Which is best ?? PBN or Web2.0

[devika45]

I need to sure which are the best methods for websites ranking ??
PBN methods or Web2.0 ??

 

[mqsss]

If you have to ask that, you should take about a week off and read again everything that you already have about SEO.

 

[hanssolo]

Web2.0 definitely gives a good foundation, esp. for a new site that has no backlink at all, but the real ranking power comes from a PBN. So IMO, both worth your effort.

 

[nakamura]

Both together works fine.

 

[SainaGroup]

Web 2.0 + PBN = great results .

 

[safex]

If Competition is Low/Medium than I would say just web 2.0's . If it's not giving you results fast enough than you can go for PBN. Basically Rankings depends on many factors not just PBN or Webs.20

 

[myopic1]

I need to sure which are the best methods for websites ranking ??
PBN methods or Web2.0 ??

"[...]They asked me which was better, a PBN or a web 2.0. I wrote down ‘ranked'. They told me I didn't understand the question, and I told them they didn't understand rankings." -John Lennon

 

[whiteblackseo]

Get good Web 2.0 with pa 30+ to deliver power to your site. Just normal Web 2.0 with no pa are scrap. Also, get 2.0 from different sites, not just 1 site such as tumblr. Use livejournal tumblr etc. more domain ip's.

 

[eaglesWTF]

Both. The end of the discussions

 

[deanneaud]

PBN>Web2.0s
A Mixture of both will put you ahead of your competitors if done right.

 

[thewriteone2345]

PBN is Better
PBN have authority and pagerank, they can literally launch your keywords at the top of Google in most cases, web2.0s are fine too but they are not totally yours. They are getting no followed in most cases.

 

[bignose]

Your own sites are your asset forever. Web2.0 are not yours. They can delete your links, can - and will - have links to all your competitors, can disappear at all.

 

[SEO_Alchemy]

OP... use both as part of a well rounded diversified SEO strategy and link building approach.

Links work in synergy: 1+1=5

Good quality Web 2.0's with quality PBN's and other links for diversity will all add together to produce good rank boosts.

 

[mickyfu]

Neither, the best is summoning demons from the underworld to rank your sites.

 

[asap1]

Use both.

You can get 20 web 2.0 post for like $10 in the marketplace.

It cant hurt.

 

[Shellster]

PBN links are more powerful.

In some niches Web 2.0 links are enough, but if it is competitive then you need PBN links.

 

[catonkeyboard]

Harnessing the power of your mind is the new SEO of the future, PM pewep for guidance.

 

[reallife]

Yes.
The answer isn't pushing a magic button.
It's having a unified SEO strategy.
Ask yourself "Which is better for your body, proteins, carbs or fat?"
The answer is "yes" to that question, too. The real question is how they all work together with proper diet, lifestyle and exercise to keep you healthy.
As someone else suggested, doing some more reading first might be better for your website than just "pushng a button."

 

[SeoWrecker]

Pbn is more powerful than web 2.0 while web 2.0 is a safer way of building links . Each has its purpose so choose both .

 

[djp371]

The best method for ranking is nailing onpage SEO, then getting quality links. Now if you are a big brand PBN doesn't make sense. If you are doing an affiliate site PBN makes sense. But ultimately most affiliate marketers turn their affiliate sites into a brand and pull their PBN to replace with natural links as the website is successful.