PBN article credibility - how important?

[Viniyois]

Hey,

What do you think about the credibility of PBN articles? For example, making it well written but bullshit all the facts after intro to make it easier to write and to match topically to your money site as much as possible (making up researches, scientific data, etc)

Logically it shouldn’t matter. I dont think during manual review they will read more than a paragraph (if they even do that). But who knows what those sneaky g bots are capable of . Wanted to hear your opinion.

 

[LeanLow]

It doesn't matter, it also doesn't matter if it's well written or not, as long as there's no grammar errors (and I'm not even sure that they track those as well).

 

[safeSEOboost]

For now it does not matter, it only will when google AI has reached a few milestones.

It doesn't matter, it also doesn't matter if it's well written or not, as long as there's no grammar errors (and I'm not even sure that they track those as well).

And manual reviewers will not give a damn indeed.

 

[LeanLow]

For now it does not matter, it only will when google AI has reached a few milestones.

And manual reviewers will not give a damn indeed.

Ether way it's obvious that PBN is a PBN be it shit content or good content.

 

[Viniyois]

Thanks for the replies, guys.

Ether way it's obvious that PBN is a PBN be it shit content or good content.

I’ve heard that argument many times here. Some people would disagree. I can’t personally comment on it as i can’t back it with experience.

So if pbn is flagged, it doesn’t matter what there is, it gets deindexed?

What’s the argument for making it seem really nice? Is it worth it?

 

[safeSEOboost]

Ether way it's obvious that PBN is a PBN be it shit content or good content.

True for 99% of PBN, as the best PBN are not so easily recognizable.

But I guess if you check to what a site links to, then yes you can detect 99.9% of all PBN.

Assuming the PBN is not hidden, in which case most people cannot even check them. Then it only depends if either google AI or manual reviewers can detect them or not.

 

[Viniyois]

I’m talking about hiding as much footprint as you can here and not shitty pbn network with spun content and default wordpress theme

- different registrars with the mix of hidden or fake info
- mix of sites (corporate,magazine,blog) with premium themes
- different hostings
etc
- not suspicious linking

I wanna know if that will make pbn pass manual review

 

[awesomewebsites]

I have some seen big PBN providers ordering manually written content. They better be prepared for manual review.

 

[safeSEOboost]

I’m talking about hiding as much footprint as you can here and not shitty pbn network with spun content and default wordpress theme

- different registrars with the mix of hidden or fake info
- mix of sites (corporate,magazine,blog) with premium themes
- different hostings
etc
- not suspicious linking

I wanna know if that will make pbn pass manual review

- when I said hidden, I mean spiders/crawlers are blocked.
- what you said ^^ is more like avoiding footprints, this is not what is usually called hiding (or you can but then it is confusing with bots blocking).
And yes both are part of the design of a PBN, among other things

I have some seen big PBN providers ordering manually written content. They better be prepared for manual review.

My PBN are 100% quality manual content, and by the way to reply OP, I never produce fake content. I have hundreds of articles on my PBN all backed by scientific facts and scholarly articles.

 

[AngelSeo]

OK, some common sense needed here it seems. So you pay $100-200 or more for good auctioned domain and then instead of getting half decent content for another $15 you are going with complete shit to save few bucks? Thats ridiculous. Sure you don't need to have uber duber content, but using spunned shit content?! Good luck with that, and when next time Google sweep the floor with your network dont come here to open gazillion threads about that.

@OP Its not a problem, the Internet is full with fake news websites that rank perfectly OK. However do not do it across your whole network, but here and there? Why not.

 

[Viniyois]

- when I said hidden, I mean spiders/crawlers are blocked.
- what you said ^^ is more like avoiding footprints, this is not what is meant by hiding.
And yes both are part of the design of a PBN, among other things

I feel like blocking crawlers is a huge footprint itself and legit random sites rarely do it. Google isnt stupid and i’m sure they know much more than us about PBN design. They just cant chase them manually and their bots arent intellient enough yet to determine accurately without making pbn like shit

Anyway, i just wanna know about content for now and then i’ll report my xp with pbn in a few months : )

OK, some common sense needed here it seems. So you pay $100-200 or more for good auctioned domain and then instead of getting half decent content for another $15 you are going with complete shit to save few bucks? Thats ridiculous. Sure you don't need to have uber duber content, but using spunned shit content?! Good luck with that, and when next time Google sweep the floor with your network dont come here to open gazillion threads about that.

@OP Its not a problem, the Internet is full with fake news websites that rank perfectly OK. However do not do it across your whole network, but here and there? Why not.

That is exactly what i think about spun content. It’s simply not worth taking that risk in my opinion and ruin good domain + potentially money site

Thanks for the info about my original question. I wanna expand content a bit with it to make it richer

 

[Topiano]

SEO game has always been to "play safe'... No one knows when big G wrath could evoke. I’ve seen top players playing their PBN game like the real websites(In-house writers / Outsource) Big G could detect crappy contents miles away.

Scrappy Contents could lead to High bounce rate... Most of the networks get traffic too. If poorly written contents are made brings correlation to high bounce rate which serves as a red signal on Manual Review ( If there is such ... )

 

[MikeyMikey13]

It doesn't matter, it also doesn't matter if it's well written or not, as long as there's no grammar errors (and I'm not even sure that they track those as well).

This guy gets it...

 

[Viniyois]

Everyone says different stuff

 

[SirLouen]

Generally, reviewers tend to crush obvious PBN copies. The worst part is that you kill the whole site by just 1 shit article (including the relevance and reputation that you originally paid for). Shit content is way more easily crushed, especially if it's ranking for certain types of content (health, money and all that).

From my point of view, it is better to have 5 healthy domains for $500 total investment than 100 shit-posted domains for $10K.
Best thing you can do is compare your competence to see their linking profiles
You will be impressed to see sites with no aging, ranking better for high quality content and a healthy linking profile, than sites with full-tier ranking + pbns with shit content and way more $$$ spent on all that massive link-building structure.

What I'm not 100% sure to which extent the footprint is relevant at all (at least not obvious footprint)
I sometimes think that it's a superstition.
There are plenty of sites with a HUGE footprint that is ranking extremely good (obviously their contents are outstanding). You have to remember that PBN it's a blackhat technique to replicate the real BN. And BN are pure footprint.

My conclusion: If you cannot fully automate the process and spend the minimum possible, at least in time, it's not worth.
Huge amount of time + all those links (+ indexing services) + hostings + expensive expired domains (min $70 for backorders), etc... could be reinvested in better content by trustworthy copywriters and guest posts in domains with a good reputation (and some high profile links with a good copy also).

 

[Viniyois]

Generally, reviewers tend to crush obvious PBN copies. The worst part is that you kill the whole site by just 1 shit article (including the relevance and reputation that you originally paid for). Shit content is way more easily crushed, especially if it's ranking for certain types of content (health, money and all that).

From my point of view, it is better to have 5 healthy domains for $500 total investment than 100 shit-posted domains for $10K.
Best thing you can do is compare your competence to see their linking profiles
You will be impressed to see sites with no aging, ranking better for high quality content and a healthy linking profile, than sites with full-tier ranking + pbns with shit content and way more $$$ spent on all that massive link-building structure.

What I'm not 100% sure to which extent the footprint is relevant at all (at least not obvious footprint)
I sometimes think that it's a superstition.
There are plenty of sites with a HUGE footprint that is ranking extremely good (obviously their contents are outstanding). You have to remember that PBN it's a blackhat technique to replicate the real BN. And BN are pure footprint.

My conclusion: If you cannot fully automate the process and spend the minimum possible, at least in time, it's not worth.
Huge amount of time + all those links (+ indexing services) + hostings + expensive expired domains (min $70 for backorders), etc... could be reinvested in better content by trustworthy copywriters and guest posts in domains with a good reputation (and some high profile links with a good copy also).

But i’m asking about fake article

Imagine: “According to the National Health Association, 23% of the US population has a gastric problems.” In the article. I just made that fact, but who will check exactly?

Or talking about the new research and adding lots of extra imaginary stuff on top of actual stuff.

Why? Because it is much faster than doing research and easier to fill up the page with 600+ words

 

[daviem23]

The fact that you are asking means that you are not comfortable with giving fake data even if it serves a secondary purpose. Like others have said, you can get decent genuine content for a few extra bucks.

 

[Viniyois]

The fact that you are asking means that you are not comfortable with giving fake data even if it serves a secondary purpose. Like others have said, you can get decent genuine content for a few extra bucks.

Not comfortable? I’d have sci fi sites if it was only up to me. But its about G and what it can

 

[soa0611]

But i’m asking about fake article

Imagine: “According to the National Health Association, 23% of the US population has a gastric problems.” In the article. I just made that fact, but who will check exactly?

Or talking about the new research and adding lots of extra imaginary stuff on top of actual stuff.

Why? Because it is much faster than doing research and easier to fill up the page with 600+ words

I am 100% sure you can write whatever info you want

 

[SirLouen]

It depends on the grade of fake-ness. For example, if you say "according to the latest research 15% of the population will get AIDS in the next 5 years" then, if you get reviewed, you will be insta-flagged. Same if you spread a fake rumour about some famous guy or gal or whatever.

But this only happens if your message ends ranking good for some interesting keyword (like top 6 or so). If you just write a random article, it won't be rated ever.

The problem is that if for some random reason your post starts to rank good, instead of this being positive, it will introduce a random possibility of being flagged (paradoxically in PBN ranking good in individual articles is not "good news")
I think that most people prefer to just gamble with this, so you have to make your "accounting" process: If you risk 10 x $1.000 single B with fake posts consider that at least 3 or 4 will be flagged in the first year. So if you cannot drive traffic worth those $4K loss in the first year then it will be a bad tradeoff

If you let me choose, I prefer an average article without passion, that anyone would read, and not engaging at all, and long enough (2K words for example) talking about anything in particular in your niche than a 2K words fake article super-engaging, best copy ever, with high chances of being viral.