Of course it still exist, it's just more sophisticated than it was before (or resource intensive).
Why do you ask?
The only reason you should be even considering neg SEO is if you are doing ORM and it's justified. Otherwise, don't do that. It's a waste of time and resources. You're better off putting that effort into ranking your own properties.
If it's possible to get yourself deranked or out of the index it's possible to do that for your competitors as well so yes, negative SEO exists
i am sorry, but what is ORM?
you better believe it son
here are some in no order of importance or effectiveness
ddos
deindexed domains links
deindexed domain 301
spammed domains 301 / links
mass dfollow links
defacing
injecting malware / creating dupe content internally
mass 404 creation
etc
Exactly. Newer sites are much more vulnerable. Once you get that authority, it's much harder to Neg SEO a website.
Exactly. IMHO, new sites are at huge risk for negative SEO, even cheap and easy stuff like mass GSA links. Older, authority sites are at minimal risk.
I believe there's an "authority threshold" after which Google largely ignores spammy links instead of penalizing for them. When it comes to an authority site, the amount of money and effort needed to hurt the site is hardly worth it (e.g., trying to increase their proportion of ******** money anchor text links), you're better off building your competing site instead.
I think this is in a state of flux, though. A year ago, an authority site could seriously hurt itself with too much spammy conduct. At the moment, authority sites can more easily adopt spammy techniques themselves and see benefits. The pendulum will probably swing back at some point.