PLZ Clarify Me BHW Experts!

[wonsong82]

Hi ppl.

Could you please clarify me the reason and how effective link pyramids with web 2.0s are in "theory"? like linkpushing?

Correct me if im wrong.

If you get backlinks from various High PR sites directly to the money site, you get all the juices from the High PR sites.

Then, whats the point of creating web 2.0 properties which are only going to be PR0 (since the new created web2.0 properties will be PR0 even though domains are PR9)?

And would google give penalty for spamming web 2.0 properties?

I am trying to make a link structures.
My plans are get a web 2.0 properties (like 10, white hat all manually),
and spam these web 2.0 properties with various types of backlinks (like couple hundres or thousands for each push, blackhat).

But i dont know if thats a good method?
1. web 2.0s are just treated as fresh 0 PR, so hows is it better than linking directly from PR 6-9?
2. web 2.0s are safe if they are spammed? is that the reason behind of this method?

 

[webmasterassistant]

the best answer here is you better work on both the ways you think of and find out which one works. don't take me wrong , when it comes to link building "theory" must be taken out and "practical" must be taken in.

 

[crashdi]

this is a very good question...i also want to know this

btw: I think, if you can manage a pr3++ inpage backlink...you should directly link it to your money site...

I personally received good result with 400++ backlinks (370 pr 0, 30 pr 1-5), and 5-6 web 2.0 with thousands of spam links....
obviously this method will not always work.....but only 10 web 2.0 will not ensure you good serp for medium compititive keyword

but ofcourse I might be wrong

 

[SEOfarmer]

this is a very good question...i also want to know this

btw: I think, if you can manage a pr3++ inpage backlink...you should directly link it to your money site...

I personally received good result with 400++ backlinks (370 pr 0, 30 pr 1-5), and 5-6 web 2.0 with thousands of spam links....
obviously this method will not always work.....but only 10 web 2.0 will not ensure you good serp for medium compititive keyword

but ofcourse I might be wrong

Are your PR3+ inpage backline nofollow or d0follow?

 

[wonsong82]

I personally received good result with 400++ backlinks (370 pr 0, 30 pr 1-5), and 5-6 web 2.0 with thousands of spam links....
but ofcourse I might be wrong

so basically 370 bad quility links, and about 40ish good qulity links?
and your web2.0 has massive spam back links?
so i would assume its safe to spam web2.0 and all the juice(from valid backlinks) from these 2.0s actually become valid?

but only 10 web 2.0 will not ensure you good serp for medium compititive keyword
but ofcourse I might be wrong

This is the point im trying to grasp. if you look at the linkpushing structure(which seems working fine according to many users here),
they only have 11 direct backlinks to the money site for each push(8 web2.0, 3micro blogs).
so even if only with 10 web 2.0, it ensures pretty well in serp, or it seems like to be at least.
linkpushing has about 5 layers and in total you get about 100 backlinks from one push, but only 11 of them are directly linking to the main site.

I am not 100% sure how link juicing is working so please correct me if im wrong.

lets simplify these concept into the very basic form.
let say moneysite -> tier1 -> tier2 -> tier3-> tier4 -> tier5
and you have 10 tier1s and each layers only has 1 properties,
you have total 50 properties.

and lets simplify that each properties have made-up score of 10 trust-rank, and there is no panelty involved in any of these.

1. tier5 passes 10 to tier4.
2. tier4 had 10 and received 10, so tier4 passes 20 to tier3.
3. tier3 had 10 and received 20, so tier3 passes 30 to tier2.
4. from the linkpushing structures, tier2 and tier1 are web2.0s, and web2.0s initially has no PR since the page is just created for the purpose of SEO.
so tier2 receives 30 and pass to tier1.
5. tier1 receives 30 and pass to money site.
6. money site receives 30each from 10 2.0s so total recieves 300 points.

but , if you directly backlinks 50 properties, you get 500 points.

am i missing something? perhaps newly created web2.0 scores better than regular pr0-2 backlinks from blogs? because google loves the domain and its contents and onsite seo for the keyword?

or is it just because you can spam to death to the web2.0 properties without them getting penalty? although it would make you hard to get the links building?

i can conclude that, 1. money <- tier1 <- tier2 <- tier3 <- tier4 <- tier5 (only 1) is exactly the same as 2. money <- tier1 (and 5 of them), cuz they would transfer the same total amount of the trust rank.

correct me if im wrong but im concluding whole point of web2.0 properties and link layering is because web2.0 can handle spams, and you are harder to be discovered your liking structures to google's eyes.

sure you can say i should test out by myself, but being a noobie, its hard to analyze the results without firm background and behind logics.

 

[edgematch]

...If you get backlinks from various High PR sites directly to the money site, you get all the juices from the High PR sites.

That is not true. Actually, first of all you should define what a backlink is. A profile backlink from pr9 forum may not be more valuable than a group of backlinks created via web 2.0 properties.

So, please think about the concept of backlink (definition, types, uses, effects, indexing, uniqueness, value/how rare it is sued, site value). All backlinks are not backlinks.

 

[SuperLinks]

The benefit of Web 2.0 types of sites is diversity in linking, and the ability to control the type of content on those sites and being able to link contextually (in content anchor text). Where as most people don't have access to High PR contextual links, they do have access to tools and Web 2.0 sites.

Web 2.0 sites already have good domain authority, which on top of in context links and linkbuilding can really help send your domain some decent link juice. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't go after the high PR links to your original money site, but most people simply don't know how to get them or don't want to spend the money to get them.

 

[wonsong82]

The benefit of Web 2.0 types of sites is diversity in linking, and the ability to control the type of content on those sites and being able to link contextually (in content anchor text). Where as most people don't have access to High PR contextual links, they do have access to tools and Web 2.0 sites.

Web 2.0 sites already have good domain authority, which on top of in context links and linkbuilding can really help send your domain some decent link juice. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't go after the high PR links to your original money site, but most people simply don't know how to get them or don't want to spend the money to get them.

wow thank you for the kind reply and clarification of what web2.0 's purposes are.

So you are saying contextual link in high authority domained property is better than unrelated mere high pr blog comments or profiles.

Can i ask you a question?

Is it ok to spam (blackhat) the 2.0 properties or even they are treated the same as other newly created website and would get penalty, thus unable to pass the juice to the main site?

once i am clear about this, i will put a test for BHW, and report the results.
my test is going to be something like this.

create 10 2.0 properties.(t1) each 2.0 have 2-3 2.0 properties.(t2).
and the 2nd 2.0 properties will have various type of backlinks, (profiles, articles, comments, to name a few), and be spammed.