Permanently Closed Marketplace Sales Thread
- Thread starter cash202
- Start date
- Status
Colonel Tuxedo
Newbie
- Feb 15, 2012
- 45
- 7
So I promised to come back and provide a review of this service when I ordered a few weeks ago. I've heard really good things about it, and I've learned a lot from Cash over the past few months so I felt like I should come back here and leave a comprehensive, honest review.
Overview:
The main keyword I was targeting was a very low competition keyword with a very low number of monthly searches. To give a more specific idea and to remove any subjective assumptions about the definition of low competition, the primary target keyword gets ~100 exact match searches per month according to G, and there are only ~2,200 results for intitle:"keyword" in G's index. I will say however that this is an e-commerce term and the average DA for the sites in the top 10 is 86. So while this term should be absolute cake (and it still is really) to rank for, I just wanted to give some context about the competing sites.
The money site for this test is a brand new site with absolutely no other links pointing to it. The on-page elements had been optimized about 2 weeks before I ordered this service, and the home page was the primary target page.
About the service:
Signing up for the service and going through the entire process was as seamless as it could possibly be. It's a very well organized service - you get access to the basecamp project and all the files as they are uploaded, and you get email updates consistently letting you know what's been accomplished. Very smooth process. As a test, I just signed up for the entry level service, the "Jumpstart" package for $99.
The actual links - Tier 1
The web 2.0 links were placed inside spun article content, with good keyword variance, and also with variance in the placement of the links (some 1st paragraph, some middle, some at end, etc). I was pleased about that. The content itself reads ok, but you can definitely tell at a quick glance that it's spun content. Not a bad thing per se, I'm just a bit of a content snob when it comes to first tier links so I just wanted to mention it. The web 2.0s were filled out completely with profile info on the author, pics, bios, etc. That's definitely a plus.
Social bookmarks and articles were submitted as outlined on Cash's website, although I was a bit disappointed with the number that actually verified, and even more disappointed with the number of the verified links that were actually indexed.
The numbers:
Verified web 2.0 links = 10
Indexed in G after 9 days = 8
Verified social bookmarking links to web 2.0 URLs and money site: 43
Indexed in G after 9 days = 12
Verified article submission links to web 2.0s and money site = 31
Indexed in G after 9 days = 11
I don't have any data on the article network links that were submitted because that information is kept private (as it should be) to protect the network.
The actual links - Tier 2
Again, everything was submitted as promised. The number of submitted URLs in the uploaded files either matched or exceeded the number that was outlined on the site. However, again a very low number actually verified and a tiny percentage of these are actually indexed after 9 days. G is a bit slower to index now compared to several months ago, but after 9 days I would think a much higher number would've been found.
Also I want to mention that a lot of the profile and comment links in my project were coming from porn sites and malware warning sites. This is definitely something I didn't expect, and is probably my biggest concern with the service. The submission list quality for this tier was far below what I expected.
The numbers:
Verified profile links pointing to web 2.0 and articles = 1591
Indexed in G = 50
Verified comment links pointing to profiles, articles, web 2.0s (out of 5500 submitted) = 459
Indexed in G = 189
With the lowest level of the service, you only get placement on 1 of the networks as outlined on their site. If you go one level up ($199), you get 4 networks plus a lot more submissions to each of the categories as well. Given the quality of the submissions though, I'm not convinced it would be worth it. There was nothing in the documentation that said the submission lists for the lowest level would be of lower quality than other levels, so I can only assume it would be more of the same. If the submission lists are different, that information should be prominently displayed on the comparison page.
Considering the structure that Cash has in place, it's possible that some of the people doing the actual work either forgot or simply didn't bother harvesting a good/fresh list. This was my first time using the service so I'm not sure if I just got a bad group, or if it's always like this. Either way, I don't feel like Cash is at fault and it's possible he isn't even aware of this, since there hasn't been any in-depth reviews lately. It takes time to go back over all of the links submitted, and most people probably don't bother.
Anyway, let's get to the results.
The Results:
Here's the ranking timeline for the primary target term. July 30th was the first day that submissions began (web 2.0s).
There's no question that rankings improved. I actually expected a little more "dancing" since this was such a new site, but I guess because of the relatively low number of total links, it didn't really cause crazy fluctuations. There have been some of course (looks like it might be in the middle of one now), but not as much as I thought there would be.
Conclusion:
I'm confident that the results would have been better with the "Single Blast" package. The extra article networks and overall linking root domains would have given a bigger kick, and the addition of RSS submission might have increased the indexation rate of the articles.
I would probably order again (for different sites, the ROI isn't there for this term) if I could be sure that the lists would be recently harvested and wouldn't include large percentages of porn and malware sites.
Rankings and traffic still improved regardless of the low number of indexed links, so the system definitely works. For the money though, I would have liked to see a higher success rate.
Suggestion for Improvement:
Cash, I hope you don't take this the wrong way (and I don't think you will), because I'm not trying to tell you how to run your business. You already have a really nice system in place. You could add one step and have your employees revisit each campaign after 1 week and run a URL verification report for each tier. They could send you a spreadsheet every 2 weeks (or monthly) with the details for each project and also the aggregate verification and indexation percentages for the entire batch. This would allow you to keep an eye on quality without spending anymore than 15 minutes per month analyzing it. You may be doing this already, but if not, I thought it could help.
Overview:
The main keyword I was targeting was a very low competition keyword with a very low number of monthly searches. To give a more specific idea and to remove any subjective assumptions about the definition of low competition, the primary target keyword gets ~100 exact match searches per month according to G, and there are only ~2,200 results for intitle:"keyword" in G's index. I will say however that this is an e-commerce term and the average DA for the sites in the top 10 is 86. So while this term should be absolute cake (and it still is really) to rank for, I just wanted to give some context about the competing sites.
The money site for this test is a brand new site with absolutely no other links pointing to it. The on-page elements had been optimized about 2 weeks before I ordered this service, and the home page was the primary target page.
About the service:
Signing up for the service and going through the entire process was as seamless as it could possibly be. It's a very well organized service - you get access to the basecamp project and all the files as they are uploaded, and you get email updates consistently letting you know what's been accomplished. Very smooth process. As a test, I just signed up for the entry level service, the "Jumpstart" package for $99.
The actual links - Tier 1
The web 2.0 links were placed inside spun article content, with good keyword variance, and also with variance in the placement of the links (some 1st paragraph, some middle, some at end, etc). I was pleased about that. The content itself reads ok, but you can definitely tell at a quick glance that it's spun content. Not a bad thing per se, I'm just a bit of a content snob when it comes to first tier links so I just wanted to mention it. The web 2.0s were filled out completely with profile info on the author, pics, bios, etc. That's definitely a plus.
Social bookmarks and articles were submitted as outlined on Cash's website, although I was a bit disappointed with the number that actually verified, and even more disappointed with the number of the verified links that were actually indexed.
The numbers:
Verified web 2.0 links = 10
Indexed in G after 9 days = 8
Verified social bookmarking links to web 2.0 URLs and money site: 43
Indexed in G after 9 days = 12
Verified article submission links to web 2.0s and money site = 31
Indexed in G after 9 days = 11
I don't have any data on the article network links that were submitted because that information is kept private (as it should be) to protect the network.
The actual links - Tier 2
Again, everything was submitted as promised. The number of submitted URLs in the uploaded files either matched or exceeded the number that was outlined on the site. However, again a very low number actually verified and a tiny percentage of these are actually indexed after 9 days. G is a bit slower to index now compared to several months ago, but after 9 days I would think a much higher number would've been found.
Also I want to mention that a lot of the profile and comment links in my project were coming from porn sites and malware warning sites. This is definitely something I didn't expect, and is probably my biggest concern with the service. The submission list quality for this tier was far below what I expected.
The numbers:
Verified profile links pointing to web 2.0 and articles = 1591
Indexed in G = 50
Verified comment links pointing to profiles, articles, web 2.0s (out of 5500 submitted) = 459
Indexed in G = 189
With the lowest level of the service, you only get placement on 1 of the networks as outlined on their site. If you go one level up ($199), you get 4 networks plus a lot more submissions to each of the categories as well. Given the quality of the submissions though, I'm not convinced it would be worth it. There was nothing in the documentation that said the submission lists for the lowest level would be of lower quality than other levels, so I can only assume it would be more of the same. If the submission lists are different, that information should be prominently displayed on the comparison page.
Considering the structure that Cash has in place, it's possible that some of the people doing the actual work either forgot or simply didn't bother harvesting a good/fresh list. This was my first time using the service so I'm not sure if I just got a bad group, or if it's always like this. Either way, I don't feel like Cash is at fault and it's possible he isn't even aware of this, since there hasn't been any in-depth reviews lately. It takes time to go back over all of the links submitted, and most people probably don't bother.
Anyway, let's get to the results.
The Results:
Here's the ranking timeline for the primary target term. July 30th was the first day that submissions began (web 2.0s).
There's no question that rankings improved. I actually expected a little more "dancing" since this was such a new site, but I guess because of the relatively low number of total links, it didn't really cause crazy fluctuations. There have been some of course (looks like it might be in the middle of one now), but not as much as I thought there would be.
Conclusion:
I'm confident that the results would have been better with the "Single Blast" package. The extra article networks and overall linking root domains would have given a bigger kick, and the addition of RSS submission might have increased the indexation rate of the articles.
I would probably order again (for different sites, the ROI isn't there for this term) if I could be sure that the lists would be recently harvested and wouldn't include large percentages of porn and malware sites.
Rankings and traffic still improved regardless of the low number of indexed links, so the system definitely works. For the money though, I would have liked to see a higher success rate.
Suggestion for Improvement:
Cash, I hope you don't take this the wrong way (and I don't think you will), because I'm not trying to tell you how to run your business. You already have a really nice system in place. You could add one step and have your employees revisit each campaign after 1 week and run a URL verification report for each tier. They could send you a spreadsheet every 2 weeks (or monthly) with the details for each project and also the aggregate verification and indexation percentages for the entire batch. This would allow you to keep an eye on quality without spending anymore than 15 minutes per month analyzing it. You may be doing this already, but if not, I thought it could help.
Last edited:
cash202
Elite Member
- Mar 12, 2011
- 1,801
- 2,828
First of all thank you for the detailed review and recommendations. Especially on keeping an eye on performance
of separate Web 2.0 accounts.
It's late today and I'll give it a better read tomorrow when I'm fresh. I quit coffee cold turkey over the weekend and have terrible withdrawals
To all: this not a review of BST as it is but a cut-down version available on a webiste.
of separate Web 2.0 accounts.
It's late today and I'll give it a better read tomorrow when I'm fresh. I quit coffee cold turkey over the weekend and have terrible withdrawals
To all: this not a review of BST as it is but a cut-down version available on a webiste.
TheEditor
Regular Member
- Aug 20, 2007
- 425
- 212
1) Would be good to read the full review then, if Colonel Tuxedo could provide the URL. BTW, every time I see that name I think "Tennessee Tuxedo". I think that may be dating me.
2)Cash, try yerba mate tea. I dropped coffee for it maybe 6 months ago. Wish I'd heard of the stuff long before. All of coffee's benefits with little or no downside. YM is quite popular in South America and for good reason. Here's a list of the differences:
a) No catecholamines. These are nasty artifacts of the process that brings ground coffee to you and the brewing process itself. Also a problem with most teas. And they can even be a problem with YM if the water you steep the tea in gets above ~195 degrees Fahrenheit or you steep the tea too long. Studies of pure caffeine supplements show definite enhancement of physical performance metrics but coffee generally does not. Catecholamines are the culprit.
b) Theobromine. YM has it. Its the stuff in chocolate that makes you feel good.
c) Because of a) & b) I get little if any problems should I consume more than a couple of cups in a day. No jitters. And on my off-days I rarely have any withdrawals. I still take two days off a week - currently Wednesday and Friday - to avoid adrenal exhaustion. That's the phenomenon that causes people to drink ever more caffeine to get the same buzz. On occasion I do get a headache on those days but I honestly can't remember the last time.
2)Cash, try yerba mate tea. I dropped coffee for it maybe 6 months ago. Wish I'd heard of the stuff long before. All of coffee's benefits with little or no downside. YM is quite popular in South America and for good reason. Here's a list of the differences:
a) No catecholamines. These are nasty artifacts of the process that brings ground coffee to you and the brewing process itself. Also a problem with most teas. And they can even be a problem with YM if the water you steep the tea in gets above ~195 degrees Fahrenheit or you steep the tea too long. Studies of pure caffeine supplements show definite enhancement of physical performance metrics but coffee generally does not. Catecholamines are the culprit.
b) Theobromine. YM has it. Its the stuff in chocolate that makes you feel good.
c) Because of a) & b) I get little if any problems should I consume more than a couple of cups in a day. No jitters. And on my off-days I rarely have any withdrawals. I still take two days off a week - currently Wednesday and Friday - to avoid adrenal exhaustion. That's the phenomenon that causes people to drink ever more caffeine to get the same buzz. On occasion I do get a headache on those days but I honestly can't remember the last time.
First of all thank you for the detailed review and recommendations. Especially on keeping an eye on performance
of separate Web 2.0 accounts.
It's late today and I'll give it a better read tomorrow when I'm fresh. I quit coffee cold turkey over the weekend and have terrible withdrawals
To all: this not a review of BST as it is but a cut-down version available on a webiste.
Colonel Tuxedo
Newbie
- Feb 15, 2012
- 45
- 7
Yeah no problem. I sincerely hope it doesn't come across as slandering at any point, because that wasn't my intention. I just wanted to provide a comprehensive and honest review. I'm confident that you can and will address whatever problems might have been unearthed.
Ha, I hadn't heard of Tennessee Tuxedo but I just looked it up. I've heard of Underdog though. Apparently it was created by the same people. Colonel Tuxedo is a reference to a Colbert Report episode.
When Cash said that this wasn't a review of this BST but a cut-down version, he meant a cut-down version of the service, not the review. I ordered/reviewed the entry level service from his website - the "Jumpstart" package. I mentioned that in the review, but I know it's a lot of text and could get overlooked.
TheEditor
Regular Member
- Aug 20, 2007
- 425
- 212
Thanks; I can be pretty dense. Of course this does not really answer your concerns.
gilbertoad
Registered Member
- Nov 5, 2011
- 57
- 6
Received my report and after almost a week, the page is sitting around rank 180. The site is quite young so hopefully this will improve within the coming weeks.
Have placed another order targeting a different keyword/page on the same site.
Thanks
Have placed another order targeting a different keyword/page on the same site.
Thanks
cash202
Elite Member
- Mar 12, 2011
- 1,801
- 2,828
Adam718
BANNED
- Jun 19, 2012
- 1,401
- 699
Review:
I ordered SEO Blast last month, and got my report over a week ago, but saw barely any results (yet). I was told my main keyword would at least move up a few pages, but its only a few spots ahead of what it was before.
Overall, it wasn't worth the money. Ill update this review if I see any real results.
I ordered SEO Blast last month, and got my report over a week ago, but saw barely any results (yet). I was told my main keyword would at least move up a few pages, but its only a few spots ahead of what it was before.
Overall, it wasn't worth the money. Ill update this review if I see any real results.
Last edited:
cash202
Elite Member
- Mar 12, 2011
- 1,801
- 2,828
Just so you know, here is the main keyword competition (with OPs site on top):
http://www.noblesamurai.com/share/seo-competition/770hgmsnpoo40kkck8c8#fresh
Here is the main keyword ranking taken just now via San Francisco proxy:
IMO, it's a miracle it moved 16 positions with 5 keywords rotation (not a targeted blasts) together with anchor text dilution with naked links (to keep Penguin at bay) WITHOUT some heavy high PR home page links
Other keywords weren't in page title and weren't mentioned on page.
Adam718
BANNED
- Jun 19, 2012
- 1,401
- 699
Just so you know, here is the main keyword competition (with OPs site on top):
http://www.noblesamurai.com/share/seo-competition/770hgmsnpoo40kkck8c8#fresh
Here is the main keyword ranking taken just now via San Francisco proxy:
IMO, it's a miracle it moved 16 positions with 5 keywords rotation (not a targeted blasts) together with anchor text dilution with naked links (to keep Penguin at bay) WITHOUT some heavy high PR home page links
Other keywords weren't in page title and weren't mentioned on page.
I can't confirm this. I see my main keyword at the same position as before. I'm not trying to be a dick, I just give every service an honest review of what ever result I get. This is the result I got.
You could be right about me using more than one anchor instead of a direct blast, but my site did not move up 16 spots. If i do see it move, ill be sure to update my review.
Last edited:
- Status