[rsdunton]

I've seen the KW I provided move up too now

#16 -> #14

Will keep an eye on it and let you know of any more changes!

[Spot]

Just ran a few web 2.0s through mozcheck I put up not long ago, here,s 1 example -

Site:   insertyournamehere. tumbler.com

page authority  - 46.05

domain authority  -  98.69

mozrank  -  3.18

external links - 42

This property has no PR as yet but with a few a more links thrown at it I,m sure it soon will. Those 42 links are just crappy scrapebox comments.

[ringer69]

rsdunton, on 21 January 2012 - 05:15, said:

I've seen the KW I provided move up too now

#16 -> #14

Will keep an eye on it and let you know of any more changes!

Glad to see some movement. All 25 websites have now had everyones links added. Hopefully we should start to see some movement over the next week or two.

[trakker]

Spot, on 22 January 2012 - 04:06, said:

Just ran a few web 2.0s through mozcheck I put up not long ago, here,s 1 example -

Site:   insertyournamehere. tumbler.com

page authority  - 46.05

domain authority  -  98.69

mozrank  -  3.18

external links - 42

This property has no PR as yet but with a few a more links thrown at it I,m sure it soon will. Those 42 links are just crappy scrapebox comments.

Sorry if I'm dense (or a little drunk after watching the 49ers lose), but...

Whats your point?

Edited by trakker, 23 January 2012 - 00:51.

[ARVolund]

trakker, on 22 January 2012 - 20:33, said:

Sorry if I'm dense (or a little drunk after watching the 49ers lose), but...

Whats your point?

tumbler has high DA.  And passes some authority to the page.  

I guess you're trying to say the seomoz rankings suck, or something?

The point is not to say anything but to test and see whether or not these alternative rankings have any bearing on link strength. Most networks use PR the point here is to test and see whether or not you can get a good boost from sites absent any PR but using these alternate rankings.

[ARVolund]

ringer69, on 22 January 2012 - 10:49, said:

Glad to see some movement. All 25 websites have now had everyones links added. Hopefully we should start to see some movement over the next week or two.

The keyword I used was at 22 but had been wandering between 20-26 since Oct. I just checked it and it is sitting at 19, nothing huge yet but a start.

[ringer69]

ARVolund, on 23 January 2012 - 00:30, said:

The keyword I used was at 22 but had been wandering between 20-26 since Oct. I just checked it and it is sitting at 19, nothing huge yet but a start.

Great to here that we are getting some movement. I drip fed the backlinks over a few days so we should hopefully see more movement - hopefully!!!

[Spot]

ARVolund, on 23 January 2012 - 00:27, said:

The point is not to say anything but to test and see whether or not these alternative rankings have any bearing on link strength. Most networks use PR the point here is to test and see whether or not you can get a good boost from sites absent any PR but using these alternate rankings.

trakker, on 22 January 2012 - 20:33, said:

Sorry if I'm dense (or a little drunk after watching the 49ers lose), but...

Whats your point?

My point was not to dismiss other ranking factors but rather to see if using the free platforms with a little extra care taken about each one (20 - 30 dollars worth of links and multiple unique posts) could equal some of the HPBL sites, rather than the usual 1 post badly spun and a few crappy links thrown at them..... post Panda. Think of it as ROI. Everyone is crying that web 2.0s are dying but has anybody here really put some effort into creating web 2.0s with some kind of authority and half decent linking ?

[ARVolund]

Spot, on 23 January 2012 - 13:21, said:

My point was not to dismiss other ranking factors but rather to see if using the free platforms with a little extra care taken about each one (20 - 30 dollars worth of links and multiple unique posts) could equal some of the HPBL sites, rather than the usual 1 post badly spun and a few crappy links thrown at them..... post Panda. Think of it as ROI. Everyone is crying that web 2.0s are dying but has anybody here really put some effort into creating web 2.0s with some kind of authority and half decent linking ?

Actually I treat my tier one sites (mostly 2.0 sites) like money sites and I know I am not the only one..

In fact I am in the process of trying to rank three on the first page with no outgoing links and then link them to the money site after they reach the first page to see what kind of bump they give.

I would think that there would be a pretty strong bump but the only to know for sure is to try it and see.

[Spot]

ARVolund, on 23 January 2012 - 13:44, said:

Actually I treat my tier one sites (mostly 2.0 sites) like money sites and I know I am not the only one..

In fact I am in the process of trying to rank three on the first page with no outgoing links and then link them to the money site after they reach the first page to see what kind of bump they give.

I would think that there would be a pretty strong bump but the only to know for sure is to try it and see.

This is what Im talking about, and I am sure there are plenty doing this but it isnt really talked about much, I feel this fits right into this particular topic of gaining authority links as cheaply as possible for the long term.

I also know there are plenty spamming the hell out of 2.0s, its just a different tact to build 2.0s that will last and provide links to any site you could have in the niches.

This is why I pointed out the mozrank for a badly managed 2,0 was 3, now if I actually took some time to link properly and add more posts, could this become a very easy pr 3 for my keywords for multiple sites?

[ARVolund]

Spot, on 23 January 2012 - 13:59, said:

This is what Im talking about, and I am sure there are plenty doing this but it isnt really talked about much, I feel this fits right into this particular topic of gaining authority links as cheaply as possible for the long term.

I also know there are plenty spamming the hell out of 2.0s, its just a different tact to build 2.0s that will last and provide links to any site you could have in the niches.

This is why I pointed out the mozrank for a badly managed 2,0 was 3, now if I actually took some time to link properly and add more posts, could this become a very easy pr 3 for my keywords for multiple sites?

Well I do not treat all the 2.0s the same, i use them for for my tier 1 and tier 2 sites and I treat the tier 1's better than i treat the tier2's. While I treat the 1's like money sites the 2's get spun content and somewhat lower quality links than the 1's do.

[Spot]

ARVolund, on 23 January 2012 - 14:14, said:

Well I do not treat all the 2.0s the same, i use them for for my tier 1 and tier 2 sites and I treat the tier 1's better than i treat the tier2's. While I treat the 1's like money sites the 2's get spun content and somewhat lower quality links than the 1's do.

Wouldnt argue with that, I,l still use em as spam links as well as other linking spam ..... also think they maybe being underated when a little more work is spent on them but time will tell once I finish my first batch of quality 2.0 spam if there is such a thing  

[ringer69]

ARVolund, on 18 January 2012 - 05:29, said:

OK just submitted Keyword and url

Currently ranked 22 and has been wandering from 20-25 since Nov with 22k exact searches.

The site itself has a lot of first page terms but I have not really worked this particular keyword much in the last couple of months.

Hi ArVolund,
Just checked and it looks like you're currently ranking at 11 in Google.com for this keyword - an increase of 11 places!! Not bad!

Edited by ringer69, 26 January 2012 - 15:05.

[ringer69]

trakker, on 19 January 2012 - 21:36, said:

Am seeing some movement:

3 related keywords:

kw1 #3   -> #2
kw2 #6    ->   #4
kw3 #11 -> #8

A bit early to say for sure as it could be normal fluctuation, but rankings have been fairly stable and all 3 up is a good sign. Anyone else?

Hi Trakker,
Seeing some even better movement with your keywords now:
KW1 that began at position 3 is now position 1 !!!
KW2 that began at position 6 is now ranking your URL at both position 3 and 4
KW3 that began at position 11 is now at position 8.

[baggs]

Ringer, for these sites, what's the content situation like? Unique, original?  Over/under 400 words? How many total pages do these sites have? OBL/page?

Thanks

[DogDo]

My KW, (a pretty tough one) has gone moved up 1 spot from 15 to 14.

[ringer69]

baggs, on 26 January 2012 - 16:51, said:

Ringer, for these sites, what's the content situation like? Unique, original?  Over/under 400 words? How many total pages do these sites have? OBL/page?

Thanks

Hi,
This is just an experiment. There is only a homepage with one article and 9 OBL. Please read the rest of the thread for more details.
Thanks
Ringer

[Steven_ucf]

So what happened to this thread?  Did anybody see any significant moment besides Trakker?