Problems get backlinks indexed

[verdox]

I am struggling to get links indexed, I noticed on majestic a count of 250ish backlinks!? I have been AMR blasting, SB blasting, link pushing and so on for months on end I have thousands of links out there

I was thinking about paying for Linklicious? I have tried using online ping tools, RSS feed creation, creating WP blogs and wacking all links in there etc I just cant get them indexed!

Any suggestions? Is Linklicious worth it? Will that solve my issue?

 

[Patel]

I am struggling to get links indexed, I noticed on majestic a count of 250ish backlinks!? I have been AMR blasting, SB blasting, link pushing and so on for months on end I have thousands of links out there

I was thinking about paying for Linklicious? I have tried using online ping tools, RSS feed creation, creating WP blogs and wacking all links in there etc I just cant get them indexed!

Any suggestions? Is Linklicious worth it? Will that solve my issue?

Linklicious doesn't index your links, it just gets them crawled. It is a ping service that just keeps pinging the links until a google spider comes.

 

[verdox]

Then any other suggestions? Or is it just voodoo ?

 

[alexj.affiliate]

i would like an answer on this as well , kinda having the same problem...

 

[Patel]

If your trying to get links indexed, you need to build backlinks to them.

Say, if you have 5k links you want to index, I recommend blasting them with mass link creators such as xrumer or scrapebox

 

[verdox]

That sounds like catch 22 if I build backlinks to my backlinks then those need indexing

 

[ThopHayt]

That sounds like catch 22 if I build backlinks to my backlinks then those need indexing

Which is why the build SOOOOO many backlinks to your backlinks... it increases the odds they get indexed. I believe you also wanna make sure you ping or get those mass blasts pinged to up the odds further.

 

[ryyaannk]

Hmmmm... I'm having the same problem. I have multiple article directories that I submitted spun articles to for backlinks, and then pinged each of them, and blasted them with scrapebox. Some of them are even ranking for their title, but they don't show up as backlinks in YSE..

Anyone have an explanation?

 

[Autumn]

Like others have said, backlink your backlinks! There are two ways of doing it: generate a whole bunch of shit links (any old crap) or put together a "hallway" page with a list of your backlinks on it, then get some high PR links to your hallways... Works wonders.

Some of them are even ranking for their title, but they don't show up as backlinks in YSE..

Anyone have an explanation?

Bear in mind there's a big lag between Google and YSE... YSE isn't updated nearly as fast.

 

[genotip]

don't waste your time trying to index them, also - i don't like the idea of building link to the links - do this only if they worth it (good sites, high pr).

just ping them (there are all kind of services, you can check in my sing also that show you the crawl status also) and move on. google will index part of them, part of them will be deleted, sites will go down... this is the game - just build lots of links.

 

[n2zen]

Have to disagree with genotip on this one!

The method ginotip is referring to is equivalent to the 'spray and pray' method. In this scenario, your backlink mass is like an iceberg. Google only indexes those which are up above the water, with 90% of them not visible, and not giving you any benefit.

Personally, I spend 20-25% of my time getting links indexed, and am moving that number upwards, likely to reach 45-50% in the very near future.

There are a lot of tools and approaches out there including:
Sprinkling the links across automatically generated blog posts
Forum posts and profiles
Social bookmarks
Social networks
RSS XML uploads
etc, etc

Yes, you are building links2 -> links1 -> money site

The more effort you spend at the links2 level, the more frequently your links1 will be indexed, cached, and pass weight. After all, why build a link with a weight of .0001 when you can build a links with a weight of .01 or .1 (relative value)?

To me, it seems ridiculous to spend 99% of your time building links, knowing that 99% of them won't be indexed, and 100% of those won't carry any weight. I'd rather build 1/2 as many links, have 50%+++ of them indexed and those carrying 10x the weight.

 

[Autumn]

I would also strongly disagree with genotip. Getting your shitty backlinks indexed is a major part of the game in 2011. Anyone can spew out thousands of links, but getting them to count is what makes the difference between ranking and not ranking.

Pinging is only one weapon in the arsenal and is way overused. Every man and his dog is pumping out pings... There must be billions and billions of pings being sent every day, mostly by spammers. It used to be that you could just build links and they'd get indexed automatically, but not anymore. The best of indexing your links is to build proper hardlinks to them! I would say that the only links that don't need deliberate backlinking are the good high PR ones, because they'll get spidered and indexed anyway.

Also if you're paying for captchas for your links then you get the best bang for your buck if you can get as many of your links indexed as you can.

 

[tat1973]

Low quality links like sb, xrumer=use linklicious
High quality links like high pr or edu = use backlinkindexer

 

[genotip]

yes and no.
i do say spam links are just spam. i will not make too much effort to index a link that tommorow will not work anymore.

That's way i believe that indexing should be by using automated tools. i built for myself smart system, that ping-tool.com is only one of the tools i'm using, but all under the simple login - xrumer links are a big numbers game.

"Build" process that work for you and automat them, that's my logic.

Have to disagree with genotip on this one!

The method ginotip is referring to is equivalent to the 'spray and pray' method. In this scenario, your backlink mass is like an iceberg. Google only indexes those which are up above the water, with 90% of them not visible, and not giving you any benefit.

Personally, I spend 20-25% of my time getting links indexed, and am moving that number upwards, likely to reach 45-50% in the very near future.

There are a lot of tools and approaches out there including:
Sprinkling the links across automatically generated blog posts
Forum posts and profiles
Social bookmarks
Social networks
RSS XML uploads
etc, etc

Yes, you are building links2 -> links1 -> money site

The more effort you spend at the links2 level, the more frequently your links1 will be indexed, cached, and pass weight. After all, why build a link with a weight of .0001 when you can build a links with a weight of .01 or .1 (relative value)?

To me, it seems ridiculous to spend 99% of your time building links, knowing that 99% of them won't be indexed, and 100% of those won't carry any weight. I'd rather build 1/2 as many links, have 50%+++ of them indexed and those carrying 10x the weight.

 

[opal123]

If you are wanting to get your backlinks indexed it's worth using "backlinksindexer.co m" This is the only service I have found that can actually get the job done not to mention actually boost your search rank. Look at all the BHW member votes for backlinksindexer here: "blackhatworld.co m/blackhat-seo/black-hat-seo/326783-backlinksindexer-linklicious-indexing.html"