[PaoloG]

Hi

has anyone tried SeoLinkMonster?

Any opinions? sounds quite expensive, so i was wondering if someone has had results with it...

Thanks

PaoloG

[Richar Green]

$147/month 14 posts a day sounds insane and over priced to be honest.

[ARVolund]

Richar Green, on 08 February 2012 - 09:00, said:

$147/month 14 posts a day sounds insane and over priced to be honest.

^^^This plus they had a huge initial push so chances are there will be a very large number of new members and posts all at one time. I see trouble ahead for the sites if they all get hammered from all the new people.

[sweeppicker]

$147 a month. What a rip off.

[MattW]

I wathched through the video but I couldn't grasp what you actually got for your monthly payment. Does anyone actually know? Got a site that could do with some links and I was thinking about giving it a shot to see how it performs.

[RobertoMejia]

I was trying to figure out the same thing. I guess they write articles and post them to their network. Does anyone know exactly?

[Insurgo]

I received this from Mike, the developer of PR Plunder the other day. I actually respect his opinion on the industry because he doesnt push every big release that comes his way:

Quote

Hi, I wanted to tell you about SEO Link Monster when I sent out the new high PR target list for PRP.

But everyone is mailing about this thing.

I was invited by Brad Callen to try his new link network. He seems like a nice guy but it's no good. Here's what is great about link networks:

• They really do work for SEO
  
• You can outsource the content submission cheap

The bad:

• They are usually expensive
  
• If it's a public network you, and you links are vulnerable
  
• Some networks are not what they claim to be

Nothing personal against Brad, but here is what I've found from using his service:

• The reporting sucks, you have to use Regular Expressions (a type of coding maths, done manually) to extract the links. The reports are useless without spending 5-10 minutes sorting out the distorted xls files.
  
• He told me he had 17,000+ opt-ins for the product. That's WAY too much heat for a link network. Remember, Google hunts networks down mercilessly because they work so well. Google hates no one more than the link networks! Having such a massive clickbank launch full of newbies spamming the hell out of what is mainly pr0 and pr1 domains is simply unsustainable.
  
• The spinning functionality sucks. If I have 3 links in an article: {keyword 1|keyword 2|keyword 3}{link1 |link2 |link3}, all 3 of them will come out the same! This means all 3 of my links go to the same page, using the same anchor text... even though I have 30+ URLs and 50+ keywords in spintax!

I fear I should have mailed this out sooner, I personally think SEO Link Monster is doomed, and will be de-indexed by Google very soon like so many other networks which were far more secret, far more advanced, and better coded.

[SeoGod]

ARVolund, on 08 February 2012 - 10:07, said:

^^^This plus they had a huge initial push so chances are there will be a very large number of new members and posts all at one time. I see trouble ahead for the sites if they all get hammered from all the new people.

^^^This

[GeorgR.]

Brad usually does GOOD stuff in the beginning, remember how SEOLV was "not bad" also in the early phases.
But Brad is marketing the #### out of everything he does which means that MANY, MANY people will sign up and quality as a whole might go down in the long run. There is probably already 1000s of 1000s using this right after the start....and when it comes to blog networks i rather choose to go with the rather unknown ones instead of the big players...but that's just me.

Edited by GeorgR., 08 February 2012 - 18:26.

[AnnaJEvans]

Richar Green, on 08 February 2012 - 09:00, said:

$147/month 14 posts a day sounds insane and over priced to be honest.

Hi,

I am confused about the posting rate...I heard that you can add any number of domains ?? So 1 post per domain in a day??

Hope someone can clarify for me...I want to jump in during the trial period...

Now the blogs are fresh and good ...better to start posting now than later

Edited by AnnaJEvans, 09 February 2012 - 02:01.

[MattW]

AnnaJEvans, on 08 February 2012 - 22:49, said:

Hi,

I am confused about the posting rate...I heard that you can add any number of domains ?? So 1 post per domain in a day??

Hope someone can clarify for me...I want to jump in during the trial period...

Now the blogs are fresh and good ...better to start posting now than later

Hi,

If you dont have a domain in something like ALN or FBL yet I would suggest investing your money in a decent domain with PR instead. For a one time investment you can post a few articles a day to high PR blogs everyday for life.

I had thought about doing a case study for SEOLinkMonster but after reading a bit about it I dont see it to be worthy of testing. I have to agree, these kind of launches are going to attract thousands of people and just trash the entire network of sites. Plus SEOLinkVine was pretty awful in my opinion, isn't LinkMonster the same thing with a different name?

Thanks

[MattW]

I decided to do a bit more research on it and wrote a post dedicated to not buying it http://www.matthewwoodward.co.uk/reviews/do-not-buy-seo-link-monster/

spread the word!

[Gadget]

They say that SEO Link Monster can win against Google...



Hmm. I thought Google would accept our concept for better rankings.


Yeah, I knew I should have listened to the guys on Traffic Planet.



That's SEO Link Monster, in a nutshell. It's tempting to join the passengers, but the end result is devastating when Google sinks the hell out of it.

[Charybdis]

^^LOL

[seodisaster]

Good one there!

[Mansoor]

I am testing it out now..$147 is not a problem. Issues here is that (just my understanding)

1) The content can be as little or as spun as you like no restrictions, I have tried putting badly put together sentences and its gone through. No quality checks
2) You get supposedly get 14 links a day PER article with no limits on number of articles. This means that there are 406 times this article will be published in one month, with 3 links in each article we are looking at 1218 links per article. Sounds like a nice number
3) The indexation rate of the article is not bad, i am getting 80% so far..
4) There is NO organization inside what so ever, so when you download a list of links these are links from EVERY article, aspect about creating projects and organizing reports would be nice and something I asked about.
5) How effective is it in reality don't know, to be honest I suspect it is effective but certainly no way near as being claimed.

As mention ia m doing a detailed test on this now so will put it up, I will not be posting any affiliate links so will be a CLEAN review (i hope). I went from initially say rubbish, to think maybe.. but today I am thinking, I wont be using it on money sites its risky in my opinion. Should have all the tests up and running on my blog in a months time.

[MattW]

Mansoor, on 11 February 2012 - 01:41, said:

I am testing it out now..$147 is not a problem. Issues here is that (just my understanding)

1) The content can be as little or as spun as you like no restrictions, I have tried putting badly put together sentences and its gone through. No quality checks
2) You get supposedly get 14 links a day PER article with no limits on number of articles. This means that there are 406 times this article will be published in one month, with 3 links in each article we are looking at 1218 links per article. Sounds like a nice number
3) The indexation rate of the article is not bad, i am getting 80% so far..
4) There is NO organization inside what so ever, so when you download a list of links these are links from EVERY article, aspect about creating projects and organizing reports would be nice and something I asked about.
5) How effective is it in reality don't know, to be honest I suspect it is effective but certainly no way near as being claimed.

As mention ia m doing a detailed test on this now so will put it up, I will not be posting any affiliate links so will be a CLEAN review (i hope). I went from initially say rubbish, to think maybe.. but today I am thinking, I wont be using it on money sites its risky in my opinion. Should have all the tests up and running on my blog in a months time.

Hi Mansoor,

Will be good to see an actual case study on the service, I decided it wasn't even worth a go for a range of reasons but would still be interested to see how it does actually perform.

I summed it up with-

Quote

The only thing you should do with SEO Link Monster is send an E-mail to your competitors telling them how good SEO Link Monster is and how your getting great results with it. Make sure you include your affiliate link with your E-mail. Other than that it is worthless.

Edited by MattW, 11 February 2012 - 03:24.

[MattBest]

Dave Baker at dbpmarketing.com made in-depth case study and came to the conclusion that indexation rate is %88, which is huge!

Well my suggestion would be try it for yourself at $47 then after one month either refund it if not satisfied or remain using it at $147.

I'm using it myself.

[raven]

MattBest, on 11 February 2012 - 16:34, said:

Dave Baker at dbpmarketing.com made in-depth case study and came to the conclusion that indexation rate is %88, which is huge!

Well my suggestion would be try it for yourself at $47 then after one month either refund it if not satisfied or remain using it at $147.

I'm using it myself.

thank you mr review and drop your affiliatelink 1 post guy

[matchoo77]

raven, on 11 February 2012 - 17:34, said:

thank you mr review and drop your affiliatelink 1 post guy

lol gotta love it! just like the WF