More Backlinks...Lower SERP

[rabenus]

If you want to gain leverage in the SERPs, this is what I do - I look for a very old related site - web archived since 1998 or 1999, then I put my links there. In a very competitive keyword, I was propelled to page 1 in two weeks. The thing is... it's quite hard to find these "old" and "related" sites.

 

[TheTRUTH]

If you want to gain leverage in the SERPs, this is what I do - I look for a very old related site - web archived since 1998 or 1999, then I put my links there. In a very competitive keyword, I was propelled to page 1 in two weeks. The thing is... it's quite hard to find these "old" and "related" sites.

Is there a certain tool you use to find these type of sites?

 

[TheTRUTH]

Does the number of pages your website contain have any impact on the rank?

 

[jenniferarico]

Concentrate on the quality link rather to build massive backlinks.There is a chance to be sandboxed.Remember that link building is only a part of SEO.There are far more things to be discussed.

 

[nathanooo2]

Sandboxed! No other way than it.

 

[ocmarketer]

Is there a certain tool you use to find these type of sites?

The tools I use to accomplish this task....

[1] Yahoo SiteExplorer
[2] My eyes.

Find a good established site in your market/niche. Enter their URL in SiteExplorer, then go through and see who they are linking to. See if you can get your own links added to their link partners.

When you find a quality site they are linking to, repeat the process by entering that site's URL in SiteExplorer. It's manual and it's slow, but you end up with high quality links. Automation is cool, but in gives you little control over who or what you are linking to. It also snubs your own creative juices.

You will often find a lot more than just good links using this method. By visiting other sites in your market, you also find great ideas and twists that you can add to your own site content that make it more appealing.

 

[steven gerrard]

u have to make 80% trusted sites baclinks (the same niche as your site) and 20% garbage,google will see it more naturally on that way... maybe that the problem,u might have build backlinks from only relevant sites (not naturally) or only from crap sites...

try to compre with your compatitor site

 

[Micallef]

The tools I use to accomplish this task....

[1] Yahoo SiteExplorer
[2] My eyes.

Find a good established site in your market/niche. Enter their URL in SiteExplorer, then go through and see who they are linking to. See if you can get your own links added to their link partners.

When you find a quality site they are linking to, repeat the process by entering that site's URL in SiteExplorer. It's manual and it's slow, but you end up with high quality links. Automation is cool, but in gives you little control over who or what you are linking to. It also snubs your own creative juices.

You will often find a lot more than just good links using this method. By visiting other sites in your market, you also find great ideas and twists that you can add to your own site content that make it more appealing.

This is spot on, and mainly what I do myself.

One thing I will add though:

1) Relevant links are best
2) But it's possible to rank on totally non-relevant links, I have done it many times.

Following on from this, you should follow not only your competitors but also any spammer site you find. Look at their backlink profile (I prefer backlinkwatch) and pick out the best sites. It gets much faster and easier with experience, as you learn what a likely quality candidate will look like just from the URL (e.g. avoid urls with dates like 03/03/2009 as they will be WP and nofollow, blogspot, homepages etc).

I would say you (OP) are pretty obviously experiencing the sandbox effect, as happens when Google does not trust a new site which has received a flurry of linkbuilding activity. Build strong links using the method outlined and you will be back in no less than 3 months.

One of my competitors disappeared from the serps 3 months back after blasting the web with manual, high powered spam (10 links per comment etc) and I breathed a sigh of relief. They had something like 4000 backlinks at this time. Three months on, now they're back and stronger then ever. They have been building links all the while and they now have 10,000.

 

[XsenseX]

The end of the day:

Don't worry about temporary rankings.

If you do enough good linking with good related sites and articles.

You will beat him one day. Its just google dancing.

 

[Softlan]

Im thinking about buying Scrapebox, but how many links a day should I post (in not a spammy way) ? mp3.com is ex PR9 How can I get a backlink from that ?

Thanks for those who answers

 

[TheTRUTH]

This is spot on, and mainly what I do myself.

One thing I will add though:

1) Relevant links are best
2) But it's possible to rank on totally non-relevant links, I have done it many times.

Following on from this, you should follow not only your competitors but also any spammer site you find. Look at their backlink profile (I prefer backlinkwatch) and pick out the best sites. It gets much faster and easier with experience, as you learn what a likely quality candidate will look like just from the URL (e.g. avoid urls with dates like 03/03/2009 as they will be WP and nofollow, blogspot, homepages etc).

I would say you (OP) are pretty obviously experiencing the sandbox effect, as happens when Google does not trust a new site which has received a flurry of linkbuilding activity. Build strong links using the method outlined and you will be back in no less than 3 months.

One of my competitors disappeared from the serps 3 months back after blasting the web with manual, high powered spam (10 links per comment etc) and I breathed a sigh of relief. They had something like 4000 backlinks at this time. Three months on, now they're back and stronger then ever. They have been building links all the while and they now have 10,000.

WOW..I have to say thanks..I should be paying you guys.

An interesting thing i found though was that these sites have thousands of backlinks.But the top competitor has first place by simply having site-wide links pointing form his UK, and CA verisions of the site.These are over 95% of the backlinks. Is google really giving that much credit to these type of links?

 

[Micallef]

Sitewide links can be depressingly powerful for competitors, and those who already own old and trusted sites which they can use for site-wides have a serious advantage over those starting from scratch. This does not mean, however, that they cannot be beaten.

I have a few old sites, PR 3 and 4, and their sitewide links have - I am sorry to say - given the edge to a lot of my high competition rankings. They can cut out a lot of work, but the same results can be achieved without them.

Also, a site can only carry so many sitewide outbound links before Google issues a penalty. I experienced this first hand. However, they are also quite forgiving if you reduce the strain on the old site to a reasonable amount of links.