1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Importance of unique articles in link pyramids?

Discussion in 'Black Hat SEO' started by thedon23, Aug 2, 2011.

  1. thedon23

    thedon23 Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,759
    Likes Received:
    1,268
    Hey guys,

    I did a lot of searching around BHW, as well as Google prior to posting this. If this has been asked before, I apologize for this post in advance.

    I have 20 unique articles. I am about to build a 5 tier link pyramid.

    Money Site --> 6 Web 2.0's --> 14 Web 2.0's --> Article Blast --> Xrumer/Scrapebox Links

    Now, I'm concerned about the Web 2.0's. Would I be wasting my articles if I used a unique article on each Web 2.0? Would I be better of using uniques on the top 6 Web 2.0's, and then using spun articles on the 3rd tier?

    Any thoughts on this?
     
  2. jerzydawg

    jerzydawg Supreme Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1,260
    Likes Received:
    422
    Unique is always better but spun works just as well. Use those unique articles on your money site (or some of them) and spin the rest of the articles and use them for web 2.0 properties.
     
  3. BassTrackerBoats

    BassTrackerBoats Moderator Staff Member Moderator Jr. VIP

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    12,774
    Likes Received:
    22,022
    Occupation:
    I don't actually have a job
    Location:
    It's an Algo, of course it can be gamed.
    Home Page:
    You would be better posting those unique articles on your site and then spinning them for your backlinks.

    Spun articles work just as well... I've tested that extensively.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  4. thedon23

    thedon23 Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,759
    Likes Received:
    1,268
    Yeah, looks like that's what I'm gonna do. Use most of them for my money site, and take like 2, and highly spin them to get like hundreds of variations.

    Looks like that's the plan. Thanks!