High metric or trust backlinks

Peter Ngo · Feb 12, 2015

tony_d said:
What if your brain hasn't calculated hundreds of millions of URL's, and how they relate to the domain that you're considering? Then what? Is your brain still 'unbeatable', or is it just deceptive?

Well, as i said, it is not a this or that approach. Your brain can make mistake and so does TF or CF.

Without a doubt, TF currently is the number 1 metric that hold most accurate, but hey if you are saying TF is the ONLY thing to rely then tell me how is that even an appropriate statement?

Don't get me wrong, i use Majestic everyday for domains sorting + ahrefs for links analysis.

I get your point since most Domains seller here are trying to sell crap, since i was also the victim.

Moreover, you can use different tools to reinforce your link analysis process, so you don't really have to use your brain to go through those millions of URLs.

tony_d · Feb 12, 2015

peterngo91 said:
Moreover, you can use different tools to reinforce your link analysis process, so you don't really have to use your brain to go through those millions of URLs.

Yeah, and those tools return metrics.

So, we're back to metrics, instead of arbitrary decisions based on what we feel like when we see a few links.

tony_d · Feb 12, 2015

jamesjk1 said:
Thanks for your insights, Tony. The info you give out is always well thought-out and top-notch. Seeing you have such a good handle on this stuff, can I ask:
1) What it is that makes a 'quality' link?
2.) How does 'spam' fit into the link-building equation and how do you classify it?

Many thanks, JK.

Domains that I buy for my PBN's have TF>10 (usually around the high teens, or into the 20's), CF <2x TF, usually around 0.5-1.2x only, and between 10 and 250 referring IP's.

'Spam' (massive quantities of crap links) is algorithmically eliminated by the TF/CF ratio. If there is a domain that gets through that criteria but still has a few auto-approve blog comments, etc, then I'm not worried, because as a percentage of the overall links, they're clearly not significant.

All that remains is checking text anchors - and that's done against a list of negative keywords (eg nike, viagra, cialis, pills, etc).

If the initial criteria are met, and no negative keywords are present in the anchor text, then it's purchased and put to work.

rogerke · Feb 12, 2015

lol @ tony_d

You're totally ignoring the point dude. You have no clue about the rank correlation coefficient between TF or whatever metric and Google's own ranking metrics. No clue at all. You can ramble all day long and divert the attention with meaningless points, but as long as you can't tell anything about the rank correlation between the Google's own metrics and external metrics you're just speculating at best. Just accept that fact and don't act lik you know it all because you clearly don't.

See, if you have a good point you don't have to post an epistel of 1000 words to divert the attention.

rogerke · Feb 12, 2015

tony_d said:
Domains that I buy for my PBN's have TF>10 (usually around the high teens, or into the 20's), CF <2x TF, usually around 0.5-1.2x only, and between 10 and 250 referring IP's.

'Spam' (massive quantities of crap links) is algorithmically eliminated by the TF/CF ratio. If there is a domain that gets through that criteria but still has a few auto-approve blog comments, etc, then I'm not worried, because as a percentage of the overall links, they're clearly not significant.

Lol wrong again dude. Do u even do expired domain search bro? There are plenty of spammed to death expired domains with a great TF/CF ratio. You just have to know what you do when you're blasting GSA. You clearly suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect and I'll call you out every single time.

braindebug · Feb 12, 2015

tony_d said:
Domains that I buy for my PBN's have TF>10 (usually around the high teens, or into the 20's)

You are looking the tf of the root domain or whatever is higher (url,subdomain)?

tony_d · Feb 12, 2015

rogerke said:
lol @ tony_d

You're totally ignoring the point dude. You have no clue about the rank correlation coefficient between TF or whatever metric and Google's own ranking metrics. No clue at all. You can ramble all day long and divert the attention with meaningless points, but as long as you can't tell anything about the rank correlation between the Google's own metrics and external metrics you're just speculating at best. Just accept that fact and don't act lik you know it all because you clearly don't.

See, if you have a good point you don't have to post an epistel of 1000 words to divert the attention.

rogerke said:
Lol wrong again dude. Do u even do expired domain search bro? There are plenty of spammed to death expired domains with a great TF/CF ratio. You just have to know what you do when you're blasting GSA. You clearly suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect and I'll call you out every single time.

Some people are on this forum for constructive discussion, and others are here to try to have a big e-penis.
You've now clearly demonstrated that you're the latter, so I don't intend to engage with you any further.

askary · Feb 12, 2015

ok, i found domain with backlink from usa.gov(pr10), but tf 0. should i reg it?

myopic1 · Feb 12, 2015

rogerke said:
Lol wrong again dude. Do u even do expired domain search bro? There are plenty of spammed to death expired domains with a great TF/CF ratio. You just have to know what you do when you're blasting GSA. You clearly suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect and I'll call you out every single time.

It makes me chuckle how the Dunning-Kruger effect is increasingly being trotted out lately as a way to 'win' arguments by people who have done nothing other than read the first 4 lines of Wikipedia and want to appear to have a level of intelligence that isn't evident in the rest of their response. Ironically in your case, the Dunning-Kruger effect appears to apply to the person using the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Your apparent disregard for metrics would lead to a standstill in domain mining, if you trust no metrics then how can you possibly search through each and every domain sorting the good from the chaff. You appear fond of talking about a 'ranking coefficient' that you yourself can not even properly define because you don't have both parts of the equation, to paraphrase Tony, the only 'truth' that we can have is from having 'tyres on the road' experience based on experimentation and then drawing conclusions from that...as is the uncertain nature of SEO.

Your Spearmans Rho statements are also flawed. Sites with lower PR (when it could still be relied upon) could still rank above sites or pages with higher PR. The way you talk about calculating the relationship between TF and PR is as if PR is the cast iron way of determining which page ranks above another...added to this PR is given in round number publicly making calculation spurious at best.

RuthSam · Feb 12, 2015

That's an awesome and interesting thread.. thanks, had a great reading and learning something again today.

rogerke · Feb 12, 2015

myopic1 said:
It makes me chuckle how the Dunning-Kruger effect is increasingly being trotted out lately as a way to 'win' arguments by people who have done nothing other than read the first 4 lines of Wikipedia and want to appear to have a level of intelligence that isn't evident in the rest of their response. Ironically in your case, the Dunning-Kruger effect appears to apply to the person using the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Your apparent disregard for metrics would lead to a standstill in domain mining, if you trust no metrics then how can you possibly search through each and every domain sorting the good from the chaff. You appear fond of talking about a 'ranking coefficient' that you yourself can not even properly define because you don't have both parts of the equation, to paraphrase Tony, the only 'truth' that we can have is from having 'tyres on the road' experience based on experimentation and then drawing conclusions from that...as is the uncertain nature of SEO.

Your Spearmans Rho statements are also flawed. Sites with lower PR (when it could still be relied upon) could still rank above sites or pages with higher PR. The way you talk about calculating the relationship between TF and PR is as if PR is the cast iron way of determining which page ranks above another...added to this PR is given in round number publicly making calculation spurious at best.

Strong name to post content correlation

There are some great ways to find absolutely awesome expired domains without looking at any of these metrics. I won't disclose them publically but if you're so inclined you can PM me and tell the world wether I'm right or not. ;-)

I will tell this though. Anyone really experienced with Godaddy auctions knows that some DA/TF/fillinnextcrappymetrichere <10 get auctioned for hundreds of $. And no, it's not because they're EMD or other reasons that make their names valuable. What you will also notice after they're bought is that these get converted to big dog online casino/viagra/car insurance PBN blogs. Wonder why?! ;-)

Just because some don't know how to properly search for expired domains without using external metrics, doesn't mean it isn't possible.

And regarding your rank correlation response, I really don't understand what you're trying to say. We're not talking about the relevancy of PR for ranking purpose, we're talking about the importance of (actual) PR to pass link juice. You're argument is pretty two-faced as well because don't act like the same doesn't apply to TF (i.e. high TF is automatic ranking). There are numerous ranking factors.

Ceteris paribus actual PR is the metric you should be chasing. Not some external metric Google literally doesn't give a damn about.

cloakndagger2 · Feb 13, 2015

Don't worry I feel your pain, it must be hard being so narrow minded that your way is the only way. Don't worry valentines days is only a couple of days away, I'm sure someone will give you a hug, reassure you that we are all evil and how dare we question your authority on the matter.

rogerke · Feb 13, 2015

cloakndagger2 said:
Don't worry I feel your pain, it must be hard being so narrow minded that your way is the only way. Don't worry valentines days is only a couple of days away, I'm sure someone will give you a hug, reassure you that we are all evil and how dare we question your authority on the matter.

I think i'll pass valentines day. We have Carnival here and I definitely prefer that to some commercial invention like VT.

Anyway, it's not about being narrow minded at all. Something is either right or wrong. If it's all above your head or don't believe what I'm sayin that's fine as well. I just hate it when people make absolute statements while it's obvious they don't have any clue what they're talking about. But fine, it's not hurting my bottom line.

tony_d · Feb 13, 2015

cloakndagger2 said:
Don't worry I feel your pain, it must be hard being so narrow minded that your way is the only way. Don't worry valentines days is only a couple of days away, I'm sure someone will give you a hug, reassure you that we are all evil and how dare we question your authority on the matter.

You're wasting your time on him.
I suggest you take the approach that I took, which is to put him on the ignore list.
My ignore list is pretty damn short - but guys like him are the stars on there, because they're literally a complete waste of time communicating with, because their only goal is to assert their supremacy.

As is evident from my post history, I rather like intelligent discussions and meaningful debates - even if (and perhaps especially if) they fundamentally challenge my view, but being rude and obtuse is a sure sign of a foolish man, and foolish men I have no time for.

Folks like that who come around these parts come and go - they don't stick around long. Likely because they fundamentally miss the point of life, and think that sitting in their moms basement and doing a few Google searches makes them an authority to be respected.

myopic1 described him perfectly: "people who have done nothing other than read the first 4 lines of Wikipedia".

Why anyone would go to lengths as great as he has to ostracize themselves from a generally-helpful community is beyond me... but then, as above - they fundamentally miss the point of life.

High metric or trust backlinks

Peter Ngo

Elite Member

tony_d

Elite Member

tony_d

Elite Member

rogerke

Regular Member

rogerke

Regular Member

braindebug

Junior Member

tony_d

Elite Member

askary

Power Member

myopic1

Regular Member

RuthSam

BANNED

rogerke

Regular Member

cloakndagger2

Regular Member

rogerke

Regular Member

tony_d

Elite Member

Main Menu

Marketplace

Making Money

BlackHat World