Are links from PBN in pure HTML good?

[safeSEOboost]

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to hear your quick opinion about PBN made out of pure html versus wordpress?

There are many differences, for example no plugins for html, easier to rebuild a site in html, etc.

One thing I notice is most PBN offered are in wordpress. I am considering offering my PBN service in the marketplace, as a rental from the homepage.

Does it matter to you if the site is in html, WP or other CMS? or you do not care?

A final point is html PBN could lower your footprint risk (versus WP PBN only)?

Any comment would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance

 

[harthall99]

If I am honest I really don't care. It's all about the sites metrics

 

[safeSEOboost]

If I am honest I really don't care. It's all about the sites metrics

Yes I got your point.

Here I am only talking of PBN with great metrics DA 25+, RD 75+, over 8 years old registration, clean content, few OBL, etc.

 

[Sristy]

After Google updates last year, I heard pure HTML pages rank less. I might be wrong as well..

 

[safeSEOboost]

After Google updates last year, I heard pure HTML pages rank less. I might be wrong as well..

Thanks for your input. I follow SEO news quite closely but I never heard of that, maybe I missed it?

But I am not sure of the logic of that? Google mostly sees html anyway, it is just that a WP site would behave differently (dynamic so more frequent changes at each crawl for example), different html (characteristic of WP coding), etc.

Based on this article, wordpress as a CMS represents 25% of the Web, but no CMS represents 57% ot the Web; by no CMS I believe they mostly mean html + php.

 

[MatthewGraham]

But I am not sure of the logic of that? Google mostly sees html anyway, it is just that a WP site would behave differently (dynamic so more frequent changes at each crawl for example), different html (characteristic of WP coding), etc.

People are probably less likely to fuck up a WP site.

 

[fasttrak]

HTML or Wordpress is fine as long as the site looks professional and has decent metrics, happy either way. I think most folk building links use a variety of mediums so if your selling point is that you offer HTML sites, it would make no difference to me.

 

[AngelSeo]

People are using WP simply because its easier, Google did not care at all - if the website is OK, how exactly is build is irrelevant. Go for it, but my advice is to mix your network as well - do not go only for html..

 

[safeSEOboost]

People are probably less likely to fuck up a WP site.

Thanks for your reply, but I do not know what you mean: is people the webmaster or do you mean hackers? fuck up? there are many ways to do that, under any CMS?

how exactly is build is irrelevant.

I follow what you are saying. But you answered in part, as you said it is easier to build WP sites (not that html is hard); which in itself is already a signal.

 

[Warrenway]

People are probably less likely to fuck up a WP site.

This.

HTML sites wouldn't be ranked differently simply because they are composed of static HTML pages. After all, WP sites are rendered completely in HTML too. So if they are ranked differently, it's due to some other reason -- i.e. poorly written/clunky code, outdated/stale pages, bad user experience, etc.

 

[xenoxen]

HTML website are great coz you do not have to think about updating script - like in Wordpress.
They are also much ligher than Wordpress and faster than most of the typical PBN Wordpresses.

They are also really great if you recreate website with some scripts or services

 

[safeSEOboost]

PNB and SEO experts, feel free to chime in.

Remember I mentioned this is for a rental service, so we are talking about homepage links. Most sites do not have many homepage links, so now imagine all your homepage links are WP? Is it a footprint or not? (WP is only 25% of the Web)

For non homepage links like blog posts, then this is a different story.

Feel free to cast your vote please and it you have anything to add, I would love to hear it.

 

[MikeyMikey13]

I link out from:

• homepage in 100% of my sites to 4-8 MS
• f' good and f' footprints, anyone who says "footprint" has never been hit by google
• mixed bunch of sites, probably 30% of my pbn's are static

 

[safeSEOboost]

I link out from:

• homepage in 100% of my sites to 4-8 MS
• f' good and f' footprints, anyone who says "footprint" has never been hit by google
• mixed bunch of sites, probably 30% of my pbn's are static

^^
This sounds reasonable.

I agree the term footprint is misused by newbies who do not know what they are talking about, unlike us.

 

[starki]

First of all, it doesn't matter for ranking if a page is coded by hand in HTML, coded with some WYSIWYG editor in HTML or uses any CMS like Wordpress, Joomla, Drupal, Typo3. It's all HTML/PHP, the code differs, the backend differs a lot, but that's it. Wordpress doesn't rank better, it's just a myth, it just makes many things easier and saves time. In fact it's a shame more and more people don't understand any HTML or PHP at all, because they grew up with these point and click interfaces. It's not like you have to be a coder, most popular CMS do a great job, but some basic understanding definitly helps. Ok, enough offtopic rant, back to what I would prefer:

Pure HTML pages, for a very simple reason: 99,99% of all PBN sites are cheaply made with Wordrpress, standard themes, standard look, zero customization, not the slightest effort to make them look legitimate. You can tell it's a PBN site in less than 1 second. If it get's reported, the webspam guy viewing the report will instantly toast it. Old school sites are much different, they are rare and don't have this intant "OMG, why this ugly flower theme for a car related site, the owner could at least have picked the theme by hand. " impression. The algorithms don't care, but from a "Is there a chance to stand a manual review?" or "Is there an easy to spot footprint?" point of view, a PBN that's much different from 99,99% of all others has a valuable USP in my opinion.

 

[Panther28]

as @BassTrackerBoats mentioned ina previous post earlier, your link profile is your portfolio, and since this is something unque then its sure to be a hit,

After Google updates last year, I heard pure HTML pages rank less. I might be wrong as well..

Google will have to equally give weight to both sites, maybe even a preference for HTML, as this is where beginners like kids often start, and they have the most unique and original ideas sometimes, so how would we discover these types of sites, from kids and schools, and small projects, unless google highlighted these seperaptly which would be nice, 2 tabs, commercial and homegrown, ok maybe 3, experianced

 

[Zwielicht]

Thread Moved​