azureshian
Registered Member
- Oct 28, 2023
- 51
- 42
English is not my native language, please forgive any mistakes in the translation.
I understand that SEO is a complex topic, but people always want to know which strategies are simply a [stupid tax].
I have five websites, and for each site, I applied different strategies to various pages.
Map Citation, which is said to be effective for improving [Local SEO]. The technique is shown in the image below:
Verification Method:
I randomly selected two types of businesses from Google, for which I have no GMB access, and performed Map Citation for them.
After two months, I used localfalcon.com to check the results. The data showed no significant improvement, with some rankings going up while others dropped.
Cloud Stacking, as shown in the image below:
This method is similar to a [Guest Post], but with higher Domain Authority values, though low traffic.
Verification Method:
I tracked keywords using Serprobot. After two months, some of the desired keywords ranked higher, while others did not.
I feel that the articles ranking higher may not be due to this method, but rather because of low competition or the inherent strength of the website.
Google Stacking, as shown in the image below:
This method takes place on Google's servers, and I feel like it’s [prophecy], hiding in a [small room called GOOGLE], doing some strange things.
Verification Method:
I tracked keywords using Serprobot. After two months, some keywords ranked higher, while others did not.
As with Cloud Stacking, I believe that the higher rankings might not be attributed to this method but could be due to low competition or the website's inherent strength.
Nandla Links + Podcast BackLinks, as shown in the image below:
These were purchased through Fiverr. Nandla Links is a special term where the seller creates backlinks on various social platforms. Podcast BackLinks are also backlink-building strategies.
Verification Method:
I tracked keywords using Serprobot. After two months, some keywords ranked higher, while others did not.
As before, I feel that the articles ranking higher may not necessarily be because of this method but due to low competition or the website's inherent strength.
Both Podcast BackLinks and Nandla Links share one common issue: they are often deleted by admins. Maybe this is because the seller is from Fiverr?
So far, Map Citation, Cloud Stacking, Google Stacking, Nandla Links, and Podcast BackLinks haven’t impressed me with any [wow, this is magic] results. Maybe I haven’t waited long enough?
As a software engineer, I try to keep the [samples] natural and random...
All [samples (domains)] are behind Cloudflare, with AI-generated content following the same set of rules. Many articles saw significant improvement and were indexed, but these results were unrelated to the methods mentioned above.
Perhaps the sellers offering these products used [automation] instead of [manual] work, but from a technical standpoint, I don’t think there should be much difference. Whether content is automatically submitted to various social platforms, Google shouldn’t know. However, if we’re talking about content quality... honestly, many sellers claiming to provide [handwritten] content still deliver [AI-generated articles].
Compared to my previous experiment, the methods tested last time actually produced better results.
https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/sharing-my-beginner-experiments-over-these-few-months.1576765/
The red section shows the results of the last experiment, and the green section shows the results of this one.
It’s worth noting that the red section is almost a year old, while the green section is only 3-4 months old. There is a time difference between the two, so perhaps after another six months, the green section will show significant growth (but I haven’t seen any such growth in the last two months).
I’m unsure how to TAG members in this forum, so I can only mention them by name:
Last time, I purchased the [T2] package from [Steptoe], and I bought it again this time. I think the price is fair, and the IPs are diverse.
Last time, I bought the [foundation-package] from [Stan Fox], but not this time.
Last time, I purchased the [GUEST POST] package from [l0cke], but not this time.
Unless [Stan Fox] and [l0cke] added some magic potion to their products, the results between the last and current experiments shouldn’t differ so drastically.
From a technical perspective, the [foundation-package] and [GUEST POST] last time offered diversity (posts, bookmarks, social signals...), which is essentially similar to this time's [Nandla Links + cloud stacking], but the previous experiment yielded better results. I can’t figure out why.
If anyone notices a flaw in my testing methods, please leave a comment. I’m curious why there’s such a large difference between the two experiments.
P.S. I’m leaning towards the [not enough waiting time] hypothesis.
I understand that SEO is a complex topic, but people always want to know which strategies are simply a [stupid tax].
I have five websites, and for each site, I applied different strategies to various pages.
Map Citation, which is said to be effective for improving [Local SEO]. The technique is shown in the image below:
Verification Method:
I randomly selected two types of businesses from Google, for which I have no GMB access, and performed Map Citation for them.
After two months, I used localfalcon.com to check the results. The data showed no significant improvement, with some rankings going up while others dropped.
Cloud Stacking, as shown in the image below:
This method is similar to a [Guest Post], but with higher Domain Authority values, though low traffic.
Verification Method:
I tracked keywords using Serprobot. After two months, some of the desired keywords ranked higher, while others did not.
I feel that the articles ranking higher may not be due to this method, but rather because of low competition or the inherent strength of the website.
Google Stacking, as shown in the image below:
This method takes place on Google's servers, and I feel like it’s [prophecy], hiding in a [small room called GOOGLE], doing some strange things.
Verification Method:
I tracked keywords using Serprobot. After two months, some keywords ranked higher, while others did not.
As with Cloud Stacking, I believe that the higher rankings might not be attributed to this method but could be due to low competition or the website's inherent strength.
Nandla Links + Podcast BackLinks, as shown in the image below:
These were purchased through Fiverr. Nandla Links is a special term where the seller creates backlinks on various social platforms. Podcast BackLinks are also backlink-building strategies.
Verification Method:
I tracked keywords using Serprobot. After two months, some keywords ranked higher, while others did not.
As before, I feel that the articles ranking higher may not necessarily be because of this method but due to low competition or the website's inherent strength.
Both Podcast BackLinks and Nandla Links share one common issue: they are often deleted by admins. Maybe this is because the seller is from Fiverr?
So far, Map Citation, Cloud Stacking, Google Stacking, Nandla Links, and Podcast BackLinks haven’t impressed me with any [wow, this is magic] results. Maybe I haven’t waited long enough?
As a software engineer, I try to keep the [samples] natural and random...
All [samples (domains)] are behind Cloudflare, with AI-generated content following the same set of rules. Many articles saw significant improvement and were indexed, but these results were unrelated to the methods mentioned above.
Perhaps the sellers offering these products used [automation] instead of [manual] work, but from a technical standpoint, I don’t think there should be much difference. Whether content is automatically submitted to various social platforms, Google shouldn’t know. However, if we’re talking about content quality... honestly, many sellers claiming to provide [handwritten] content still deliver [AI-generated articles].
Compared to my previous experiment, the methods tested last time actually produced better results.
https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/sharing-my-beginner-experiments-over-these-few-months.1576765/
The red section shows the results of the last experiment, and the green section shows the results of this one.
It’s worth noting that the red section is almost a year old, while the green section is only 3-4 months old. There is a time difference between the two, so perhaps after another six months, the green section will show significant growth (but I haven’t seen any such growth in the last two months).
I’m unsure how to TAG members in this forum, so I can only mention them by name:
Last time, I purchased the [T2] package from [Steptoe], and I bought it again this time. I think the price is fair, and the IPs are diverse.
Last time, I bought the [foundation-package] from [Stan Fox], but not this time.
Last time, I purchased the [GUEST POST] package from [l0cke], but not this time.
Unless [Stan Fox] and [l0cke] added some magic potion to their products, the results between the last and current experiments shouldn’t differ so drastically.
From a technical perspective, the [foundation-package] and [GUEST POST] last time offered diversity (posts, bookmarks, social signals...), which is essentially similar to this time's [Nandla Links + cloud stacking], but the previous experiment yielded better results. I can’t figure out why.
If anyone notices a flaw in my testing methods, please leave a comment. I’m curious why there’s such a large difference between the two experiments.
P.S. I’m leaning towards the [not enough waiting time] hypothesis.
