Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Hey Guest, Welcome to Traffic Planet!

Sign up today in order to gain access to a vast range of features including the ability to create new topics, send private messages, Facebook & Twitter integration and MUCH more!

  • RSS Feed
  • CASE STUDY: Negative SEO - Results


    • This topic is locked This topic is locked
    497 replies to this topic

    #361 Steve Backlink Energizer

    Steve Backlink Energizer

      Advanced Member

    • Active Seller
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 525
    • Joined: 17-December 11
      Reputation: 135
    • LocationSo Cal

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:30 AM

    I stand by my comments, one person can make a difference and sometimes a large one. Thats all I was saying. Take it out of context if you want but I know what I was saying.


    Yup bro - you made a huge difference. More so than Mike Anthony has ever made at anything ... so kudos to you. Your thread has caught absolute FIRE across the entire world and in seo/webmaster forums all over. Id say its making a difference. Nice one.

    Get RESULTS with Powerful S.E.O. - "Contextual Links In High PR Blog Posts" Rank Ascend Thread | RankAscend.com

    Featuring 100s of NEW High PR Blogs and Kick Ass New Back Office System To Manage Your Orders


    #362 joetheseo

    joetheseo

      Advanced Member

    • New Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 38
    • Joined: 07-March 12
      Reputation: 2

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:35 AM

    Fair enough... but what happens when it's directly against Google's own policies to sell links..

    And they penalize people that bought links FROM their own ads?

    .... That can't be legal dude ... That's gotta be fraud or something.

    I lost 50%+ of my business overnight, so "technically" couldn't someone just say ...

    "I actually bought those links from YOUR ads..."

    And they'd be forced to unpenalize you?

    I just can't imagine going into a gas station, the guy saying

    "Oh btw, it's illegal to buy beer here.".... and then turns around, whispers and says

    "... but for an extra $50 bucks...."

    That's legal?

    #363 Mike Anthony

    Mike Anthony

      Advanced Member

    • Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 66
    • Joined: 22-April 12
      Reputation: 13

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:37 AM

    Actually, you're wrong buddy.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/27/an-antitrust-lawsuit-by-the-ftc-could-bring-down-the-web-giant-google.html


    If you think that Google's anti trust case has anything to do with you getting your rankings back you are delusional. Look take a deep breath and man up. All this whining and crying is just sad coming from some people calling themselves SEOs. Take another look at your article and see that it mentions a certain company called MS. LOL. it fails to indicate that MS is still going strong. Still with plenty cash. Dominating in the gaming industry, still with the lion share of desktops. kicking rear in the enterprise with software like Office, entering into the phone market about to release Windows 8 with a multiplicity of full strength tablets while nipping at the heels of Google at number 2 in search. IF Micrososft is your example of how Google is going down then you are the one sunk.

    Enough. the whining and crying should be over now. had things to get off your chest fine but now SEOs running around in forums crying boo hoo hoo we no longer rank let the government come in and restore our spam links because its unfair Google owes us to rank using the same links they said we should stop using makes the whole industry look like a joke filled with kiddies. Give it up. Roll up your sleeves and get back to work.

    Edited by Mike Anthony, 28 April 2012 - 12:39 AM.


    #364 Sybernetik

    Sybernetik

      Advanced Member

    • New Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 45
    • Joined: 19-March 12
      Reputation: 2

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:39 AM

    let the government come in and restore our spam links


    ROFL!

    #365 _Richard

    _Richard

      Forum Moderator

    • Forum Support
    • posts 5,178
    • Joined: 27-September 11
      Reputation: 1,882
    • LocationNW Arkansas

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:39 AM

    Actually, you're wrong buddy.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/27/an-antitrust-lawsuit-by-the-ftc-could-bring-down-the-web-giant-google.html

    Google is getting closer and closer to full blown BUSTED.

    Penalizing links when you allow advertisers to sell them, is illegal.


    Considering filing suit is not the same as winning. If and when the Govt does decide to go ahead you know Google will fight and appeal it as long as possible. You can figure 6-10 years easy from the time the Govt files. Even if Google loses there will be very little change, one only has to look at the Microsoft case to know that neither case really made any difference.

    And no selling adwords while running the organic rankings is not illegal.

    But you go ahead and wait for the Govt to step in and save you, personally I will just keep working on making more money by adapting to the changing conditions.

    Sometimes I have a link in my signature to a product. If I do assume it is an affiliate link and I might make a couple of bucks off it...................................


    #366 joetheseo

    joetheseo

      Advanced Member

    • New Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 38
    • Joined: 07-March 12
      Reputation: 2

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:40 AM

    Eh shadup Mike,

    You're always running your mouth acting like the biggest and baddest SEO in town, when really just another one of us.

    I've been in the game long enough to know that if a company is SELLING links, and then penalizing for the same thing, that cannot be legal.

    Or either just horribly immoral and ethically wrong.

    If you think that Google's anti trust case has anything to do with you getting your rankings back you are delusional. Look take a deep breath and man up. All this whining and crying is just sad coming from some people calling themselves SEOs. Take another look at your article and see that it mentions a certain company called MS. LOL. it fails to indicate that MS is still going strong. Still with plenty cash. Dominating in the gaming industry, still with the lion share of desktops. kicking rear in the enterprise with software like Office, entering into the phone market about to release Windows 8 with a multiplicity of full strength tablets while nipping at the heels of Google at number 2 in search. IF Micrososft is your example of how Google is going down then you are the one sunk.

    Enough. the whining and crying should be over now. had things to get off your chest fine but now SEOs running around in forums crying boo hoo hoo we no longer rank let the government come in and restore our spam links because its unfair Google owes us to rank using the same links they said we should stop using makes the whole industry look like jokes. Give it up. Roll up your sleeves and get back to work.



    #367 joetheseo

    joetheseo

      Advanced Member

    • New Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 38
    • Joined: 07-March 12
      Reputation: 2

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:42 AM

    I never stopped working bud... I just shook off 4 years worth of near 24 hr days like it was nothing.

    It takes a real champion to do that. SEO is my life friend. I live it, breathe it, and ***** it.

    But if Google is allowed to sell links, and penalize them...

    Why did they take down the Adwords ad within minutes of me posting this on Twitter?

    mmhmmm.

    Posted Image


    Considering filing suit is not the same as winning. If and when the Govt does decide to go ahead you know Google will fight and appeal it as long as possible. You can figure 6-10 years easy from the time the Govt files. Even if Google loses there will be very little change, one only has to look at the Microsoft case to know that neither case really made any difference.

    And no selling adwords while running the organic rankings is not illegal.

    But you go ahead and wait for the Govt to step in and save you, personally I will just keep working on making more money by adapting to the changing conditions.



    #368 Mike Anthony

    Mike Anthony

      Advanced Member

    • Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 66
    • Joined: 22-April 12
      Reputation: 13

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:47 AM

    Yup bro - you made a huge difference. More so than Mike Anthony has ever made at anything ... so kudos to you. Your thread has caught absolute FIRE across the entire world and in seo/webmaster forums all over. Id say its making a difference. Nice one.


    LOL Getting mentioned in a thread for doing something highly unethical is now making a mark in this world. excuse me a minute


    ROFL

    Shows where your mind is at my man. Now if people were heralding negativeSEO for something good he 's done then that would be something but being the Casey Anthony of SEO??? I'm laughing out loud at you for real.

    Me? want that? LOL - Yu Mad

    Edited by Mike Anthony, 28 April 2012 - 12:49 AM.


    #369 joetheseo

    joetheseo

      Advanced Member

    • New Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 38
    • Joined: 07-March 12
      Reputation: 2

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:51 AM

    Negative SEO is good. Good for showing Google how big of idiots they are for penalizing backlinks.

    LOL Getting mentioned in a thread for doing something highly unethical is now making a mark in this world. excuse me a minute


    ROFL

    Shows where your mind is at my man. Now if people were heralding negativeSEO for something good he 's done then that would be something but being the Casey Anthony of SEO??? I'm laughing out loud at you for real.

    Me? want that? LOL - Yu Mad


    Edited by joetheseo, 28 April 2012 - 12:51 AM.


    #370 Mike Anthony

    Mike Anthony

      Advanced Member

    • Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 66
    • Joined: 22-April 12
      Reputation: 13

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:53 AM

    I've been in the game long enough to know that if a company is SELLING links, and then penalizing for the same thing, that cannot be legal.

    Or either just horribly immoral and ethically wrong.


    Yes of course if a company sells links on their own site and fails to promote sites that do not buy their links its illegal. You miss the central point. The only penalty they are handing out to you is failing to promote you on their site. Call me when the Supreme court overturns common sense.

    #371 _Richard

    _Richard

      Forum Moderator

    • Forum Support
    • posts 5,178
    • Joined: 27-September 11
      Reputation: 1,882
    • LocationNW Arkansas

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 12:58 AM

    .... That can't be legal dude ... That's gotta be fraud or something.


    Yes it is and no it is not. You might want to look up words before you start using them as they do not mean what you think they mean.

    Just because Google has screwed up the rankings does not mean that they have done anything illegal. In fact all they have been doing for years is furnishing millions of websites free advertising. They could change to a 100% paid model tomorrow and there would not be anything illegal about that either. Now they would probably lose a lot of market share but that is a business decision that they are free to make.

    The only thing that that could get them into (anti-trust) hot water is if they removed competing businesses and showed just their own products. Not positive that at their level of market share the Govt could make a good anti-trust case but that would probably make them try and do so. In fact if you look at what the Govt is looking into that is exactly the kind of activity they are looking at. They care about Google taking its search and pushing into other areas unfairly, it has nothing to do with who is ranked where in the organic rankings.

    Sometimes I have a link in my signature to a product. If I do assume it is an affiliate link and I might make a couple of bucks off it...................................


    #372 joetheseo

    joetheseo

      Advanced Member

    • New Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 38
    • Joined: 07-March 12
      Reputation: 2

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:01 AM

    Alright cool... So if I was a newbie webmaster, and I bought links from Google adwords,
    specifically an ad that said "Increase Your Rankings!", then Google penalizes my site for
    links I bought through their advertising platform...

    That's 100% A-Okay with all laws?

    Damn, that means I can completely scam anyone I want and get away with it.

    Brilliant.

    #373 Sybernetik

    Sybernetik

      Advanced Member

    • New Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 45
    • Joined: 19-March 12
      Reputation: 2

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:04 AM

    I do see your point joetheseo, but it doesn't matter. Either adapt or go home. The rules have changed and there is no amount of complaining or finger pointing that will fix it.

    By the way, no problem, we'll just purchase backlinks instead:
    Posted Image

    Edited by Sybernetik, 28 April 2012 - 01:22 AM.


    #374 Mike Anthony

    Mike Anthony

      Advanced Member

    • Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 66
    • Joined: 22-April 12
      Reputation: 13

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:08 AM

    Negative SEO is good. Good for showing Google how big of idiots they are for penalizing backlinks.


    Won't work. the guy has been running all over the place telling people how he tanked a site long before this thread was created and in ways that went way beyond just adding links . Look seriously - if these are your heros all you are saying to Google is that they stepped on the right foot.

    #375 _Richard

    _Richard

      Forum Moderator

    • Forum Support
    • posts 5,178
    • Joined: 27-September 11
      Reputation: 1,882
    • LocationNW Arkansas

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:16 AM

    Alright cool... So if I was a newbie webmaster, and I bought links from Google adwords,
    specifically an ad that said "Increase Your Rankings!", then Google penalizes my site for
    links I bought through their advertising platform...

    That's 100% A-Okay with all laws?

    Damn, that means I can completely scam anyone I want and get away with it.

    Brilliant.


    But you would not be buying the links from Google, you would be buying them from somebody who advertised on Google which is a very large difference. Kind of like blaming the newspaper for something you purchased from ad when you found out it was defective when who you really should be blaming the person you bought it from.

    Now if Google sold you the links directly and then hammered you for using them that would be a different matter altogether but that is not what is happening.

    Now am I surprised that Google sell ad space to companies selling links? A little but they allow that kind of thing in the organic results as well so not really all that much. I suppose they could remove all results that did anything they did not approve of but then everyone would be screaming censorship and that would be a much bigger public relations problem for them than a few seo guys jumping off buildings.

    Sometimes I have a link in my signature to a product. If I do assume it is an affiliate link and I might make a couple of bucks off it...................................


    #376 Mike Anthony

    Mike Anthony

      Advanced Member

    • Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 66
    • Joined: 22-April 12
      Reputation: 13

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:17 AM

    Alright cool... So if I was a newbie webmaster, and I bought links from Google adwords,
    specifically an ad that said "Increase Your Rankings!", then Google penalizes my site for
    links I bought through their advertising platform...


    You didn't buy any links through their advertising program. You bought through a company that advertised with them. Further the only reason the ad showed was because before you ever saw the ad you were looking for such a service (or it would not have appeared in the search results). Down the drain goes the argument that they are culpable. However whats the point? the guy that bought the link can make that argument but your sites presently tanking will still tank. This provides nothing to correcting what has happened to most webmaster that did not but their links because a Google ad was shown to them.

    Edited by Mike Anthony, 28 April 2012 - 01:17 AM.


    #377 _Richard

    _Richard

      Forum Moderator

    • Forum Support
    • posts 5,178
    • Joined: 27-September 11
      Reputation: 1,882
    • LocationNW Arkansas

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:19 AM

    Hmmm..... Starting to feel like we are tag teaming the guy.

    Sometimes I have a link in my signature to a product. If I do assume it is an affiliate link and I might make a couple of bucks off it...................................


    #378 joetheseo

    joetheseo

      Advanced Member

    • New Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 38
    • Joined: 07-March 12
      Reputation: 2

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:21 AM

    Fair enough, I'll stop pushing the issue then.

    Serious question though.... Spun content still, or no?

    Also, kw 3 way split.. anchor % per?... ~5-10% each?
    Rest unopt., lsi, long tail, full url variations, etc?

    What is the trigger?

    #379 Mike Anthony

    Mike Anthony

      Advanced Member

    • Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 66
    • Joined: 22-April 12
      Reputation: 13

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:25 AM

    Hmmm..... Starting to feel like we are tag teaming the guy.


    Yeah. Every time I am writing a post and publish it I look up and see you said much the same thing. not intentional. I'm out for now anyway. Friday night and time for some down time. To all. Have a good weekend and come back energized (no reference to Steve - lol). Fun days ahead and believe it or not some very real opportunities are now open besides negative SEO.

    #380 joetheseo

    joetheseo

      Advanced Member

    • New Member
    • PipPipPip
    • posts 38
    • Joined: 07-March 12
      Reputation: 2

    Posted 28 April 2012 - 01:26 AM

    I had also considered rel={NOFOLLOW|DOFOLLOW|DOFOLLOW} when submitting to my personal network...

    A bit disappointed as only a few days before they rolled this out, I completed my "stat-of-the-art" blog network (3 separate networks actually).

    On a good note, the network has not had 1 link submitted, and has only quality content, images, videos, pictures, internal links, etc.

    Maybe letting it "age" will make big G think it's not a blog network at all.





    Similar Topics Collapse

    2 user(s) are reading this topic

    0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users