Maybe I have missed it, but are there any reviews for this product? What changes in SERPs are seen when using this product? Also, does this work on competitive keywords?
If you got no open spots i'd like to reserve one for when you do. If that's possible. Ty
I told you already that few people have this problems, and its hard to determine why 30+ people from Network 1 rank sky high, and ~15 people have problems to move.
We think its Social element missing, and that is why we are adding for free all customers of Black Hole to our new service that is more social oriented - Black Hole SEO 2.0
With this bad boy every member will receive EACH week following:
5x5x5 web 2.0 pyramid
Submission to top 5 private blog networks
Submission to 1.000+ article directories
125 High PR Manual Bookmarks
50 Angela style high PR manual backlinks
100+ Wiki Sites submission
10.000 blog comments to supercharge link pyramid
As you can see this is a lot - and this will be given for free to all members, including yourself.
Initial tests moved our dummy site in just 2 weeks from page 4-5 to page 1 for keyword that receives 240.000+ exact searches each month.
Also be aware - we are so confident of our methods, that if until next payment you wont see any movement, then we will gladly refund you.
Happiness of our customers is #1 for us.
EW
I too have seen no movement of my keywords. I kind of want a refund, I was expecting a lot more out of this.
Hi.
Once again - no SEO service will work for all customers.
This is why we are upgrading all our customers to Black Hole SEO 2.0 for free.
And this why we are providing full refund policy after completion of 4 months if you are not happy with results![]()
I already canceled at the end of last month after two months. I never did receive my second month's report. My SERPS actually dropped since signing on with your service, and I'm convinced that the search engines are penalizing your approach, particularly your practice of putting half a dozen or more links pointing to the same page on my site from each page on your site you built for me. That's a big red flag to them.
It's telling that none of the pages you created for me are cached in Google, even though I submitted them all via Linklicious in early August. That means that Google doesn't consider them worthy of being scored in the index for PageRank purposes.
I suspect you won't refund me since I didn't fork over four months in payments, but I would welcome a refund anyway.
By the way, you previously complained that I hadn't contacted you privately via Skype about all this. While I did try contacting you numerous times via email (messages which were largely ignored), I have since done so via Skype as well, although we haven't successfully connected yet, due to your recent move to Spain and my own busy schedule. I re-initiated contact via Skype today and am awaiting your reply.
ExtraWinner,
here is the thing: I have been a customer for full 3 months, I am not crying and throlling about your service BEFORE I get the chance to see if it's working or not. The things I didn't like and the main reason I drop the service on the
4th month I already stated above. I can't stay more to see any improvements because, when I checked the created websites:
1) most of them are offline
2) there are actually more links of competitors websites than mine
3) the price is quite high, i expected rapid improvements, even on the 3rd month the results are far for great!
Point me at least one domain created through the first month of network one with good rankings in any seo monitoring site such as compete/opensiteexplorer. Why there is no movement? Perhaps not only the quality of the articles is quite low (auto spinned text i guess) but you are using BRAND new domains. These domains will be frozen for google for quite long. I don't mean to offend you but really perhaps it's better to offer less domains (like 100 domains total) and improve the quality of these domins like investing in aged domains, better hosting and high quality manualy checked/written articles. Having pictures will not make any difference to those articles. Don't think that if you give rights to anyone to write content in these sites, the quality content will pop up itself.
I expected more from this service because I am using very similar service (same concept, less properties with higher rank aged domains) for a site and the results were amazing in just a few months the improvements were huge. Can't say the same for this service, just not worth the money.
Guys remember, this service could work just perfect for you, depends on what you have and what you expect. This is just my point of view. I have way better options to spend on SEO and feel like just throwed 300$ in the trash.
hey bart, have resent PM again, this is the third time trying to get anything from u, so far the only thing i have received about the service is the first months report and yet the 2nd and 3rd months payments have been taken and u have assured me a couple times now that u would send all other information that i havent received? please get back to me asap.
I doubt the search engines are even noticing what EW is doing because:
A) EW knows what he's doing (there's plenty of proof around to confirm that)
B) The internet is that big and has that many sites using quite varied backlinking techniques that the search engines can't possibly keep track of it all to such an acute extent
I don't buy it, ezlegion. All the claims about "plenty of proof" aside (personally, I've only seen claims, never the actual proof itself), your assertion that the search engines don't even know what he's doing is belied by the fact that the pages aren't being cached. Period.
For instance, I just did some SEO work on a brand new 45 page website for a plumber. It was launched in August, with a ton of SEO flaws (the designer was a friend of mine who knows nothing about SEO), and it still managed to get indexed, although the flaws were so bad that only a couple pages got cached. I did my stuff on it at the end of August (basic, on-page SEO, nothing fancy: titles, h1, meta description, text, etc.), and submitted it to linklicious. It's now about three weeks later, and already most of the revised site is re-indexed and cached in Google. This is a brand new site, mind you!
By comparison, EW's sites are all older, yet Google is refusing to cache hardly any of his pages. Ask yourself why? Then, please answer that question here and explain how this does NOT prove that Google's algorithm is aware of what he is doing.
I claim that the failure of his pages to be cached proves that the search engines are already aware of what he's doing and have built-in algorithmic steps taken against it, which will prevent EW's customers from succeeding.