


          Crawl Your Way To Cheaper Expired Domains - PM Me To Access My Personal Crawler/Scraper


          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8855538].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jinx1221
      Originally Posted by Make Money Ninja View Post

      The reason behind this is Google can now detect which sites are self post sites. For example, forums, web 2.0, wikis, article directories, link directories, social bookmarks etc.
      I agree but also must argue that eventually, you will need these types of links. No, not by the thousands, but all the types of self post links are forms of social signals. You do need those.

      Reality check.. what website in the world that is at the top spots has only guest posts pointed at it? Or put another way, in the form of private network links, what website only has "other" websites linking to it, and nothing else.. no social signals, no forums, no web20's, nothing, just a few high pr sites linking to it and nothing else.. and you're at the top.. does that not smell fishy?

      Ok here it comes, I can hear it now.. "All I have is high pr links from my private network sites linking to my site, and I am at #1".. Ok, hmm. That's nice and all.. until google sees that that's all you have. No website in the world has only other high pr "websites" pointed at it.

      Bookmarks, web20s, forums, blog comments, all these "self post" sites are relevant votes that are not discounted, and will never be. Now, I'm not talking about setting them up by the thousand like some software can, of course that's gonna get you in heap big trouble. But in reality, a website needs several types of links, especially including the social ones described here.

      Hell, I still see hubpages on the front page for lots of search terms. And they are standing on the front page on their own. Why? It's a social site. Isn't google repeating over and over they are looking more into social signals rather than pure pr? So again, set these up man, just don't blast them with software. Keep it natural. Also look into the natural social aspect of it.. traffic will find these, set up targeting long tail keywords, pointed at your site, and traffic will find your site. You don't need a lot of them. PR "link juice" is not the main point here. It's diversity, promotion and ultimately, natural traffic. No diversity and some day, maybe not today, but eventually, this little ship you are building might just sink.
      Signature

      The Ultimate Private Network Management,
      Visualization and Automation Tool




      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8853172].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
        Originally Posted by jinx1221 View Post

        I agree but also must argue that eventually, you will need these types of links. No, not by the thousands, but all the types of self post links are forms of social signals. You do need those.

        Reality check.. what website in the world that is at the top spots has only guest posts pointed at it? Or put another way, in the form of private network links, what website only has "other" websites linking to it, and nothing else.. no social signals, no forums, no web20's, nothing, just a few high pr sites linking to it and nothing else.. and you're at the top.. does that not smell fishy?

        Ok here it comes, I can hear it now.. "All I have is high pr links from my private network sites linking to my site, and I am at #1".. Ok, hmm. That's nice and all.. until google sees that that's all you have. No website in the world has only other high pr "websites" pointed at it.

        Bookmarks, web20s, forums, blog comments, all these "self post" sites are relevant votes that are not discounted, and will never be. Now, I'm not talking about setting them up by the thousand like some software can, of course that's gonna get you in heap big trouble. But in reality, a website needs several types of links, especially including the social ones described here.

        Hell, I still see hubpages on the front page for lots of search terms. And they are standing on the front page on their own. Why? It's a social site. Isn't google repeating over and over they are looking more into social signals rather than pure pr? So again, set these up man, just don't blast them with software. Keep it natural. Also look into the natural social aspect of it.. traffic will find these, set up targeting long tail keywords, pointed at your site, and traffic will find your site. You don't need a lot of them. PR "link juice" is not the main point here. It's diversity, promotion and ultimately, natural traffic. No diversity and some day, maybe not today, but eventually, this little ship you are building might just sink.
        Jinx I prefer to rank the site first and let the "real" natural social signals and link diversity come through the traffic I'm getting. Nothing more natural then natural eh?

        Anyway it works for me, and has done for many years. And we are not here to debate my method. We are advising the OP on a better method then the one hes planning
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8853213].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author jinx1221
          Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

          Anyway it works for me, and has done for many years. And we are not here to debate my method. We are advising the OP on a better method then the one hes planning
          I was in reply to make money ninja, not you man :p But yeah you obviously got the right idea, I'm just emphasizing that "self host" sites are not discounted and are equally as important. If you can get traffic from your high pr networks to naturally link to your site through social means, that is 100% the goal. But see, how is all this natural traffic gonna link to you, if they aren't webmasters themselves? Umm.. "self host" sites
          Signature

          The Ultimate Private Network Management,
          Visualization and Automation Tool




          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8853242].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
            Originally Posted by jinx1221 View Post

            I was in reply to make money ninja, not you man :p But yeah you obviously got the right idea, I'm just emphasizing that "self host" sites are not discounted and are equally as important. If you can get traffic from your high pr networks to naturally link to your site through social means, that is 100% the goal. But see, how is all this natural traffic gonna link to you, if they aren't webmasters themselves? Umm.. "self host" sites
            I work in Pharma, so the whole social thing is kind of useless to my clients. Joe Blow never takes the time to retweet to his mates when hes just restocked on pills.

            My own pharma site does have the usual social pages plugged in, but it's tumbleweed on those pages and really just for the sake of having some pretty looking share buttons on my site That's about all I will ever get out of social signals.

            Point is though, there's tonnes of markets out there where social has never and never will play any part of an SEO strategy. It's "self hosted" blog networks and paid links all the way.

            My article directory, web2 and all those other free to get link types would be a complete waste of time for me. As they would most likely get deleted by the site owners as? Pharma spam.. Regardless of the quality of article :p
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8853417].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author pizzacashmon3y
      Originally Posted by Make Money Ninja View Post

      Hey,

      I know this will go against the grain now, but this stuff worked superb 1-2 years ago. I was the biggest proponent of tiered link building when it was working really good. Now on the other hand, i don't think its the most effective method to generate traffic, and for the most part, results just dont come or they don't last.

      The reason behind this is Google can now detect which sites are self post sites. For example, forums, web 2.0, wikis, article directories, link directories, social bookmarks etc.

      If you go over a certain theshold you will get penalized. Even if you think you are doing it smart.

      Instead go for creating your own private blog network and start your own niche site empire. I currently make $10k+ month doing that. I have given up 100% on link building tools completely. I just build sites, buy domains, and sometimes buy the odd premium niche relevant link.

      The days of mass spam links are becoming doomed. Get ahread of the competition now and ditch it, and move towards something more long term and sustainaible. Personally, i love googles latest changes because its start to reward putting some serious effort in to your sites. Which is always a good thing imo. 2 cents.
      this guy is correct. +1 for a superb post :]
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8853782].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
    Originally Posted by Dirty380s View Post

    Hey guys,

    I want to know your opinions on a few things. Before I ask my questions, I will explain a little bit about the 2.0s and the strategy I would like to employ.

    I have about 25 keywords for a niche. For those 25 keywords I have created a corresponding article that is optimized for each specific keyword. All content is unique and not spun. I have also created a specific inner page on my money site for each article that is targeting a keyword.

    Here is my plan...

    Create 5-10 web 2.0s and have them point to 1 article inner page on money site. Drip feed (14 days) those 5-10 2.0s with about 50-100 high PR contexual links each. Then juice those contexual links with low quality stuff. Rinse and repeat for all 25 keywords.

    The web 2.0s would all be created (hand made) on high PR platforms (wp, blogspot, blah blah). They would all include 2-5 UNIQUE (not spun) articles relating to my keyword/niche including images and videos. All will be set up with different emails and all the other crap so we don't leave a footprint.

    Finally, my questions:

    1) In your opinion will google think all my web 2.0s (25 keywords x 5 each = 125 web 2.0s) are spammy...Even if I have unique and genuine content on each one?

    2) Do you think creating authority 2.0s (with 2-5 articles + videos) with real genuine content that readers will enjoy will be better than a simple 1 article 2.0s??

    Thanks for you time. I appreciate any responses.
    See, your missing the wood's for the tree's a little in your plan.

    Why don't you drop the Web2.0 blog idea and try

    Buy 125 expired domains with existing authority, that are or can be made into niche relevant sites.
    Put your niche articles and "real looking" layouts on those, and Bobs your Uncle.

    But that's going to take forever and cost a tonne?

    Not really, something like 500k domains expire everyday so there's plenty of sites out there that would fit the bill. Stay away from auctions hyped with PR chasers and stick to drops that you can reg for $10-$70.

    The money you would spend on buying domains, hosting, etc..is going to be spent 10 times over anyway, as those High PR contextuals are going to cost you a lot in monthly fees x 125. Not to mention when they get whacked as Public Blog Networks so often do, you will be probably starting over again on a 6 month cycle.

    You can also push the boat out a little as you progress, and turn those 125 self "owned" and hosted sites into direct traffic or sales funnels for your main site. You can use their existing authority to optimize and rank for low competition keywords within your niche. Dominating SE's with multiple properties and SERP's all feeding your main site and your pocket at the same time.

    I personally don't buy stuff from web2.0s, do you? I don't really click on them in search result either. But maybe thats coz I'm SEO minded.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8853089].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jinx1221
    Aha.. so it's your site I landed on when I bought my last package of Cialis.. er, ah I mean.. Benadryl.. yeah, that's it.
    Signature

    The Ultimate Private Network Management,
    Visualization and Automation Tool




    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8853545].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Make Money Ninja
    I dont really know how to respond to that. I have a site pushing 1000 pages of high quality content, very few links, MOST of which i own and control and are apart of my network. Most of those links I own are formatted like proper sites, and look less like a blog network. At least 25% of the links that link to me, get alright traffic and rank for certain terms.

    The amount of money im making, makes it ******* stupid to jeopardize it by pointing any form of risky links at my site. If anything goes kaput now, i am in control. I can remove links, change anchor text etc. FYI - i dont use ANY keywords in my linking now, and guess what im crushing it. Crazy that!

    The only way i endorse using buffer sites and tiers, are to rank sites that link to your site. If they get penalized, big deal. But no way am i going to risk a site that i've invested $20k+ in quality content on. Every now and then ill buy some services from forums to point at my sites that link to my money site (buffer) and for the most part, the services work okay for a little while, but i find very few that stick long term.

    I just dont want any newbie to think hes doing the right thing, pouring his heart and soul in to a site, then getting a lot of article directory, web 2.0, social bookmarks, link directory, blog comments to their site. Then seeing his site get penalized by penguin when the next one rolls out.

    Honestly, i know this sounds like im kissing up to Cutts or just endorsing white hat SEO. But honestly, if you are a talented content producer, invest a bit in a brand. If you get your ass in to gear and start churning out quality content, whilst at the same time being smart with KW research and finding a few niche loopholes. You will realise its very possible to make a lot of money with SEO without going crazy with the links.

    And from what i can tell, this is a very stable way to make money, assuming you dont take short cuts and make by far the best site in your niche.

    Most of you guys will struggle to do this, and complain google is favouring big brands. Well ya know what, im becoming a big brand, and im thankful for this. Because the increased barriars to entry and favouring of my site, means all u little punks can't outrank me with your shitty content and automated tools

    Oh and this is coming from one of those shitty little (former) spammer punks.

    Hard work pays off. End.
    Signature

    The Ultimate Guide To Link Building

    Get More Links - Generate More Traffic - Make More Money!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8854088].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author michaelra
      Originally Posted by Make Money Ninja View Post

      Most of you guys will struggle to do this, and complain google is favouring big brands. Well ya know what, im becoming a big brand, and im thankful for this.
      I had that thought before for a few years. Wait until Google bring down all your keyword ranks and push your posts into a few pages out of the first page
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8854157].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jinx1221
    I'm gonna jump way out on a limb and just say this.. many, if not most of the visitors here do not have a $20,000 investment on their websites, and most aren't targeting insanely competitive niches or keywords either. For most of us, including me, our websites are a side hobby, and a supplement to our 9-5 incomes. I for one am happy as hell to get a $100 or $200 paycheck in the mail. Cool shit! Free internet for me! I use web 20's, forums, and article directories to promote. Seo is a side benefit from that promotion. Not saying you should do things that will tank your site, like mass spamming. That should be a no brainer by now.

    Just saying that not everyone here are big game hustlers who do this for a living. I could see having to invest $20,000 if you are in the Pharma or Gambling niches just to stay afloat. Most of us aren't though, and most of us don't have to be on that level to be where we want to be. I have a site whose primary targeted keyword is on page one that hasn't moved in years.. and it's riding on links created with -shame on me- automated software, created 6 years ago. I just happened to be smart about it and put some thought into it. All this fear-mongering about getting people to jump on the private network bandwagon is starting to get silly. Don't get me wrong, private networks kick ass! Provided you know what you're doing.

    There's no guarantees in that either, though, if your site isn't quality enough to begin with. So all these people go out and spend $1000's of dollars on expired pr domains thinking there's some guarantee they'll shoot and stay at the top? Pshht, then in a month or two their site not only tanks, but they're out thousands of dollars in investment they could've used to build a better site and promote for free. Then maybe someday be able to invest in their own private network. Just the way I see things, guys.
    Signature

    The Ultimate Private Network Management,
    Visualization and Automation Tool




    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8856331].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
      Originally Posted by jinx1221 View Post

      Nah it's not like that Jinx.

      We talk about the areas we work in and know, but that's really beside the point.

      It's about "Scale"

      Small niche = small network
      Big Market = big network

      Why give someone
      $1200 a year for Senuke + Captcha, proxies blah blah.
      Then spend 6 months whacking away trying to rank a site.

      When
      A network would give you much quicker and better results for the same price.

      Example:
      I bought this last week

      Dropped domain with good existing links and authority $27.
      Hosting cost me $30 for a year.
      3 Articles cost me around $120.
      I did the site myself but might spend a little later on WebD.
      I targeted 8 low-med comp keywords.

      1 week later:

      Using the existing authority of the homepage and some anchor rich internal linking to the other 2 articles.
      All keywords are in the top 30
      4 in the top 10
      1 in the top 3
      Got my first $29 commission sale today.

      $180 invested and $29 back in a week from a site whose primary function is to rank other sites. It's a no brainer way to SEO if you ask me.

      Why waste time and money "building authority" when it's instantly available for sale at the same price?.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857129].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author yukon
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

        Nah it's not like that Jinx.

        We talk about the areas we work in and know, but that's really beside the point.

        It's about "Scale"

        Small niche = small network
        Big Market = big network

        Why give someone
        $1200 a year for Senuke + Captcha, proxies blah blah.
        Then spend 6 months whacking away trying to rank a site.

        When
        A network would give you much quicker and better results for the same price.

        Example:
        I bought this last week

        Dropped domain with good existing links and authority $27.
        Hosting cost me $30 for a year.
        3 Articles cost me around $120.
        I did the site myself but might spend a little later on WebD.
        I targeted 8 low-med comp keywords.

        1 week later:

        Using the existing authority of the homepage and some anchor rich internal linking to the other 2 articles.
        All keywords are in the top 30
        4 in the top 10
        1 in the top 3
        Got my first $29 commission sale today.

        $180 invested and $29 back in a week from a site whose primary function is to rank other sites. It's a no brainer way to SEO if you ask me.

        Why waste time and money "building authority" when it's instantly available for sale at the same price?.
        Same here, there's no reason to not monetize a network. I don't link to other peoples squeeze pages, I do the selling on my site & link to SSL checkout pages. There's no SEO value going out to pages I don't care about (SSL) as far as SEO goes.
        Signature
        Hi
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857153].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author danparks
        Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

        It's about "Scale"

        Small niche = small network
        Big Market = big network
        That and everything else Kevin said in that same post.

        Most of the private network talk on this forum is from people like me that use the network to rank keywords for many other site owners, not for a site of our own. So, naturally the network has to be big to accomodate all those different sites. For a person who has one or two sites of his own, and is doing SEO on them, then all the talk of hundreds of sites and hundreds or a thousand dollars in monthly hosting doesn't apply. Instead, a very small network of just a handful of sites can suffice and isn't very expensive at all. Maybe not for a person in a very competitive niche, but many site owners are in more moderately competitive niches and a bunch of targeted keywords in contextual articles on sites with low outbound links can be very helpful.

        You can get a little more value from the small network by including a few links to the sites of others, too. I wouldn't recommend selling links or approaching site owners in a cold-calling fashion. But most site owners know and trust at least a couple of other site owners in a similar niche. You could offer such a site owner a nice contextual link in a quality article on one of your sites, in exchange for a similar link on his site (provided that site owner has a page of similar quality as your network site page). You each get a good link back to your money sites and, if you care about reciprocal links, that doesn't come into play because it will his money site linking to your money site, and your network site linking to his money site (no direct reciprocal arrangement).

        I'm not a site owner doing SEO on my own site, but if I was, I'd do something like this. For just a few hundred bucks I'd be getting several good, contextual, relevant, permanent backlinks that I control. No, I wouldn't be getting great PR5 links or some such, but I could be getting several nice links nonetheless.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857199].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ricardo Furtado
    What are buffer sites??
    Signature

    Ricardo Furtado

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857155].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Ricardo Furtado View Post

      What are buffer sites??
      backlink page/domain > web 2.0 page/domain/buffer > money page/domain
      Signature
      Hi
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857163].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Ricardo Furtado
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

        backlink page/domain > web 2.0 page/domain/buffer > money page/domain
        Thanks for enlightening me.
        Regards
        Signature

        Ricardo Furtado

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857168].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
    Cool insight. Anyways, I appreciate your opinions. Thanks!

    Btw I created a legit discussion..neat
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857403].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author danparks
      Originally Posted by Dirty380s View Post

      Btw I created a legit discussion..neat
      Yes, you did. Normally a thread of this length in posts inevitably involves a lot of flaming, and a post of that Michael Jackson video where he's eating popcorn (sit back and watch the drama). Pretty tame stuff here so far
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857439].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Ricardo Furtado
        Originally Posted by danparks View Post

        Yes, you did. Normally a thread of this length in posts inevitably involves a lot of flaming, and a post of that Michael Jackson video where he's eating popcorn (sit back and watch the drama). Pretty tame stuff here so far
        Hmmmmm...guess I missed something here..lolllzlzzzz
        Signature

        Ricardo Furtado

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857456].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
    Haha, ya I think it's great.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857500].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rschmitz
    The blog network method where you own the domains is the best method by far, if you know what your doing. There is a lot more risk for the guy starting out though . I still think if you are just starting out you should use 2.0 sites since they are free and if you mess up it doesn't cost you anything. Tools like gsa ser and kontent machine should cost around $300 for life time access total, but then you have literally no overhead, you can build and rank your sites and you don't have to worry about juggling hosting and domains and avoiding footprints that can shut you down. You can make a natural looking web 2.0 and then blast it and you can schedule and do everything in about an hour.

    As for blog networks, I know that each self hosted blog can link out between 50-100 times before its juice starts to suffer...and you really only want 2-3 links coming from each site. So I would hold off on creating blog network until you are at about 20 sites first.

    These links are by far the best, I understand that. The management of the network is what I think makes it unfriendly
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857600].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author danparks
      Originally Posted by rschmitz View Post

      I still think if you are just starting out you should use 2.0 sites since they are free and if you mess up it doesn't cost you anything.
      Sure they're free. But each is a brand new site, PR0 and with no backlinks. You're unlikely to find good, high PR expired domains for the price of registration, but you can still occasionally find, say, a PR2 with a handful of nice backlinks for the price of registration ($10). Toss it on $1/month hosting and you've got several nice backlinks, in your control, for about $20/year. One PR2 backlink might not be huge, but it blows away a PR0 web 2.0 backlink. So it's not really much of risk. The high cost and potential risk comes in building up a huge private network that includes higher PR domains (because you can pay a lot for each domain, and even with good knowledge you can't be guaranteed that a domain might not drop in PR).

      I don't think web 2.0s are useless, but I don't see how building a network of web 2.0s is better than building a very small private network of existing "real" domains with some PR value. If we're talking about a network that exists to support just one site, then yes web 2.0s are free, but buying expired domains isn't a huge expense at all. Web 2.0 sites are free to create, and many people automate it and create dozens or hundreds of such sites every day. I can't even imagine how many free web 2.0 sites are created every single day.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8857615].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jinx1221
    I might be making a right angle turn here, but I am wondering, about how many pages do you have and create in your network sites? Like, when you buy a domain obvously you put a page on it, how large do you grow that site out, and what frequency do you add pages to it? And do you do cross-linking to other sites in your network, or do you strictly point links toward your (or your clients) money site?
    Signature

    The Ultimate Private Network Management,
    Visualization and Automation Tool




    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8858904].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dirty380s
      Originally Posted by jinx1221 View Post

      I might be making a right angle turn here, but I am wondering, about how many pages do you have and create in your network sites? Like, when you buy a domain obvously you put a page on it, how large do you grow that site out, and what frequency do you add pages to it? And do you do cross-linking to other sites in your network, or do you strictly point links toward your (or your clients) money site?
      Wondering the same...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8861875].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
      Originally Posted by jinx1221 View Post

      I might be making a right angle turn here, but I am wondering, about how many pages do you have and create in your network sites? Like, when you buy a domain obvously you put a page on it, how large do you grow that site out, and what frequency do you add pages to it? And do you do cross-linking to other sites in your network, or do you strictly point links toward your (or your clients) money site?
      It really just depends on what you bought and of course budget.

      If the domain was previously a niche relevant site, then waybackmachine is a great source of content.
      If the domain needs to be re-purposed then you will have to put your hand back in your pocket for content.

      But when you are buying domains that needs re-purposing, you can expect you would be buying it solely for the existing link profile. So the extra effort/money is returned in authority.

      I prefer to build sites rather then blogs...it's cheaper with little to no management needed
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8862115].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author indokarir
    I'ts a very interesting discussion..But actually I haven't fully understood what "Private Blog Network"..Is it dummy blogs..Blogs that we creates to support(give backlinks) to our main site..?
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8870704].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Amod Oke
    Create content which attracts links, solves the entire problem.....
    Yeah right!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8908866].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Moneymaker2012
    1) In your opinion will google think all my web 2.0s (25 keywords x 5 each = 125 web 2.0s) are spammy...Even if I have unique and genuine content on each one?
    I don't think that google think our web2.0 are spammy as you say you are using unique and geniun content this is a good idea.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8909009].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author proav
      With regard to buffer sites, can anyone help explain to me if it would make sense to build a wordpress site with a newly registered domain and local hosting instead of using a web 2.0? I want to buy some high pr links, point them to buffer sites and then have the buffer sites point to my money site. Will there be a disadvantage in having a newly registered domain on the buffer sites? Will the link juice still pass through?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9396630].message }}

Trending Topics