Jump to content


New Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About live&learn

  • Rank
    New Member
  1. Thanks Pat. I think I will take the chance!
  2. Thanks for your response Pat. Yeah, the main backlink for this domain (the one giving it the high PR) is a yahoo directory link. The Yahoo listing describes the site in terms of its OLD content/niche. I want to buy it and totally repurpose it for a completely different niche. But I'm worried the yahoo link will get removed once they see it's no longer the same site. But you reckon Yahoo don't actively recheck the domains (periodically) to make sure they're still good? I may go ahead and buy it in that case. Thanks for sharing your thoughts
  3. Hey everyone, Suppose you're thinking of buying an aged domain with PR. Suppose the major backlink (responsible for the high PR) is a Yahoo directory backlink. What happens to that backlink if you repurpose your aged domain and completely change the content? Do Yahoo regularly check the sites listed in their directory (to ensure they're still up to scratch and suitable for inclusion)? A concrete example. Suppose the domain originally featured a "Learn Spanish" website and this is what Yahoo listed it as in their directory. Now you buy the domain and change it completely so that it's a "Lose weight" site. Will Yahoo notice the theme change and remove the directory listing/backlink? Thanks for your help! Adam
  4. Thanks for commenting Ellen (is that your name?) - so you get roughly a 1% conversion rate (from visitors to sales). A while back I was getting 100-300 visitors a day and seeing zero sales, so I must have been doing something wrong! Right now (after the wretched Penguin update) I only get about 30 visitors per day so I suppose I can't expect more than 1 sale every 4 days (not getting that either though). Could PM you if you think that's best... Would be nice to discuss the Google+Amazon model you've been having such success with! Adam
  5. Hey Terry, Firstly, I second FredJones' comments - Terry, you (often) seem to be one of the only upfront, honest internet marketers around. Rather than claiming to make six figures a month from this (as many would do in the hope of selling a (useless) product), you openly share your challenges and goals. Maximum respect for that. I've had my own conversions nightmare, similar to this (but different in some ways). Before the idiotic Penguin update (man I'm getting sick of Google), I had a page getting up to 300 unique visitors a day via 3-4 so-called "buyer keywords" (e.g. "product name for sale" "cheap product name"). I also used a price comparison plugin displaying prices from stores like Amazon, Best Buy, Walmart and so on. Had a pretty good click-through rate (most people clicked through to Amazon) but terrible conversions - something like 0.2% went on to buy. And that was from so-called "buyer keywords." The product was very popular and in stock; prices were as low as they could be; traffic was "targeted"; visitors were clicking through to the merchant and still conversions were almost non-existent. Showed this to a couple of IM people - they had no idea why it was converting so badly. That kinda made me lose faith in the "get Google traffic and send them straight to Amazon" sort of approach. I thought about list-building but for the physical product(s) I was promoting, you can't really build a list. It amazes me how others succeed with the search engine traffic+Amazon model (not doubting that people do succeed with it; just wondering how!) What kinds of keywords are you ranking your pages for, Terry? (Sorry, you may have already said this somewhere). How close to buying are the visitors (given those keywords)? Anyway, I'm sure you'll solve your challenge and wish you all the best, Adam
  6. Hi Pilot, Thanks for posting. Yes, I've been suspecting/realizing lately that having keyword in domain (or even anywhere in the URL) isn't absolutely essential to rank. I gave the example above of mattsmarketingblog.com/ which ranks at #2 for "affiliate marketing" ("affiliate marketing" being nowhere in the domain/URL) and I saw that #3 for "internet marketing" is also a homepage without keyword in URL. I suppose I was trying to have my cake and eat it. Would have been nice to be able to get the keyword in the URL as well as enjoying the age and high PR of the domain. May I ask what your recommendation is, in that case, Pilot? I have a feeling I already know, but am I right in thinking that you'd rather go for (1) than (2): (1) Try to rank homepage with high PR (but without keyword in URL) (2) Try to rank innerpage with keyword in URL (but without high PR) I'm told that innerpages on aged high PR domains will still benefit from a sort of PR trickle-down effect from root domain. But perhaps it's still better to use the full PR force of homepage to rank.. A
  7. Hi everyone, I'm fairly new but have really enjoyed reading some of the threads already. Hopefully this one will be useful for lots of people too. I'll try to be concise. Suppose you buy an aged domain of PR 5. Let's call it: www.ageddomain.com. There are no other existing pages/URLs on this domain. Now suppose you wish to use this aged domain as a "repurposed money site" (and rank it for "keyword"). This is where I see a dilemma. Could any of the advanced SEOS (particularly those who repurpose aged domains as money sites) solve it? Dilemma goes like this: You've got your aged PR 5 domain. You want to repurpose it as a money site to rank for "keyword". It seems to me that you've got two options - (1) and (2): (1) You try to rank the homepage for "keyword". The advantage of this is that the PR (of 5) is on the homepage. That's where all the backlinks were pointing to as well. The disadvantage is that you can't get the keyword into the URL (as the domain is obviously fixed: www.ageddomain.com) (2) You create an inner page on the this aged domain and try to rank the inner page for "keyword". The advantage of this approach is that you can now get the keyword in the URL. You can make the URL of this inner page: www.ageddomain.com/keyword The disadvantage, though, is that this inner page has no PR. The PR5 was on the homepage (or root domain) It seems to me that if you want to rank (a page on) the aged domain for "keyword" you have to do one of these things. You either try to rank the homepage. Or you try to rank the innerpage. But either way it seems you're losing something. - If you try to rank the homepage, you can't get the keyword in the URL - If you try to rank an inner page, you don't get the (full?) force of the PR5 [PR exists on root domain, not inner page] Can someone solve this? Of course, everybody is invited to share their thoughts. But it would be great to hear from people who actually repurpose aged domains as money sites. What do you actually do? I should point out that I'm a relative newbie and have never tried to rank an aged domain. I want to start though! Here are a few thoughts I've had about this "dilemma" (do forgive me if they're naive or just plain wrong): (i) Perhaps you just try to rank the homepage without the keyword in the URL - I know that it's possible to rank a page without having keyword in the URL. [Matt Carter's blog - mattsmarketingblog.com/ - ranks #2 for "affiliate marketing" - keyword is not in domain/URL] (ii) On the other hand, perhaps you have to work quite a bit harder to rank a page if it doesn't have KW in URL(?) I've never done it so I wouldn't now. I always put keyword in URL. (iii) If you try to rank an inner page on ageddomain.com (and stick keyword in the URL), perhaps some of the PR from root domain flows through to inner page and helps it rank [Even if this is the case, though, it seems a shame not to use the full force of the PR5) Anyway, I'll stop there before I start to ramble. I get the feeling that other (newbies?) might be wondering the same thing as I am, so hopefully this thread will be of use to lots of people. As I said above, it would be great to hear from people who repurpose aged domains as money sites. What do you do to solve this "dilemma"? Thanks for reading this. I look forward to hearing your thoughts, Adam
  8. @GeorgR - point taken. However, what I said to trakker applies here too: Yes, "natural" linking on the web does not make such repeated use of the same anchor text. But high percentage keyword-as-anchor text has worked in SEO for some time (again, I refer to Terry Kyle's own previous practice and recommendations of 70-80% keyword-as-anchor text). And as long as it worked (it worked for me a few times as well) there was not much reason to change it. That said, I'm now certainly going to change it - 50% at the most, probably. I do agree that we want to make our linking look "natural" and will be making that more of a priority from now on.
  9. @trakker - well, I certainly now think that 80% is overdoing it. However, it's worth pointing out that Terry himself recommended up to 80% anchor text in SEO masters academy (and this is someone who's successfully ranked hundreds of pages). Plenty of other SEOs have recommended a similar figure too (Matt Carter and so on). I think hindsight is a wonderful thing. Certainly 80% doesn't look "natural" but if it's what successful SEOs have been using to achieve top rankings (and what they were recommending that others use as well) I don't think it was that crazy to give it a go. That said, things seem to be different now. In Terry's big post, he revised the figure to 50% (if I remember rightly) and that's probably what I'll aim for in future.
  10. Scrap (some of) that - just read Terry's post. Looks like the latest best practice recommendation is to use only 50% keyword-as-anchor text, so perhaps that's one of the reasons why I was hit (in addition to using BMR directly on my money page)
  11. Hey mofoe - if you mean did I create too many links with the keyword as anchor text, then I don't think so. I've heard people say that you don't want to overdo it, however I also know of cases where people have used their keyword as anchor text almost 100% of the time and they rank just fine. Terry (Kyle) himself recommends 70%-80%. I'd say I was hitting the 80% mark (keyword as anchor text 8 times out of 10). As for overdoing links to the index page, can you explain what you mean? Do you mean "was I linking only to the page I wanted to rank?" or something else..?
  12. Hey, I thought I'd chip in to the discussion as what I've experienced is similar to what others have experienced - high first-page rankings obliterated (seemingly) overnight. I'm talking about plummeting from #4 to #650. I do use BMR links and a lot of my "high-powered" (i.e. high PR) contextual backlinks to this page came from BMR. I checked about 10 of my BMR posts (to see if they were still indexed in Google) and all of them were. However, that's probably not a large enough sample to be sure - I had about 160 BMR posts linking to the page in question, and don't know how many (if any) of those posts were deindexed. But i have to say, I've always had concerns about using BMR. I remember writing to "John" (it must have been the same John you other guys mentioned) and expressing my concern that Google could surely detect (and deindex) their sites very easily. As someone else said (in this thread or another like it), it's just a matter of signing up to the network: (i) Google get one of their employees to sign up for BMR (they obviously know about BMR as BMR's site is in their index and they've got whole teams devoted to spam, search quality, etc.) (ii) That person creates a ton of posts (iii) That person then finds out which domains the posts were published on (and notices other suspicious looking posts there too) (iv) (S)he reports back to Google and those domains are deindexed Surely it's that simple. Detecting the network is hardly rocket science. I mean Google are employing human beings to review sites, now, so I suppose there's a chance they also employ people to detect link networks. Any thoughts?