SEO relevancy amplifiying method [GIVEAWAY]

[tar729]

Dude, yandex and google are not even closely related they have completely different algos, it's like comparing bing to google. But hey, what do I know, I only make a living ranking sites on Google.

I have already given you arguments with the sexual organs of boys and girls.
We are talking about the fundamental similarities.
the bonus of the trust over the relevant link is a fundamental similarity.
tell you a secret: Baidu.com also a boy and he has a dick
Don't need much intelligence to approve: the seo transistor is applicable to China too.

 

[THUNDERELVI]

Dude, yandex and google are not even closely related they have completely different algos, it's like comparing bing to google. But hey, what do I know, I only make a living ranking sites on Google.

What the OP is claiming is that this "compensation" technique is a fundamental concept in any search engine ranking algorithm. He is NOT claiming that both Yandex & Google use the SAME algorithm, he is just pointing out a similarity between the algorithms that can be used in your advantage.

For example, take programming languages Java & C#. They have differences between each other, but both languages are built upon OO (object-oriented) paradigm fundamentals, which are the SAME for any OO-supported language. If a hacker would discover a vulnerability for example in the underlying OO code, both languages would be vulnerable despite the fact that Java is better because it's not a platform dependent language. If you have any experience with coding and algorithms, you would have understood this by now.

You only know how to rank sites in Google, fine keep doing that. Don't forget though that Google is simply a huge pile of "code" and this discussion here is much more than your common knowledge about SEO.
@OP: Do you have Skype or Telegram?

 

[tar729]

What the OP is claiming is that this "compensation" technique is a fundamental concept in any search engine ranking algorithm. He is NOT claiming that both Yandex & Google use the SAME algorithm, he is just pointing out a similarity between the algorithms that can be used in your advantage.

For example, take programming languages Java & C#. They have differences between each other, but both languages are built upon OO (object-oriented) paradigm fundamentals, which are the SAME for any OO-supported language. If a hacker would discover a vulnerability for example in the underlying OO code, both languages would be vulnerable despite the fact that Java is better because it's not a platform dependent language. If you have any experience with coding and algorithms, you would have understood this by now.

You only know how to rank sites in Google, fine keep doing that. Don't forget though that Google is simply a huge pile of "code" and this discussion here is much more than your common knowledge about SEO.
@OP: Do you have Skype or Telegram?

the same approach should be applied to the concept of the weight of the link. The metric of usefulness of the link, also fundamentally the same. The difference in the methods of implementation of these metrics. metrics are simple and well known. I brought them in the discussion thread. On them I measure the weight of links
skype ev-gen.t

 

[vampour]

How is this different from SILO?

 

[tar729]

How is this different from SILO?

I don't understand. let's wait for the translator

 

[florinovic]

I want to be polite. Your main website promoting seo services for Google and Yandex has no decent ranks anywhere, at least lately. yaxxxxxx.ru is yours, right?
And the transistor concept is yours as well, not a leak from google, as you said in the Dec 2015 interview. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I appreciate your effort trying to explain your ideas, but you were wrong from the start assuming yandex and google are very similar. They are not.

and for that claim "one of the five leading specialists in Russian seo" .... I prefer to not comment.

 

[W9go]

You need as many articles that are related as the amount of keywords you're going to use.

so for every KW you like to rank you make 1 article with a link (anchor -= kw)
how you like between page 1 - 2 and the money side page 3 ????
with the main KW ?

or does this structure only work for 1 kw ???

 

[coma123]

on the Russian forums do not share important information. To read them is meaningless. if someone places an important and valuable it is immediately placed in a ban.
all moderators are corrupt. hard totalitarianism.
Russian forums specifically pay trolls. Their goal is to dilute the valuable information nonsense. From this, people are confused in their thoughts and more in need of counseling. Profit.
this Russian world, baby
all relevant information in closed groups, Facebook and other

I am georgian and I know russian totalitarism but did not know that this is happening on forums too. But there must be place where useful information can be founded. From where are you getting information like this you posted here?

 

[tar729]

I am georgian and I know russian totalitarism but did not know that this is happening on forums too. But there must be place where useful information can be founded. From where are you getting information like this you posted here?

I do and promote the site only for his scientific work. I do experiments, learn the algorithms. I have more than 40 sites on different subjects.
transportation, medicine, advertising, seo, clothing, construction, investments, fitness...
all these experimental sites.

How is this different from SILO?

This has nothing to do with SILOs. Read better.

I want to be polite. Your main website promoting seo services for Google and Yandex has no decent ranks anywhere, at least lately. yaxxxxxx.ru is yours, right?

And the transistor concept is yours as well, not a leak from google, as you said in the Dec 2015 interview. Correct me if I'm wrong.


I appreciate your effort trying to explain your ideas, but you were wrong from the start assuming yandex and google are very similar. They are not.


and for that claim "one of the five leading specialists in Russian seo" .... I prefer to not comment.

Mine "main site", as you called it, was created in 2014 and was only updated once. You're obviously one of those that thinks that if Matt Cutts would've made such a website, he would get into the top on the keyword "seo services".

It's funny to even talk about this. I created the concept of SEO transistors in 2009. And since then I've had a huge experience building them. It is completely my work and I am the leading expert in it.


Your ignorance shows how foolish you are, if you just understood the possibility of this. You wouldn't even consider it real or not, or create arguments against it. You would test it. You would want it to work.


One of the other bad assumptions on this forum is that link can only rank for one or a few keywords, that's not true. If you need site3 to rank for 1000 keywords, you don't have to build 1000 transistor pairs. 6-7 pairs for popular keywords are more than enough. How popular the keyword, how much more keyword relevancy you can pass on through a link. Also relevant keywords are really relevant and are not keywords like. Cheap hotel, inexpensive hotel. There exist special tools to check the relevancy of Russian keywords. Some keywords, even though more popular, can be less relevant to your keyword and do no good. However some can be extremely relevant. You can see it then on a graph.

so for every KW you like to rank you make 1 article with a link (anchor -= kw)

how you like between page 1 - 2 and the money side page 3 ????

with the main KW ?


or does this structure only work for 1 kw ???

You need to read my first post one more time carefully. Yes on article.

With one anchor. In the title. The same anchor everywhere, just a bit varied. Like if your anchor is dog food, I could have cheap dog food or everything about dog food. You can try experimenting. I usually check relevancy of all keywords. Then I decide to use the most relevant keyphrase. It has to be as exact as possible, but also natural to the visitors

 

[lastbencher]

You said we should not build links to transistor sites but what happens if sites like scamadviser, whois sites and many other crap sites link them. Do we need to disavow them when they appear? Or simply you ignore them

 

[JoachimvR]

So just to clarify it for myself as I seem to understand site 1, but site 2 is just a bit vague for me:

Site 1:

1) Build site 1 with a main article on the homepage based on the main keyword you'd like to rank site 3 (moneysite) for.
2) Create a bunch of posts on the very same site with related keywords based off the main keyword and DON'T link directly to those posts via the homepage.
3) Create a subpage which has all the links to the articles listed and link to that subpage from the homepage
4) Link out with main keyword anchor text from the homepage to site 2

Site 2:

1) Build site 2 with a main article on the homepage based on the main keyword you'd like to rank site 3 (moneysite) for.
2) Either link out directly to your moneysite (site 3) with main keyword or let it sit for a while.

It looks like I'm missing some stuff on site 2 isn't it? Also, site 1 and 2 should be build and indexed at the same time no?

Thanks for sharing this btw.

 

[tar729]

You said we should not build links to transistor sites but what happens if sites like scamadviser, whois sites and many other crap sites link them. Do we need to disavow them when they appear? Or simply you ignore them

You should simply ignore them since they are irrelevant to your keyword and will not effect you in any way.

I will explain keyword relevancy and it's importance to the transistor system below.

Of course if you get too many you might get penalized, I'd use an app to automatically disavow spammy links. And even links in general if it comes to that.

So just to clarify it for myself as I seem to understand site 1, but site 2 is just a bit vague for me:

Site 1:

1) Build site 1 with a main article on the homepage based on the main keyword you'd like to rank site 3 (moneysite) for.
2) Create a bunch of posts on the very same site with related keywords based off the main keyword and DON'T link directly to those posts via the homepage.
3) Create a subpage which has all the links to the articles listed and link to that subpage from the homepage
4) Link out with main keyword anchor text from the homepage to site 2

Site 2:

1) Build site 2 with a main article on the homepage based on the main keyword you'd like to rank site 3 (moneysite) for.
2) Either link out directly to your moneysite (site 3) with main keyword or let it sit for a while.

It looks like I'm missing some stuff on site 2 isn't it? Also, site 1 and 2 should be build and indexed at the same time no?

Thanks for sharing this btw.

You're missing some things, you are right. Look at my example websites and the original post one more time.
On the receiving structure website you should build an irrelevant link(bottom of the page) with an irrelevant keyword to the articles page.
On the giving structure website you should build relevant links to your articles and no relevant links from articles to homepage.
Guys, you can interlink all pages as long as it's done with maximum irrelevancy. Yes, built and indexed at the same time. On-Page SEO should also be the same or roughly the same.

Relevancy

Not all relevant keywords work with transistor websites. All the keywords should be precisely chosen. Which is done through a semantic graph such as this :

How bigger the circle, how many searches of the keyphrase.
How shorter the lines, how related they are to each other. For maximum relevancy I've chosen the closest circles to each other. The keyphrases with the shortest linesb are the ones you should use as anchor in links. There are different semantic graphs, such as one made for commercial website and one for non-commercial, as the keywords vary. As I've said before, if both commercial websites try to link each other, it will lead to a penalty. That's why you need one non-commercial website between them with only relevant non-commercial website. How more precise they are, the relevant keyphrases, how bigger the amplification. On homepages of both the websites I spend around 12 hours writing them. Two articles for two homepages. The keywords are specially made using LSI keyword method. The articles need to be unique, could be copywritten. I assume you all know what's LSI keyword method, so I won't go further into it. You can copywrite the articles which are already in the top for your keyword for maximum efficiency.

Anyway, the semantic graphs are made by a special program like I said. I have my own Russian service that creates them. Me and my team have created everything ourselves and cracked Yandex relevancy algorithm this way.
Also Google Planner doesn't exactly show keywords by highest relevancy, if the keyword would only be 1% related it can weaken the amplfication as it will widen to another keyword that isn't related to your money website.

 

[Kanye West]

I have read this thread very carefully. I have understood everything you have said but I have a question. How powerful is this method? Could you give us more precise information about the possiblites ranking only with this method? The amplification only would be an advantage if the power which gets amplified is big enough to be more efficient than PBN's.

 

[dondada7]

I have read this thread very carefully. I have understood everything you have said but I have a question. How powerful is this method? Could you give us more precise information about the possiblites ranking only with this method? The amplification only would be an advantage if the power which gets amplified is big enough to be more efficient than PBN's.

That is a strange way of thinking.

@tar729 Do you need to hide the footprints of the transistors the same way you do with PBNs?

 

[Kanye West]

That is a strange way of thinking.

@tar729 Do you need to hide the footprints of the transistors the same way you do with PBNs?

I just want a comparison scale. Could you please justify your statements like these?

 

[dondada7]

I just want a comparison scale. Could you please justify your statements like these?

He said it amplifies relevancy by 5-10x. If this is true it would probably save you a lot of money on PBNs. I don't get why you wouldn't bother doing it just because it "isn't as powerful as PBNs"

 

[fc-dh]

He said it amplifies relevancy by 5-10x. If this is true it would probably save you a lot of money on PBNs. I don't get why you wouldn't bother doing it just because it "isn't as powerful as PBNs"

Because he or she needs to be spoon-fed, instead of doing their own testing they rather have it all on a silver plate and of course it needs to cost nothing....

 

[Kanye West]

He said it amplifies relevancy by 5-10x. If this is true it would probably save you a lot of money on PBNs. I don't get why you wouldn't bother doing it just because it "isn't as powerful as PBNs"

Didn't understand the part like you but if it's just like that it makes sense.

Because he or she needs to be spoon-fed, instead of doing their own testing they rather have it all on a silver plate and of course it needs to cost nothing....

I can't take you even serious. The OP clearly stated that we can answer him anything and isn't it wise to get as much information as possible? If he doesn't know it it's ok. Keep in mind that you don't know the person behind any account so be more respectful to people with "Newbie" accounts.

 

[fatjack'sblackhat]

Can transistor sites be created with web 2.0s like wordpress or blogspot and then the 3rd is a normal domain/commercial site and have a big effect, or do the transistor sites need to ALL be bought and paid for domains on different hosting accounts?

 

[tar729]

I have read this thread very carefully. I have understood everything you have said but I have a question. How powerful is this method? Could you give us more precise information about the possiblites ranking only with this method? The amplification only would be an advantage if the power which gets amplified is big enough to be more efficient than PBN's.

This is more effecient than PBNs, if you used the same cost, this would give you overall more trust power.

That is a strange way of thinking.

Transistors are more cost-effecient. Try them out yourself vs PBN using the same costs.

@tar729 Do you need to hide the footprints of the transistors the same way you do with PBNs?

No, as long as you keep it by Google rules. Making two websites and linking them to another website that you own isn't against Google rules. Neither are transistors.

Can transistor sites be created with web 2.0s like wordpress or blogspot and then the 3rd is a normal domain/commercial site and have a big effect, or do the transistor sites need to ALL be bought and paid for domains on different hosting accounts?

No. Your own domains and different hosting.

More explanation

I would like to bring the attention of everyone who is reading to one more explanation if you still don't understand what SEO transistors are. I want to bring you to a time that happened long time ago. When Yandex and Google only were created. Do you know who we should thank for backlink rank power? The idea to use links to rank website was proposed by the father of founder of Yandex Ilya Segalovich in a normal talk in the kitchen. His father was a geophysicist and Ilya always listened to him and shared his ideas of advancing his search engine. So came to life SiteRank. Then only the quantity of links was counted. It was a long time till PageRank was created by Google, which didn't only look at links that came in, but also at links that pointed to the links that came in. In the new SEO business that was evolving it was extremely easy to manipulate results with bought links. And then was the time when SEO experts created a ring loop. The simplest ring loop is made of three websites linking to each other with the same anchors.

Three sites are created and at the start they have very little trust. Let's say that in the start, every site has a trust power of 1. And every link gives out 10% of it's trust. Let's see now what happens every update. Everyone thinks that every update the websites will give away 10% of their trust power to each other and in the end the trust power will stay the same or that somehow the trust power keeps increasing and increasing. That's not true. There is no magic and the websites don't only get trust from other websites. The secret is that a link can get compensation trust from search engines in the following cases :
1) For aquired total traffic from Google.
2) For user feedback. Such as CTR, raitings, time on site.
3) For related outgoing links (In our case, every website from the loop gets bonus trust for doing this. Since every website is related and every link they give out is to a related website)
That's how universally trust gets created. Let's play it out and see what happens exactly.
Google Update 1)
1) Every website gave away and received 10% trust from each other.
2) Every website got bonus trust from Google for giving out related links to each other.

Google Update 2)
1) Every website once again gives away 10% of it's trust and receives 10% of it back. However this time, the total amount of trust traded between each other is higher, since every website now also gives away 10% of it's bonus trust from Google.
2) Every website once again receives bonus trust from Google.
3) Because every site now gets extra bonus trust, the rankings of the websites also rise, which causes the websites to get even more trust.

SERPs affect averagely 75% of a website's traffic. And this went on in a loop till the websites hit the first spot or the rise in the website's trust wasn't enough to move a single serp anymore. Maybe years later it would move a few serps, but that was just it. The luch of SEO experts that used this was used up when Google started targetting loop circles. Since they had enormous power, much more than a transistor, they invested a great deal of time of tracking down them.

I went back to time and explained this so that you could guys understand how positive feedback link trust works and that a SEO transistor works in the same way, however without a loop. Frequently, we all dealt with it. If your microphone was too close to your speakers it would result in a positive feedback loop which would make the sound at max volume scream in your ears like hell. That's why the possiblity of using positive feedback link trust without getting banned is important and why these structures are important. Without them it wouldn't work and if you used a circle, you would get banned.
Here's just an example of how an SEO transistor works and that it's very similar to a circle loop, but it's not that and Google doesn't target this :

The positive feedback trust link happens inside Google's algorithm and is caused by the different structures of the websites. However the amplification power inside a transistor is limited unlike inside a circle loop. It's limited by the purity of the sctructures and the purity of the semantic power of the websites. How worse are these parametres, how worse will the amplification be. With my tools and knowledge I've personally created stable transistors with a maximum amplification power of 10x. It can be higher, however then the transistor will become unstable. That means that there runs a risk that one of the transistors will fall out of the SERPs, causing the other one to do so as well.
One of the reasons why transistors are cost effective is because
1) They work like PBNs, they aren't some blog posts or something like that, the links give out maximum trust that is possible to give out. Blog posts have a lot of other posts and a lot of other links, which would cause the outgoing trust to your link to be lowered in favor of other links. That's exactly the reason why PBNs work.
2) Two websites produce as much power as six - ten would. Once again the amplification power depends on a lot of factors and how much work you would put into the websites.

There need to be further tests done to find out the cost-effectiveness of transistors, however in my opinion they are the most cost-effective thing, if you create dozens of them.