8 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
8 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Google vs "Whitehat" SEO providers on WF

by Biowza
7 replies
  • SEO
    • |
Ok, I admit I am a bit new to this whole SEO game. I've been meddling around in PPC off and on for the last couple of years with decent results, but I've made the jump (one I should have done a while ago by the looks of it) to organic traffic.

On-Page, and On-site SEO seems pretty straighforward, but I am having a bit of difficultly understanding how Off-Page SEO "works" exactly. I understand of course the concept behind it, but it seems there are really two camps and some conflicting messages.

On one hand, you have Google, Matt Cutts, and big SEO blogs like backlinko and moz. They'll tell you essentially the key to getting great backlinks is to provide great content. Write ebooks, reach out via email to niche relevant blogs spreading the word of your target page, create infographics and offer them for free, offer something that no-one else is and the viewers will flock.

Well, thats great and I love the idea of this. Part of me wants to jump on board, roll up my sleeves and get to work. But then you have the other camp.

These are the people who seem to claim they are providing whitehat SEO services, most in the form of a WSO, and most with hundreds of positive reviews and impressive sales pages. I'm not talking about small players here, I'm referring to the most sold, and popular offers on the forum.

You'll find it everywhere, offering 200 article submissions here, 5,000 blog comments there, 100 facebook likes, 500 twitter followers, 20 unique articles written, etc. All for the low, low price of something-7 dollars.

How is it that these providers can charge such a low price for links? And isn't it against Google Policy to be "buying" rank anyway? (I realize that its not exactly "buying" rank, but technically hiring someone to provide a service, its walking a fine line imo).

It seems with a lot of these WSO's the focus is on making links "look" natural. Which, to me, seems a bit hypocritical from a service claiming to be whitehat. Google obviously wants to minimize people being able to create a crummy site, buy a few WSO's and rank on the first page within a few weeks, so why is it that these services offer to do exactly that?

Maybe I am a bit new to this SEO game. There are obviously thousands of people who have purchased packages on this forum and for whom it works great but I'm struggling a bit to see how these two camps tie together. It's like having your dad (Google) telling you to play by the rules, and your older brother (WF community) saying its ok to cheat a little if you don't get caught.

I'd love some feedback from SEO providers on this forum who could clear this up for me. Is there room for "the little guy" to make a decent profit by following the Matt Cutts mantra? And how can a service offer to build so many links for so many people at such low prices, while still remaining within Google guidelines?

I appreciate your thoughts.
#google #providers #seo #whitehat
  • Profile picture of the author paulgl
    Originally Posted by Biowza View Post

    On one hand, you have Google, Matt Cutts, and big SEO blogs like backlinko and moz. They'll tell you essentially the key to getting great backlinks is to provide great content. Write ebooks, reach out via email to niche relevant blogs spreading the word of your target page, create infographics and offer them for free, offer something that no-one else is and the viewers will flock.
    Thta's not true. None of those will tell you that. At least with a straight face. Your
    examples are laughable. Email to blogs? Holy cow....

    Originally Posted by Biowza View Post

    You'll find it everywhere, offering 200 article submissions here, 5,000 blog comments there, 100 facebook likes, 500 twitter followers, 20 unique articles written, etc. All for the low, low price of something-7 dollars.
    Because they are scammers, wannabes, liars, etc. Pure junk.

    Plenty of good ways to build links discussed here, but you have to wade
    through the muck. Time, patience, diligence, and a whole lot of logic.

    Sadly, too many people want instant gratification. That leads to a never
    ending merry go round of perpetual failures. Then they come bashing SEO,
    when they really have not tried real SEO.

    There are very good guys here. But like I said, do some research by reading
    what they post. Are they a moderator? That's a good start.

    Paul
    Signature

    If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9210906].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Biowza
      Originally Posted by paulgl View Post

      Thta's not true. None of those will tell you that. At least with a straight face. Your
      examples are laughable. Email to blogs? Holy cow....
      Well, maybe I was oversimplifying it a little bit, obviously they go into more detail than my couple of examples. They don't say content is the ONLY thing that can get you ranked, but they seem to place it in a bit higher regard than many SEO providers do. What I was trying to say was generally speaking they tend to discourage the "quick fix" type of linkbuilding solution that are provided on forums like this.

      Because they are scammers, wannabes, liars, etc. Pure junk.

      Plenty of good ways to build links discussed here, but you have to wade
      through the muck. Time, patience, diligence, and a whole lot of logic.

      Sadly, too many people want instant gratification. That leads to a never
      ending merry go round of perpetual failures. Then they come bashing SEO,
      when they really have not tried real SEO.

      There are very good guys here. But like I said, do some research by reading
      what they post. Are they a moderator? That's a good start.

      Paul
      Well yeah, the main reason I started this thread was after coming across a few WSO's from respected members which promised thousands of backlinks from different sources, designed to "look" natural. It's mainly the wording in 90% of the WSO's that throws me, it seems like most (even the good ones) seem to be "tricking" Google to pushing your site into the SERPS, many of which use it as a selling point for their method. It seems to me a bit counter-intuative compared to the general messages on Off-Page SEO by the "big blogs" and Google.

      I haven't really considered the obviously scammy offers.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9210967].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by Biowza View Post

        Well yeah, the main reason I started this thread was after coming across a few WSO's from respected members which promised thousands of backlinks from different sources, designed to "look" natural. It's mainly the wording in 90% of the WSO's that throws me,
        There are only a few that sell SEO services on the forum itself that are respected in this SEO forum. I can think of one person that absolutely no one respects in regard to SEO that has several pages in a long thread with reviews selling the spammiest of offers. Shocking really (and to avoid any fuss in case anyone misunderstands - no its NOT nik0)

        Heres the bottom line. I know of no one in any WSO here that really offers White hat SEO. You cannot be placing links yourself and be doing white hat SEO. Thats black or grey hat. Sellers that claim to be doing that should be avoided. They are either lying or don't understand what White Hat SEo is in order to provide it.

        In many cases its a ploy. Google has in the last two years made it unsafe to do link spamming. sellers know that customers now know that so white hat is a way of saying "hey our service is safe". In other cases the seller in order to stay in business and offer low prices to the WSO crowd just kids themselves that spamming manually or varying anchor text is "white hat"

        Truth is White hat is expensive because its time consuming. Its essentially getting other webmasters to link to you. Less than $600-$1000/month can easily result in the SEO making minimum wage if he is putting in the work.

        Most people heres only option is grey hat but to call it white hat is just wrong.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9213851].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by paulgl View Post

      Thta's not true. None of those will tell you that. At least with a straight face. Your
      examples are laughable. Email to blogs? Holy cow....
      OP you can just ignore this post. Paul doesn't know what he is talking about. Your examples are fine. People here are just not well versed on true white hat SEO. Yes email outreach is a BASIC and well known technique in white hat link building
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9213633].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    I cannot remember ever seeing a single SEO-related WSO on here that would be a good long-term strategy.

    Admittedly, I do not look at all of them.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9210995].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author twilightofidols
      I always cringe when I see White Hat Knights In Shining Armor "create great content to get links that's the key!"

      LOL just LOL.

      Behind the scenes they are building there PBNs, or buying links, creating 2.0 networks etc...

      What good is great content if no one can find it? Should you create quality content, yes. For your site visitors. Google doesn't know that you're content is great, only that it's unique.

      The truth is there is a lot of smoke and mirrors in SEO. This "White Hat" agencies that put on a squeaky clean public face, and are doing link buys behind the scenes in the dark.

      There's more to marketing and driving traffic than creating great content. Don't be fooled any service offering to build links for you is definitely not following Google's rules. "But these are manual web 2.0s with quality content so they have to be white hat blah blah blah" No. They aren't. Not if it was built with the sole intent of placing a do follow link.

      What works in SEO vs What's Preached in SEO are often two different things. Sure there's guys who just wrote great content and were found. They are 0.001%, if you could increase your chances by taking action (link building) you'd be crazy not to.

      The only way to find what really works is to test. To try and fail. It's how I learned. I bombed tons of sites, and ran all sorts of tests and analyzed the data to draw conclusions.

      Sometimes you'll rank your first site ever, sometimes you won't. There's a lot of slime in the SEO world, fake gurus, and crappy products, you have to wade through the muck to find the gems. The only way out of hell is through the fire.
      Signature
      Sad Panda
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212480].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ONE SEO
    You can't believe one word matt cutts says

    Google MATT CUTTS MORON

    Enough said

    He's a fall guy for corporate greed, you can do everything 'white hat' and guess what, they still bury you now, if your content is too good and stops searches, in other words high response content is now a no-no at google.

    Why?

    GREED

    If you stop searches with killer content they lose money no more clicks.

    For a while now the serp's at G have been a joke, nothng relevant in organic on the top cpc terms, NOTHING.

    Now they even don't like well developed EMD's.

    Clients have also noticed the quality of leads from G in both organic and ppc are horrible, the reason is if you have a brain you stopped using the junk G serves up and now search on bing/yahoo.

    Let's see 1/3 of search is bing/yahoo, and the bing/yahoo users have a higher IQ in clients opinions, not just mine.

    Within a year or two there will be a new 4th SE, a huge project underway, it's using VERIFIED BUSINESS SEARCH since G is about to be hit with a huge class action over how they sell ppc ads to disbarred lawyers and revoked medical license doctors.

    Let's just say a few 3 Million buck ads by a new NON PROFIT NO PPC AD search project with heaving funding from big corporations will make the public look at google in a new light.

    Overnight the opinion of the public will be different on PAID SEARCH due to a killer public message ad campaign I've already seen.

    So the reign of Google is coming to an end, just like all the other SE's fell.

    Infoseek
    AV
    Yahoo

    Now Google

    Those in the KNOW, KNOW the days of Google terror are almost over.

    THANK GOD
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9212880].message }}

Trending Topics