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

What is the best way to use Web 2.0 as Tier 1?

Discussion in 'Black Hat SEO' started by bobrittany, Jul 9, 2015.

  1. bobrittany

    bobrittany Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    378
    Likes Received:
    129
    I am trying to decide how much time & money I want to put into my web 2.0 sites.

    I can either:
    A. Create a simple web 2.0 site (with an about, legal pages, image, video, etc, to make it look legit) and then leave it. This is what most people do. Create the site, send a tier 2, then never do anything to it again.

    B. Create an authority web 2.0 site, with real social pages and regular social media updates, update the blog regularly with good content, send links to the site on a monthly basis, and grow the site to be a place for fresh content trusted by google.

    For either site, I will link to my money site. Obviously, option B takes much more time and energy to maintain. The question is: how much more valuable is the link using Option B vs Option A? Is the increased value using Option B proportional to the increased amount of work it takes? Anyone ever tested this out?
     
  2. VerifiedProxies

    VerifiedProxies Newbie

    Joined:
    May 19, 2015
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    2
    I've never done a side by side comparison of the two methods, but in general... the more work you put into something, the more value you will get out of it.

    Google is pretty smart these days... and they don't place much value in stagnant unchanging pages imho. A regularly updated website would perform much better than option A imho.
     
  3. bobrittany

    bobrittany Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    378
    Likes Received:
    129
    Thats what I was thinking. I am just nervous to put in the time and work, and 3 months down the road see no better results than if I would have gone with option A.

    I'm thinking Google will put more value and trust into a link that is coming from a site with regular, fresh, content and maybe even some real traffic flowing to the site, VS a static web 2.0 that was obviously done by an SEO (because face it, no matter how "legit" we make our web 2.0 sites, you can still tell instantly when you see one whether it was done for SEO purposes or not)
     
  4. lightningblitz

    lightningblitz Elite Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2014
    Messages:
    1,626
    Likes Received:
    3,720
    Location:
    Domain Land
    Web 2.0s tend to get 'authority' quickly, even with spammy links. This directly makes it a stronger link to point to your money site.

    Adding more quality, improving 'authority', will help your money site.

    It is not as simple as A + B = C, but it does not hurt to have some Aged 2.0s pointing to your domain.
     
  5. Cshark

    Cshark Jr. VIP Jr. VIP Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,400
    Likes Received:
    186
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Grinding
    Location:
    NYC
    Aged 2.0 with option B is what I would go for, given an option. So if I were you, I'd go for option B over option A.
     
  6. K.H.R

    K.H.R Jr. VIP Jr. VIP

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,301
    Likes Received:
    1,047
    Occupation:
    Learner
    Location:
    BHW
    I think so.

    Go with "B" you will get more value.