Your problem can be worked out mathematically.
Lets say each PBN site linking to a money site has an identical ranking power of 'Z', this will never be the case in the real world.
If all 20 sites were pointed at each money site, meaning they had 5 articles linking to 5 sites the ranking power delivered to each site would be:
20*(Z/5) = 4Z
If 5 sites had 1 article (and no other pages) linking to 1 money site (this doesn't happen in the real world but I'll get to that) the ranking power delivered would be
5*(Z) = 5Z
On the surface it looks like you would be better off using 5 sites to 1 money site but unfortunately this isn't the case. In the real world you pad out your PBN sites with filler articles and hopefully other outbound links to other sites to mask your intentions. This all detracts from your 5Z ranking power making it far less than 4Z. Therefore mathematically I would suggest using all 20 sites is the better approach in terms of ranking power. For the purposes of simplicity I've discounted any link juice degradation via internal links. The added advantage of using all 20 sites is that it overcomes any variations in the PBN sites themselves, if you were unfortunate enough to group together 5 weaker sites then that particular money site would suffer.
Another consideration is the footprint implications of linking to 5 identical sites from 20 sites. If anyone can see a flaw in my logic I'd be happy to hear it.
Another consideration is the footprint implications of linking to 5 identical sites from 20 sites. If anyone can see a flaw in my logic I'd be happy to hear it.
Your problem can be worked out mathematically.
Lets say each PBN site linking to a money site has an identical ranking power of 'Z', this will never be the case in the real world.
If all 20 sites were pointed at each money site, meaning they had 5 articles linking to 5 sites the ranking power delivered to each site would be:
20*(Z/5) = 4Z
If 5 sites had 1 article (and no other pages) linking to 1 money site (this doesn't happen in the real world but I'll get to that) the ranking power delivered would be
5*(Z) = 5Z
On the surface it looks like you would be better off using 5 sites to 1 money site but unfortunately this isn't the case. In the real world you pad out your PBN sites with filler articles and hopefully other outbound links to other sites to mask your intentions. This all detracts from your 5Z ranking power making it far less than 4Z. Therefore mathematically I would suggest using all 20 sites is the better approach in terms of ranking power. For the purposes of simplicity I've discounted any link juice degradation via internal links. The added advantage of using all 20 sites is that it overcomes any variations in the PBN sites themselves, if you were unfortunate enough to group together 5 weaker sites then that particular money site would suffer.
Another consideration is the footprint implications of linking to 5 identical sites from 20 sites. If anyone can see a flaw in my logic I'd be happy to hear it.
buddy, youve written so many words only to disgrace yourself?
just which better 20 to 5 or 4 to 1
buddy, youve written so many words only to disgrace yourself?
buddy, youve written so many words only to disgrace yourself?
just which better 20 to 5 or 4 to 1
There'd be 4 pbn sites per money site not 5![]()
Randomize it. 10 of your PBN sites could link to 3 money sites, 12 could link to 3 money sites, 5 could link to all 5 money sites, etc. If you studies sets in school, you'd understand what I mean. Two sets can have the same elements (intersection of sets) but not all the elements of the universal set. In the same vein, 12 of your PBN sites could link to a few money sites but not all, and another 10...you get the idea.
My god... what's up with these rude noobs?
OP - this guy spent time responding to you, in detail.
I suggest you check your attitude at the door, lest you get no more replies to your questions in future.
:asshole:
--------------------
Before I answer your question AGAIN, I'd like to make a suggestion, although SEO is by no means 'rocket science' a certain level of literacy is required to get ahead, there are numerous sites on the internet that will help you with your inability to read...no such luck with your attitude though.
As I plainly said, based on my logic above "This all detracts from your 5Z ranking power making it far less than 4Z. Therefore mathematically I would suggest using all 20 sites is the better approach in terms of ranking power."
Good luck.
During Penguin 3.0 I was forced to restructure my network completely, in the past we functioned as a typical public blog network, eg linking to dozens and sometimes even 100's of different money sites from the same domain. This led to penalties, Google identified the PBN links as spam.
I took heavy measures by turning my network completely upside down, took a large part of the network down, started to use excerpts on homepages and archive pages to avoid having links to tons of irrelevant topics on the same page and what not.
However I took it to the extreme, I decided to delete almost every link I build and instead dedicate domains to clients, eg 2 rock solid PR4's and 3 PR3's per client, which costs me about $600 worth of domains per client (with a good number paying only $100-$130/month that was about the max I was able to afford) as I also need to make a profit. Either way most of the domains I could reuse so it's not like I had to pay it all from my pocket, but still it was a very expensive joke that cost me ten thousands of dollars (lost income + investments in more domains), but it was worth it.
The end result however:
- All or nearly all clients recovered, great
- All or nearly all clients ranked lower than before, not so great, ranking #12 instead of #8 sucks (though still much better than ranking at #35 of course)
Lesson learned
So I decided to make some changes...
I turned the dedicated PR3 domains (of which each client received three), into a 3 OBL network, eg linking to 3 clients per domain and I decided to give each client links from 9 shared domains instead of 3 dedicated domains.
Result: Everyone kept improving in rankings and has reached their old positions and is still climbing.
Next to follow are the PR4 domains, those are niched and will soon link out to multiple clients as well.
Conclusion:
It's a huge waste of a domains link juice to link out to only 1 website, you're loosing out on a ton of capability, don't trust the math, it simply doesn't work that way.
Apparaently Google uses a way more sophisticated math model to transfer link juice.
are you kidding me? where did you get your 5z? in each case 4 pbns link to moneysite on average
You plainly saw my correction above and made this pointless post...either way, this is my last post to you. Your brand of ignorance is worthy of my ignore list.