Every month, I spend a significant amount of money on links for various projects.
It is generally best to use different vendors, to ensure diversified referring domains.
Some months I land on great vendors with ideal properties, and other months it's a battle to avoid or recover from landing on a deceptive vendor.
I'd like to suggest that better standards be implemented for SEO link-building marketplace vendors.
Concealing networks and site lists seems to be a tool for selling people garbage links on a regular basis, and it's getting really old.
Sometimes samples seem to be okay, and other times it's like the vendor doesn't even know that their asset has 200 referring domains to 100k total backlinks.
Most assets I evaluate have inflated link metrics, which seem to be designed to deceive buyers, and they also tend to have zero ranking keywords.
I firmly believe that at-least a very small number of ranking keywords, or perhaps a more natural referring domain to backlinks ratio, should be required, in order for a site or service to be featured in the marketplace.
Maybe that means an encrypted database that automatically verifies link metrics, or maybe a better system for evaluating vendor reputation, I dunno... but something needs to be done.
Just this evening, I messaged more than several VIP vendors, and all of the samples provided were horribly spammed-out.
The quality is often times as bad as it gets, without belligerently being a web 2.0 link-drop into foreign porn content.
I'm fully aware of the hurdles for making this a reality, but the marketplace still desperately needs better standards in terms of vendor and asset quality.
I know I'm not the only one who feels this way.
Now, it's just a matter of administration acknowledging the problem, and putting a plan into action.
It would be nice if we could see something implemented in the not-too-distant future, but in any case... thanks for your consideration!
It is generally best to use different vendors, to ensure diversified referring domains.
Some months I land on great vendors with ideal properties, and other months it's a battle to avoid or recover from landing on a deceptive vendor.
I'd like to suggest that better standards be implemented for SEO link-building marketplace vendors.
Concealing networks and site lists seems to be a tool for selling people garbage links on a regular basis, and it's getting really old.
Sometimes samples seem to be okay, and other times it's like the vendor doesn't even know that their asset has 200 referring domains to 100k total backlinks.
Most assets I evaluate have inflated link metrics, which seem to be designed to deceive buyers, and they also tend to have zero ranking keywords.
I firmly believe that at-least a very small number of ranking keywords, or perhaps a more natural referring domain to backlinks ratio, should be required, in order for a site or service to be featured in the marketplace.
Maybe that means an encrypted database that automatically verifies link metrics, or maybe a better system for evaluating vendor reputation, I dunno... but something needs to be done.
Just this evening, I messaged more than several VIP vendors, and all of the samples provided were horribly spammed-out.
The quality is often times as bad as it gets, without belligerently being a web 2.0 link-drop into foreign porn content.
I'm fully aware of the hurdles for making this a reality, but the marketplace still desperately needs better standards in terms of vendor and asset quality.
I know I'm not the only one who feels this way.
Now, it's just a matter of administration acknowledging the problem, and putting a plan into action.
It would be nice if we could see something implemented in the not-too-distant future, but in any case... thanks for your consideration!
