Beat high authority affiliate sites with bad content?

[emgh]

In the niceh that I want to start the site rakning first has around 130 high quality banklinks, ranking first.

There's another affiliate site in the same niche, the second is ranking about 6th when searching for the main keyword, and has about twnty or so high quality links.

The thing is, they're too obvously sites that looks like someone wanting to make a passive income without actually helping the user. They list all the different packages and list a big red "buy buttom" and nearly no content, maybe 600-800 words at max on each site, even the homepage. I could make much better content.

If I were to write high quality lenghtly and make the site look more honest, would I be able to beat their sites?

 

[Megaverse]

Better quality contents + more quality back links... Better content alone is not enough.

 

[emgh]

Better quality contents + more quality back links... Better content alone is not enough.

The thing is, I really can't beat their backlinks. What I can beat by loads is their content. If I were to produce high quality content, would I need as many backlinks as they've got still you think? When I say as many I mean as many in the same quality category.

 

[contentcreators]

I would work on both content and backlinks, if your content is way better then you may not need as many backlinks (i'm not an expert on that but the folks on here can tell you for sure), but I would think that the closer you are to their number of links the better.

 

[emgh]

I would work on both content and backlinks, if your content is way better then you may not need as many backlinks (i'm not an expert on that but the folks on here can tell you for sure), but I would think that the closer you are to their number of links the better.

Yeah, finding tons of highly targeted backlinks whitehat is hard though.

 

[Tozzy]

Backlinks are more important than content (unless it is non-unique or generated).
Some people may tell you content is the king and perhaps they're right but as for my experience I used to see tons of pages with poor content (or no actual content at all) ranking higher due to quality links.
Content is easy to buy, you can get it for few ten bucks but getting links may be harder.

 

[Amoled]

What do you mean by HQ Backlinks? .edu or .gov links with high metrics / NY Times Article Links or real niche relevant Backlinks in a Guest Post or similar?

 

[emgh]

What do you mean by HQ Backlinks? .edu or .gov links with high metrics / NY Times Article Links or real niche relevant Backlinks in a Guest Post or similar?

Sponsored articles from very high DA websites with good anchor texts, a blog network with sites in the same niche that Google won't take action against.

 

[BadPanda69]

I can say that if the first page is filled with authorit-y sites, then in no way you can outrank them even if you throw some hq links.
But even if manage to reach at page one it will be tough getting at top 3

 

[Deleted member 657006]

I would work on both content and backlinks, if your content is way better then you may not need as many backlinks (i'm not an expert on that but the folks on here can tell you for sure), but I would think that the closer you are to their number of links the better.

it the quilty of the link not the numbers but usally doubling the comp backlinks is normal.

but heigh quilty better then numbers .

content always king , double every content the comp got .

same with socail beat all there socsil numbers fake or real.

on page seo

then there pbn if that dont work.

 

[Vaibhav Adlakha]

Yes sure you should post high quality and lengthy content than those sites. But with content, you need to get some good amount of backlinks as well. However it's tough to get high authority backlinks but you can try.