How many articles to put on tier 1 web 2.0 ?

But it is not speculation... we test over here. I am not sharing some ethereal theory that may or may not exist. I have a full team that does R&D on a regular basis as we provide SEO services to thousands and it is reality, not speculation.

For whatever reason you want to "debunk" my theories but they are not theories, they are what we have tested.

If it was theory I would not share it.

Thanks so much for the info that really helped me finally figure out all this. What about other besides web 2.0 should I throw in blog comments and other link building strategies in tier 1 or should I leave those for tier 2 and stick to web 2.0 blog, bookmark, video and doc sharing sites for my tier 1 ?
 
To help out those that have two accounts here on BHW, and others that may not understand why I stated what I stated above, I'll explain why I say what I say about the backlinks one has linked to their site.

If all your backlinks are identical as to the amount of content, Image SEO, videos with links, etc, then there is going to be a footprint. That has been in play since about 2009 or so.

If you have a variety of backlinks, with differing amount of content, different pages linking in, different <insert any variable>, then you will have different link juice strength as well as not building a footprint backlinking infrastructure with the exact same process each and every time you link to your site.

Here is an example (simple but extrapolate it out for yourself):

Your site, domain.com has 100 pages.

You backlink each of those pages with the exact same link types that are all the same amount of content, pages, have the same # of images that are using similar or the same Image SEO, all have videos... pretty much just are replicated in most respects, you are going to build one big fat giant footprint.

On the other hand, should you mix up the kinds of backlinks, the amount of content on those backlinks, the amount of pages from those backlinked sites, images, videos, etc, you are going to keep thing from looking contrived and like you are trying to game Google and thus not leave a footprint.

I'm not a genius, in fact I'm not all that smart, but I do have the time and team to test, and scenario 2 is 100 times better, long term, to rank a site and keep it ranked.

Did you notice any problem with web 2.0 sites with just one page in practice? This is much cheaper.

I see that some sites ranks pretty nicely with just one page per web 2.0 . And for over 1 year. They could be using some kind of hidden PBN but I doubt so.
 
Back
Top