[Quick Case Study] - Ranking Web 2.0 Sites using GSA and 301 Shorteners in 2017
- Thread starter moonlighsunligh
- Start date
dude come on..
glad I am sitting on the toilet otherwise I'd shit my pants.
lat that site rot for 4 weeks now and DO NOTHING. so you have a clear understanding if that blast helped or did not.
Kind of shake my head everytime dudes come with the same old crap of:
"buy or blast some sthit"
wait 5 days
see no #1.
blast some other crap to it.
and tank the site 4 weeks later .
"SEO IS DEAD. FCK GSA" hating posts..
- May 1, 2010
- 2,442
- 470
I am not complaining ... just wanted to keep you guys updated. Sometimes web 2.0s do get ranked in even shorter timeframe.
I think it is under 20% ... i sually use just URLS as anchors.
What was the result of your test?
I think it is under 20% ... i sually use just URLS as anchors.
What was the result of your test?
I kept it around 5%
could rank a freeblog to #9 within 3 weeks.
but competition was low, so as volume.
anyhow, it was a 50 words 1 large image posts. so for me, that's kind of amazing:
doing nothing, ordering a cheap link pyramid and getting close to the seller of the product himself.
even martch 8 did not kill that project. just left a dent.
https://gyazo.com/0def26c9efa605426802595db0290629
ITs kind of a pet project.I also posted some time ago.
nowadays, I'd rather oder some cheap blogposts.
this whole tiered spamming annoys me. and I have to mess with that switchblade "buffer site" crap...
could rank a freeblog to #9 within 3 weeks.
but competition was low, so as volume.
anyhow, it was a 50 words 1 large image posts. so for me, that's kind of amazing:
doing nothing, ordering a cheap link pyramid and getting close to the seller of the product himself.
even martch 8 did not kill that project. just left a dent.
https://gyazo.com/0def26c9efa605426802595db0290629
ITs kind of a pet project.I also posted some time ago.
nowadays, I'd rather oder some cheap blogposts.
this whole tiered spamming annoys me. and I have to mess with that switchblade "buffer site" crap...
- May 1, 2010
- 2,442
- 470
I ranked one with not words at all. Just a title 
.. but low volume of course.
.. but low volume of course.
pj777777
Power Member
- Nov 12, 2014
- 699
- 365
Update from my journey using a very similar method to OP.....(see my first post in this thread)
Made a fresh web 2.0 on 28th March and fired 5 301 redirects at it and then fired around 200 spammy backlinks to 301's AND 400 spammy links directly at web 2.0. 200 the day after creation and 200 two days later.
Wasn't in the serps until today, but came thru with the following:
Not earth shattering, but if it will make it into the top 3 slots I will be more than happy as the whole process took less than 30 mins total
PJ
Ps the keyword links directly to my drop ship project so fingers crossed
Made a fresh web 2.0 on 28th March and fired 5 301 redirects at it and then fired around 200 spammy backlinks to 301's AND 400 spammy links directly at web 2.0. 200 the day after creation and 200 two days later.
Wasn't in the serps until today, but came thru with the following:
Not earth shattering, but if it will make it into the top 3 slots I will be more than happy as the whole process took less than 30 mins total
PJ
Ps the keyword links directly to my drop ship project so fingers crossed
Last edited:
- May 1, 2010
- 2,442
- 470
Thanks for the sharing ..you got the faster results as you fired direct links.
What kw density did you use. For me it is a 3 words keyword mentioned 7 times in a 350 word article. I am expimenting with 3-4 mentions bit still didn't get the results.
What kw density did you use. For me it is a 3 words keyword mentioned 7 times in a 350 word article. I am expimenting with 3-4 mentions bit still didn't get the results.
blueberryim
BANNED
- Jun 22, 2015
- 82
- 16
Quite awesome, lets wait for the results
aidenhera
BANNED
- Nov 30, 2016
- 3,059
- 915
Update from my journey using a very similar method to OP.....(see my first post in this thread)
Made a fresh web 2.0 on 28th March and fired 5 301 redirects at it and then fired around 200 spammy backlinks to 301's AND 400 spammy links directly at web 2.0. 200 the day after creation and 200 two days later.
Wasn't in the serps until today, but came thru with the following:
View attachment 89120
Not earth shattering, but if it will make it into the top 3 slots I will be more than happy as the whole process took less than 30 mins total
PJ
Ps the keyword links directly to my drop ship project so fingers crossed
yeah but why? is it because you made way more redirects than OP or as he probably made them manually and they probably got removed resulting in broken link tiers, or probably cause OP didnt even bother indexing the links. could be
anyway whats the point of using url shorteners? to make way more links without penalty? you casted 200 links at 5301 redirects so 200*5301=1060200 links. so you fired 1060200 links through shorteners to a single web and some directly for links diversity.
if you made 1060200 links probably even 5% is not indexed yet. no indexer would allow you to put so many links and most of them dont index anything anyway..
edit ehh nvm he means five 301 (not 5301) redirects so 5 redirects with 40 links per redirect. why not fire them directly?
pj777777
Power Member
- Nov 12, 2014
- 699
- 365
Lol, wondering why I didn't fire them directly myself.
Here's my thought process....by firing the links at the 301's then hopefully the 301 da will add a little more weight to the spammy links, the 301 will shield the web 2.0 from the sheer volume of links being pointed directly, the 301 will only pass on links that have been indexed (I am only pinging the links and allowing them to index over time). For example if I direct 400 spammy links at the web 2.0 and only 20% index Google will still know that 80% of the links pointing towards the web 2.0 are crap and are manufactured and that may be reflected in not ranking the web 2.0.
Tbh I am just playing around and seeing what, if anything, works to get stuff ranked. If I find a quick way that is spammy then I will apply what works in a less spammy way to my income producing sites (and spam web 2.0s for churn and burn income)
Here's my thought process....by firing the links at the 301's then hopefully the 301 da will add a little more weight to the spammy links, the 301 will shield the web 2.0 from the sheer volume of links being pointed directly, the 301 will only pass on links that have been indexed (I am only pinging the links and allowing them to index over time). For example if I direct 400 spammy links at the web 2.0 and only 20% index Google will still know that 80% of the links pointing towards the web 2.0 are crap and are manufactured and that may be reflected in not ranking the web 2.0.
Tbh I am just playing around and seeing what, if anything, works to get stuff ranked. If I find a quick way that is spammy then I will apply what works in a less spammy way to my income producing sites (and spam web 2.0s for churn and burn income)
pj777777
Power Member
- Nov 12, 2014
- 699
- 365
Lol, highish density! Title, 60 word intro paragraph lsi stuffed. No other written content.
The rest of the content was images, videos, links out to authority sites and a couple of links to affiliate programs.
Nb all of the other content titles alone must have really pushed up the kw density!
- May 1, 2010
- 2,442
- 470
Trying with 3 times in 350-400 words articles now ... I guess 2% is too high nowdays.
aidenhera
BANNED
- Nov 30, 2016
- 3,059
- 915
why would you say is too high
- May 1, 2010
- 2,442
- 470
Because I see wrong pages are sometimes ranked ... so I guess the right pages were penalised because of high kw density.
Also it is a 3 word keyword now a single word one.
Also it is a 3 word keyword now a single word one.
Samwacgamchy
Power Member
- Jan 11, 2017
- 655
- 107
even if you fail to rank your website after a month or two and get tired because of it, please post here that you gave up. Atleast this thread will help others know that this does not work and someone can read this before starting another "will this work" thread. Anyway if it does rank then keep us updated.
pj777777
Power Member
- Nov 12, 2014
- 699
- 365
It's a side project. Nothing additional will be done for at least 4 weeks apart from checking ranks, but will update weekly ;-)
pj777777
Power Member
- Nov 12, 2014
- 699
- 365