I'm trying to rank for a competitive keyword and these are the two methods that I am trying to choose between. I know I should just test both methods on my own, but I thought maybe someone could give me some advice before I take the plunge.. Method #1: Create 100 single page websites on my own domains (.com/.net/.org/.info). Each site will have a 100% unique article written around my keyword. Then I will use xrumer and scrapebox to build links to these sites with the appropriate anchor text. All 100 sites will have an in-content link pointing at my money site. Method #2: Create 100 different web 2.0 sites (wordpress.com, blogspot.com, etc.). Again, each site will have a 100% unique article written around my keyword, and I will use xrumer and scrapebox to build links to these sites with the appropriate anchor text. Ideally these 100 web 2.0 sites will also have an in-content link pointing at my money site. Summary: Obviously the first method is going to be a lot more expensive, and require more careful set up to make sure I don't leave a footprint (hosting, etc.), but which method do you think would be the most effective and longest lasting if set up properly? PS: If I decide to go with the first method, should I make sure that the whois is different for each domain, or is private registration enough? Maybe I'm just being too paranoid.
I would say a mixture of the 2 methods would be optimal. Not sure if 100 is necessary - IMO, if done correctly, you can get far more juice from a dozen well-seo'd properties than 100 poorly done ones(or rushed)... ...And a mixture is something G prefers - more 'natural' looking.
Build a pyramid 1 Money Site -> 20 own domain micro sites -> 80 Web2.0 sites -> Xrumer/Scrapebox -aReJay
I would suggest a mix as well. Your own stuff will be onger lasting and more effective over time, but not as strong when all new. The 2.0 stuff will have more strength early, so build your own and 2.0 at the same time. Benefits of 2 while waiting on your stuff to age and grow. I would do more than 1 page per own site though. You want a mix of quantity and quality, don't lean to one extreme.
I'd do a blend as well... you clearly have an idea as to how to work it and a good work ethic. I'd be willing to share a process I use with you because of that. If you are interested, pm me.
Thank you for the helpful advice so far guys. @Crixus: Thanks, those are some things that I should consider. I will be outsourcing the articles so having multiple articles for each of my own sites would be easy enough, but a lot more expensive. I guess I would need to do more research/testing to see how much more weight Google gives to links from sites that have multiple pages of content vs a single page to see if it would be worth it or not, or if there's a happy medium. I have a feeling it will be extremely difficult to single out a factor like that though since there are so many other variables. @BassTrackerBoats: Sure, I'll send you a PM.
