SEOLutions - Paint it White... Has any one used?
-
Has anyone used the tiered link building service offered by seolutions (http://seolutions.biz/store/seo-solutions/premium-solutions-paint-it-white.html)?
If so, can you provide any insight into how effective it was in the long and short term?
Thanks!
-
That's a very good point.
-
Clearly methods on blackhatworld work, ( or it would not exists), but the questions what type of site does it work for. Some one with multiple disposable domains with affiliate links as the earner that if they lost one of them, it would be annoying but would not be the end of the world, they just start again. Or it it a long term investment brand (e-commerce store? ) if de-listed by google would be the end of the world.
It depends on your position. But I don't think you should do both black and white hat, because once you get hit by google badger update, all that white hat will be wasted, (or you spend a very long time undoing the black hat work, and even then you don't know if its worth it as it might have been only the black hat stuff that was making you rank)
-
I guess it depends on how comfortable you are with the risk+cost vs. reward for both the short and long term. As long as you're making an informed choice.
(Anyone else suffering from "respond" link blindness?)
-
It's always tricky looking for trust indicators in the murky side of SEO I think, however there seem to be plenty of "happy & genuine" punters on blackhatworld, with examples, etc.
To be honest I wouldn't want to put a link or a testimonial on a black hat link building site!
Yes, these links are clearly going to be piles of dog poo - but if it's working for a load of people, then why not!?
-
Look for the trust indicators! Do they, (or can they) provide verifiable examples of clients that they've helped in the past... and where are they now? Why don't their testimonials link to their clients sites or mention their business names? How open/transparent are they about their process...
"manually creating web2.0 properties" to point "highly contextual links directly to your site" sounds a bit like "build our own link network and link to you with exact match anchor text" to me and we know how much Google would just love that.
Would you show these links to your customers/friends/family?
-
Also, listening to the kind of results that people have achieved on Blackhatworld using methods likes this makes me very keen to give it a run.
I guess if it's shite, at least I'll know for future reference.
-
Could be the badger update, after all they're currently being culled the sh*t out of and that's what google likes to do to sites.
I like your analogy "crap ---> shite ---> balls ---> yourwebsite = win!!" ... haha
Yes, I would rather do that as well. But that's slower and I want it ALL.. .NOW! and fantastic content isn't always as fast as I'd like, especially on a site that's in the google trough at the moment.
-
yeah it a more complex system, but I have seen it been used before and seen other offer this type of think before and at some stage it did work, and maybe it still does to a degree.
It basicly their plan is: crap ---> shite ---> balls ---> yourwebsite = win!!
but more importantly its the type of thing google does not want you to do and its some thing that could be spotted and so they will target it in the future (badger update?), so long term its not is a good strategy IMO.
I would rather but the $169 toward getting some real "beautiful" blog post/ info-graphs etc, because you don't have to worry about those links biting you in the ass in a few years.
-
True...
One reason I like the tiered links idea is that if it goes wrong, then you can cut the ties on those 10 links or so links relatively easy. You may do a bit of damage, but I've heard some good feedback from this kind of scheme - obviously I wouldn't do it on a client's site, but I am tempted to "give it a whirl" on some of my domains which could do with a bit of a lift.
-
ha, yeah, I doubt the content is anything near "beautiful", although I have to admire their marketing for actually using that word, especially for what will be undoubtedly spun articles.
It's more the tiered aspect I'm interested in. If I knew their tiered structures and methods were good (obviously in black hat terms) and got results, then it's worth it.
-
I've been tempted by such services in the past, but if everyone was able to spend $xxxx and get a great page rank then everybody will be sitting pretty with a high PR.
But I know that sometimes it can be a bit of a temptation to pay some money to "see how it goes" but before you know it your website is on a link farm somewhere and ultimately you lose domain authority and such and it really isn't worth it!
Just my opinion
-
"creating beautiful web 2.0 posts with well-written unique content on premium web 2.0 hosts"
so submitting blog articles to crappy 2.0 blog networks? This is the type of stuff google is targeting, I would stay away.
$169 for 10 good articles, on 10 actually good blogs you would want a backlink from is too good to be true....
I don't know the company, but that my (cynical) opinion
-
Tom,
I appreciate your views. Admittedly their advertising seems aimed at people who are unsure of how SEO works or who have a limited understanding, however tiered link building can work in the right place.
I was curious as to whether their tiered service was actually any good or not.
Thanks
-
Hi Alex,
Just as an outsider looking in and haven't used this website before (or any like it to be honest), I would say that anything that offers services for "link juice" and is only promising you page rank (although there site is only a mediocre PR 2), I'd personally say spend your money on maybe getting a bit of SEO consultation.
Or failing that, you're on a website filled with fantastic SEO advice and resources, you just have to check out the previous Moz seminars to get started.
What you need to remember is that a good ranking website isn't based solely on Page Rank. Page rank is just one factor of hundreds that search engines take into consideration.
I personally wouldn't spend that sort of money on a service that says it will give me a better page rank. It's not all about the PR!
Tom
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Google URL Shortener- Should I use one or multiple???
I have a client with a number of YouTube videos. I'm using Google URL Shortner to allow the link to show in the YouTube text (as its a long URL). Many of these links go to the same page ex .com/services-page Should I use a single short URL for each video linking to the .com/services-page or should they be unique each time? If unique, would Google possibly think I'm trying to manipulate results? Thanks in advance. I'm just not sure on this one and hope someone knows best practice on this. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | mgordon1 -
Removing duplicated content using only the NOINDEX in large scale (80% of the website).
Hi everyone, I am taking care of the large "news" website (500k pages), which got massive hit from Panda because of the duplicated content (70% was syndicated content). I recommended that all syndicated content should be removed and the website should focus on original, high quallity content. However, this was implemented only partially. All syndicated content is set to NOINDEX (they thing that it is good for user to see standard news + original HQ content). Of course it didn't help at all. No change after months. If I would be Google, I would definitely penalize website that has 80% of the content set to NOINDEX a it is duplicated. I would consider this site "cheating" and not worthy for the user. What do you think about this "theory"? What would you do? Thank you for your help!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Lukas_TheCurious0 -
What do you think of this "SEO software" that uses Rand's "proven method" ?
I saw an ad on Search Engine Roundtable and the call to action was... "What is the #1 metric that Google uses to rank websites?" I thought, "I gotta know that!". (I usually don't click ads but this one tempted me.) So I clicked in and saw a method "proven by Rand Fishkin" that will "boost the rankings of your website". This company has software that will use Rand's proven method (plus data from another unattributed test to boost the rankings of your website). I am not going to use this software. The video made my BS meter ring. But if you want to see it.... http://crowdsearch.me/special-backdoor/ Rather than use this "software", I would suggest using kickass title tags that deliver the searcher to kickass content. That has worked really well for me for years. Great title tags and great content will produce the same results. The bonus for you is that the great content will give you a real website.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | EGOL1 -
On the use of Disavow tool / Have I done it correctly, or what's wrong with my perception?
On a site I used GSA search engine ranker. Now, I got good links out of it. But, also got 4900 links from one domain. And, I thought according to ahrefs. One link from the one domain is equal to 4900 links from one domain. So, I downloaded links those 4900 and added 4899 links to disavow tool. To disavow, to keep my site stable at rankings and safe from any future penalty. Is that a correct way to try disavow tool? The site rankings are as it is.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AMTrends0 -
Link "Building" or "Earning" Which one are you doing? Both?
I'm curious to see how SEO's interpret this section of the Google Webmaster Guidelines on Link Schemes: The best way to get other sites to create high-quality, relevant links to yours is to create unique, relevant content that can naturally gain popularity in the Internet community. Creating good content pays off: Links are usually editorial votes given by choice, and the more useful content you have, the greater the chances someone else will find that content valuable to their readers and link to it. (Source: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66356?hl=en) I'm not asking what you "should" do, but rather what do YOU do... Do you interpret this as: Create awesome content and the links will come? Create Awesome Content and Outreach a bit? Perhaps you don't follow it all and concentrate on building links over content? What do you do and why? Discuss!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BrettDixon0 -
Competitor using "unatural inbound links" not penalized??!
Since Google's latest updates, I think it would be safe to say that building links is harder. But i also read that Google applies their latest guidelines retro-actively. In other words, if you have built your ilnking profile on a lot of unnatural links, with spammy anchor text, you will get noticed and penalized. In the past, I used to use SEO friendly directories and "suggest URL's" to build back links, with keyword/phrase anchor text. But I thought that this technique was frowned upon by Google these days. So, what is safe to do? Why is Google not penalizing the competitor? And bottom line what is considered to be "unnatural link building" ?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | bjs20101 -
What if White Hat SEO does not get results?
If company A is paying 5k a month and some of that budget is buying links or content that might be in the gray area but is ranking higher than company B that's following the "rules" and paying the same but not showing up at all, what's company B suppose to do?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | EmarketedTeam2