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

Technical SEO Question: Beating thousands of un-targeted Backlinks etc, e.g. Wikipedia etc

Discussion in 'Black Hat SEO' started by bane!, Nov 25, 2012.

  1. bane!

    bane! Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2012
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    9
    Hi bhw :)

    I have been using Traffic Travis and The Ultimate Niche finder etc and I am getting confused by their competition advices.

    They analyse keyword (kw) X and say it is ?relatively easy? to rank for. Then I use Market Samurai to check the SEO Competition for kw X and the top 5 results are huge authority sites such as Wikipedia, Amazon, Apple, Howstuffworks etc that are NOT onpage SEO ?d for my target KW X but are related to my KW (e.g. ?trout fishing? to ?trout?). Furthermore they have thousands, if not millions of Backlinks to the page and millions if not billions of links to their domain and very high PR?s etc.

    My question is, how hard do I have to work to beat these guys for my target KW when I will have 100% on page SEO optimisation for my KW? I realise On page stuff plays a minimal role and thus I have to take into account their anchor text profile (using majestic). So if none of their top 10 anchor texts are my KW, then should I be ok? Would I only require 100?s of backlinks with my KW as the anchor? Or am I still going to need thousands to compete with their millions?

    An example is ?affiliate program?. One of the top 3 results is a Wikipedia article about ?Affiliate Marketing?. ?Affiliate program? is NOT mentioned in the Title, URL or description, only in the header ? clearly this article is not optimised for ?affiliate program? and consequently Traffic Travis, The Ultimate Niche finder and other tools deem the competition as at most ?medium difficulty? haha (which i think is incorrect)

    It frustrates me that Traffic Travis and The Ultimate Niche finder tell you it?s ?relatively easy? to rank, when in actual fact it?s not. Or is it? I am trying to learn haha.

    Thanks for your help anyone.
     
  2. Smeems

    Smeems Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    417
    Probably not the answer you wanna hear, but the best way to get an idea is to actually do it.

    The programs you've used are only aggregators that can estimate competition (Traffic Travis being a particularly poor one at that). If a high authority site is directly targeting a keyword and has links going to the actual page for that keyword, then it's naturally going to be difficult (but not impossible) to rank ahead of. However, provided that they are not targeting the keyword directly (or semantically, through proper interpretation of LSI), then you do stand a decent chance of ranking, despite their 'authority' status. The onus then is up to you to tell Google that you're site is authoritative and informative, but actually directly relate-able to the search query.

    I do take exception to these statements, however:

    On-page, IMO, plays much more than a minimal role. I always think of it as, if backlinks are the fuel for your car, your on-page SEO are you tyres - make sure they're pumped up and in good condition.

    Anchor text as well - As many people will tell you, you can easily rank now without exact match anchor text being even half of your backlink profile for a page, so you can't read too much into this.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  3. bane!

    bane! Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2012
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    9
    Firstly, thanks a lot for helping me :)

    hahah. that's fine. I'll do some research first tho, before I possibly try and fail to beat these authority sites.

    Could you please clear that up for me. semantically = With regard to meaning. Example would be, "Affiliate Marketing" to "Affiliate Program"? Sounds like this is something I need to understand so I can better understand my chances of outranking an opponent.

    Yeah, well said. I would agree with that. I said what I said because I have read some stories about black hatters ranking sites for a kw through off page SEO alone, with completely unrelated on page content.

    So then how does google "know" what to rank you for? I thought the anchor text profile would be the defining factor (and the strength of the links associated with the particular anchor texts)

    Thanks for your time