Are Web 2.0's Dead?

[ThopHayt]

IThere has to be..... a next! Web 2.0's and PBN's are now, what about in 2 or 3 years time?

No... there doesn't have to be anything next. There will not be web3.0's in 2017, nor will PBNs die. My advice is to stop worrying about what is next and simply learn how to do what is here today successfully. One must learn to finish this candy bar before he opens up another candy bar.

-ThopHayt

 

[NulledCode]

No... there doesn't have to be anything next. There will not be web3.0's in 2017, nor will PBNs die. My advice is to stop worrying about what is next and simply learn how to do what is here today successfully. One must learn to finish this candy bar before he opens up another candy bar.

-ThopHayt

Exactly! People assume because they now need quality over quantity the method is dead.

 

[Cshark]

Except for blogger, wordpress, webly, tumbler and to an extent, myblog all of the other web 2.0 options don't get indexed these days. So if you know where to put your money OP, web 2.0 is still good to go.

 

[elitebill]

Web 2.0 still work. Make sure they are indexed and publish content on them. As a strategy, I aim for content targeting very low competition keywords related to my money site. As you web 2.0 rank, they pass link juice to your money site.

 

[memme]

The next thing might be loosing the value of backlinks in google algo at all. Take a look at yandex (.ru search engine) their algo works without backlinks.

This might be the next move for google.
Maybe social signals getting more and more important in future.l

 

[THUNDERELVI]

The next thing might be loosing the value of backlinks in google algo at all. Take a look at yandex (.ru search engine) their algo works without backlinks.

This might be the next move for google.
Maybe social signals getting more and more important in future.l

You have no idea at all how the algorithm of search engines works fundamentally , do you?! Everyone with a bit of logic and programming knowledge knows that unless quantum computing and AI takes over, the core of the algorithm (links + on-site) won't change. And I don't see that happening any time soon, I doubt it that we will even be alive to see it happen. And this is true for all search engines - Google, Yandex, Yahoo/Bing, etc... I have no idea where you draw the conclusion that links don't matter in Yandex, but you are completely wrong. And social signals will never be as major a ranking factor as links are, simply because they are out of Google's control. Google doesn't have access to that kind of data, so the numbers can be manipulated by a 10-year old buying a package in BHW. Hence why only social signal sellers spread the BS that they are the new "links" that rank your websites.

 

[memme]

You have no idea at all how the algorithm of search engines works fundamentally , do you?! Everyone with a bit of logic and programming knowledge knows that unless quantum computing and AI takes over, the core of the algorithm (links + on-site) won't change. And I don't see that happening any time soon, I doubt it that we will even be alive to see it happen. And this is true for all search engines - Google, Yandex, Yahoo/Bing, etc... I have no idea where you draw the conclusion that links don't matter in Yandex, but you are completely wrong. And social signals will never be as major a ranking factor as links are, simply because they are out of Google's control. Google doesn't have access to that kind of data, so the numbers can be manipulated by a 10-year old buying a package in BHW. Hence why only social signal sellers spread the BS that they are the new "links" that rank your websites.

okay, my info was old on yandex, sorry:
In December 2013, Yandex, the largest search engine in Russia, announced they would drop links from their ranking algorithm for some verticals. That actually went through in March 2014 but it seems it was short lived. A year later, Yandex will be bringing back these links into their ranking algorithm.

 

[humphrytools]

links and on site factors (even ctr on search position) matters and that is the base of google algo. As long as they maintain that links will count. They started using social metrics and people started selling them. So i am not sure why so much panic.

 

[extremeboy]

Normally things are not dead but peoples mindsets which driven by Groups decision will make things dead

 

[Scott Parker]

Dead....no. I still use Web 2.0 sites, both fresh and expired. They still work if ou can put out quality content.

 

[JustUs]

The best way to determine web 2.0 is to test it. It may be dead for you or your niche, but not dead for another.

 

[SnoopyDrew]

Except for blogger, wordpress, webly, tumbler and to an extent, myblog all of the other web 2.0 options don't get indexed these days. So if you know where to put your money OP, web 2.0 is still good to go.

Yolasite,Jimdo and wix index well for me and give me a LOT of power when buffed up with GSA blasts, blog comments and cheap PBN posts.

 

[domwe ala]

Lol. Web 2.0 is still good.

 

[charliebrooker]

My service uses wordpress, tumblr, boosites and blogger. All get indexed and all can build a great Tier 1.

 

[charliebrooker]

And for those saying Weebly blogs get indexed....unless you pay they don't.

 

[MatthewGraham]

We still get results with Web 2.0 sites.

Here are two top-secret pieces of advice that have helped us have success with Web 2.0s in 2016:
1. Do a good job
2. Don't do a bad job

Every "SEO consultant" that comes to us to pitch Web 2.0 services is trying to sell some one page Web 2.0 with spun content, a default template, and a sidebars/about pages/contact pages that haven't been changed at all from the default. They have a ton of links that go no where, default text, images that overlap the content so you can't see anything, and are barely functional. Basically, they look and feel like crap.

Everyone on the planet has started a crappy blog with nothing on it that hasn't been updated in like ten years. You will get low-quality results with these.

Put a little god damn effort into your Web 2.0s and they'll have way better results.

Change the settings around so they aren't just the default. Add some images. Change the text on the sidebar so it says something besides "Insert your sidebar text here."

Have multiple posts. They can be basic. Transcribe videos relevant to your niche, translate articles, write some generic articles. Put some images in, generic links to things like Wikipedia, etc. You can hire people to put together these basic "filler" posts for so cheap that they might as well be free. Use post scheduling tools to have these articles drip feed onto the site over a year or two.

Build backlinks to your Web 2.0 in a way that makes sense. Drip feed links over time. You can increase the link building velocity over time. Vary your anchor text. Some generic, some tangential, some plain URLs with no anchor text, and some that are related to the exact keyword you're trying to rank. Link to more than just the homepage. Send some links to about/contact/FAQ/etc. pages. If you have multiple blog posts on the site, and you should, send some links to posts besides just the ones with links to your money site.

You can send more backlinks at the pages that have the links to your money site than the others. Backlinks at the other pages at well make your linking seem natural and raise the authority of the blog overall.

When you need an actual link to one of your money sites, write or hire someone to write a decent quality post. Include the link in the post. Send backlinks to the post and use it as a tier. Do your backlinking to the post naturally. Mix up your anchor text, link types, etc. And as mentioned previously, send links to other pages on the domain as well.

Put the effort into you Web 2.0s and you can make a long-term resource that you can use to send way more powerful links to your money site.

 

[rosscrew]

Web2.0 works good for ranking if you are not doing spam. like fresh content for single submissions, no more than 1 link to keywords, etc.

 

[pelangi]

haha lol,
whats exactly dead mean?
i rankd all web 2.0 so well..
if everybody leave it, its good news for me, let me play alone..

 

[Furious Man]

still alive mate

 

[PBNButler]

Honestly, the way to look at this, as many other members before me have mentioned, is an evolution.

Back in the day, you could spam sites with a ton of spammy links and boom, you would rank.
And then the quality guidelines came in and all of a sudden you had to be a little bit careful about the links you send to your site.

At some point you could use as much dupe content as you liked, and that also didnt matter, and today you have to be careful about that too.

The way you have to build out a web 2.0 has changed (in my opinion), no longer is it beneficial to just put one spun article on 50 platforms and spam them with links.
Now what is better is to actually put some thought into it, add 5 articles on different pages, interlink them internally (with a proper silo) and use some common sense.
Once you do that, and then send some links at it, it wouldnt surprise me if your web 2.0 started ranking, once it ranks in the top 300, link out to your MS and see what happens.