Back link plan discussion
-
When you have a lot of keywords that you rank for say something like 15,000 or more.
How do you develop a good back link plan?
I was thinking to first look at the highest volume keywords we already rank for but aren't in the top 1-3 spots. To focus on those few words trying to obtain more high quality back links. But I'm not sure if this is the best plan .
What would you do?
What are some good consistent back link plans you can use to work on a keyword or lots of keywords?
Thanks for the discussion,
Chris
-
Appreciate the answer.
That was sort of my game plan to pick out our top 4 keywords that we aren't ranked on Google spots 1-3 but would bring us back the most volume of traffic. I do have four keywords like this that we are are either at the bottom of page 1 or on page 2 & if we obtained a better rank could bring back 11,500 to 30,000 per-keyword.
I just didn't want to focus on only 4 keywords by trying to get anchored text links or high quality links by manually reaching out to sites for only those four keywords if there was another plan to distribute more juice to a wider variety of words.
But you are correct that is the issue with coming up with a plan, that we have so many keywords some that bring back little traffic some that bring back a lot and how do we focus on the many or should we just focus on the four for now and then focus on a new set once a goal is accomplished.
-
Hi Chris,
I'm not sure I fully understand your question:
"The question now is, How with so many ranking keywords do you come up with a solid back link plan."
Do you mean how many keywords you can target with link building?
If so, that's not really the way to think about it because most high-quality link building won't use your keywords as anchor text and may not link directly to your commercial landing pages. The approach should be on getting links into the domain which are high quality which 1) help the domain as a whole and 2) can be filtered to your key pages via good site architecture.
Going back to your first question, if you are going to focus on link building, then you do need to prioritise and focus on key landing pages first. But you have two options for this:
-
Try to get links directly to those pages - this is hard unless those pages are link worthy in some way or you're prepared to pay for links to those pages which I wouldn't advise.
-
Try to get links to your domain/content and then use internal linking to filter link equity to your key pages.
Link building with a focus on improving 15,000+ keywords individually isn't going to happen and probably why you're struggling with this a bit. Focusing on a few at a time by doing the things above or trying to improve the domain as a whole is going to be more helpful I think.
Cheers.
Paddy
-
-
The company is in an odd industry, real estate. So our user base is posting out content in a sense which drives traffic. We don't have many "articles" or "content blogs" ranking for big keywords.
If you'd like to do a review just use MOZ Domain Tool we are www.nystatemls.com
-
Our website is well out of the "early stages" we are ranked for nearly 17,500 keywords bringing in about 200,000 unique visitors a month and 1 million page views. Most of this happened naturally without any focus on Search Engine Optimization.
The question now is, How with so many ranking keywords do you come up with a solid back link plan. I am looking for something consistent, that a team could start doing every week to capitalize on the keywords we are ranked for that have huge traffic potential that are near the top but not in place yet.
Just sounds sort of crazy that the best option is to manually reach out to high PR sites to see if we can get a back link to either our ROOT or an Anchored Text.
Any ideas?
-
"Ultimately, you should be trying to come up with ways to make your website naturally link worthy so that you end up getting links which you didn't ask for."
Paddy is absolutely right.
You say that you have rakings for 15,000 keywords. Let's say that is done by 500 articles. If your content is superb enough for each of those 500 articles that the pull in just one natural link per year for each. That is a nice number of links.
If you spend the next year improving that content enough that each article pulls 2 links per year, that is almost like having a full time person doing link building.
-
Hi Chris,
Link building can be very manual, particularly in the early days of a website and when you're trying to get going. Ultimately, you should be trying to come up with ways to make your website naturally link worthy so that you end up getting links which you didn't ask for.
This can come a few ways:
- Your product or service being genuinely useful to your target audience or within your industry so that people recommend it/reference it etc
- Creating content which genuinely answers questions and solves problems for your target audience
- Creating content which has some kind of an angle which encourages top tier sites or bloggers to links to it such as informative guides or statistics/data related to your industry
You may find it hard to get links to lots of your product or sales pages unless they are link worthy in themselves. So also try to focus on getting links to your content and then distributing the link equity from these pages to your key pages.
I hope that helps!
Paddy
-
But is the real plan to get back links to reach out to these high powered domains? That seems very manual and time consuming. I understand some may need to be done like this but how do you outsource or come up with a real plan to get back links each day or week from good sources without using spam methods.
-
Let's consider two goals...
First: Try to improve rankings where a modicum ranking improvement in position will best move the needle of your business. Very often these are pages on your site that rank at #4, #5, #6, or so for money keywords at the present time. Getting a ranking boost there will result in a major improvement in your revenue. Improving the content on that page and making other improvements that might facilitate conversions can make big paybacks.
Second: Often, people try to improve the rankings of sales pages, but, it is often easier to improve the rankings of article pages - especially if they are fantastic. So, I would suggest, after picking some pages for your first goal, write comprehensive articles that thoroughly explain that topic. These articles might attract links, they might be better targets when asking for links, these pages might rank better than your sales page. You will link them to your product pages and make every visitor to the article page know that you have the items for sale.
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
-
Sudden increase in backlinks with "Link Reclamation": Any risk from Google?
Hi all, We failed to redirect the links of our old website versions to new website pages for years and we are planning to now redirect all those old links to new in the process of link reclamation. This activity may increase the back links suddenly or steadily. If there is sudden increase in backlinks, will it hurts us? What's Google's stand? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz1 -
Our Journey back to Good Rankings.
17 year old support site on the topic of hair loss. The home page (and pretty much all internal pages) enjoyed Page 1 Place 1 ranking out of 64 million search results for 12 of those years, for our main search phrase: hair loss. Other internal pages ranked #1 for other search phrases. I believe we were blessed by Google because we did everything the best we could: Genuine, manually constructed, unique, relevant content that was created from the heart. Other generalized health sites linked-to our site for more information on hair loss, and we had a couple thousand back-links that we never had to pay for. For the last 7 years or so, core content and news center went stagnant, but user-driven content (discussion forums) continued chugging along. Very old CMS systems had created duplicate content (print pages, PDF pages, share pages) and the site was not mobile-friendly at all. By the end of 2013, our home page had been bumped to the middle of Page 2 for "hair loss" as Google began pushing us down. Replacing our 700 page site dedicated to the topic of hair loss with random news articles, and dermatology organization sites that had little more than a paragraph of content on the topic. Traffic and income dropped by over 75% with this change, and by 2015 we were looking at a 9 year old site design that wasn't mobile-friendly, and had no updated content outside of the Forums for about as long. Mid 2015 we began a frantic renovation. The store was converted to a mobile-friendly design, tossed into HTTPS, and our developer screwed up, forgetting to put canonicals in place. Soon after, our store rankings dropped to almost zero. By the end of 2015 this was fixed, and we were spending tens of thousands to convert a very large, very old site into WordPress with a responsive, mobile friendly, lightning fast page-load design. We had no Google Analytics data prior to this either. Actions Taken starting Jan 1, 2016 - May 2016: Static Homepage + core content > Now put into WordPress. (80 pages) - proper 301's. News section running a 10 year old "PostNuke" CMS > Now put into WordPress. (300 pages). 301's. Forums running a 5 year old vBulletin > Now put into XenForo. (160,000 pages). 301's. Profiles section running a 10 year old "SocialEngine" CMS > Now put into new SocialEngine. (10,000 pages)* Site moved from HTTP > HTTPS. Proper 301's. Store CMS already finished months prior but sales dropped by 90%. Almost zero. Old forum CMS had created countless duplicate URLs. All of these 410'd. Old forum CMS had 65,000 pointless member profile pages indexed. All 410'd. Old news CMS created 4+ dup pages for every article (print, etc). All 301'd to new Article URL. Our HTACCESS file is thousands of lines long, trying to clean everything up, and redirect everything back to one, accurate, proper URL for each piece of content. It was a lot of work! After 17 years, we obviously had spammy sites linking to us. I quickly deleted content on my site the worst offenders were linking to. Then hired an SEO person to create a disavow audit on the other 20,000 sites liking to us. He settled on around 300 URLs needing disavow, but commented that didn't see any evidence we'd been penalized by Panda. He finished Friday and we will submit disavow Monday. Ran Screaming Frog audit on the site Cleaned up Google Search Console fully Created properties and submitted new sitemaps there. Monitored each property for the last 3 months and addressed 100% of issues raised. Revived Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Pinterest, and Instagram Accounts. Began publishing new content in our /news/ section and cross-posting to Social Media. Began improving up our Title Tags in the Forums as they often were pointless: "Hi! Need help!?" **Despite this, nothing has helped. Nothing has budged. Our traffic hasn't moved an inch since January. Sales have dropped 90% and site income has almost dried up. ** I have taken out a $25,000 personal loan just to cover my mortgage and pay my bills while I attempt to identify what's going wrong, and how to fix it. It bought me about 3 months, and that 3 months is almost up. I hired 2 or 3 different SEO experts with varying levels of experience. Due to no Google Analytics data to draw on, none of them could come up with any specific explanations for our drop in ranking over the last 4 years. That's why I took the approach to just "do everything" to fix all problems identified, and then cross my fingers. It hasn't worked. As of today our home page is not even found in google for our main search phrase: hair loss. Its simply not there. At all. And the only thing that is ranking is our forums, ranked at "67", which is horrible. But I don't understand why a site that was doing so well for over a decade has now been completely dropped from Google, without a single notice in Console or otherwise, explaining any problems. I realize this is a massive undertaking, and an equally massive post. But any time you can spend helping me will be forever appreciated.
Algorithm Updates | | HLTalk0 -
Are links from directories still good practice?
Ok, so I am new at "link building"....which of course I have read furiously on how that philosophy is changed, it's a goal, not so much a process. I am focusing on great content, social sharing, etc. BUT, I see competitors still getting links from some of the directories that I have found listed on Moz as being "good" directories to list in. For example, yelllow pages, manta, ibegin, hot frog, etc. Do I have the terminology totally twisted here? Is it still good practice to get a couple links from these directories. Or is this practice completely the wrong thing to do post Panda & Penquin. Thanks guys!
Algorithm Updates | | cschwartzel0 -
How on earth is a site with ONE LINK ranking so well for a competitive keyword?
Ok, so I'm sure you get the gist of what I'm asking about in my question. The query is 'diy kitchens' in Google UK and the website is kitchens4diy[dot]com - which is ranking in third from my viewing. The thing is, the site has just ONE BACKLINK and has done for a good while. Yet, it's ranking really well. What gives?
Algorithm Updates | | Webrevolve0 -
How come google image search doesn't link to the right page?
For one site I work with the images link to the home page of the site rather than the page the image lives on. I think this is hurting my bounce rate quite a bit. Thoughts?
Algorithm Updates | | NetvantageMarketing0 -
So, useless link exchange pages still work?!
After 3 years out of SEO I thought things might have moved on, but apparently not. Bit of back link research and all the top sites in my niche have tons of reciprocal links to barely relevant sites. Do I really have to do this? I mean I thought this was so out of date, it's not much better than keyword stuffing. So, should I just forget my lofty principles asking myself 'is this of any value to my users?' and just take the medicine?
Algorithm Updates | | Cornwall0 -
Awarding badges to bloggers as a link-building strategy?
Hello - In the past, doing "Blog awards" and subsequently offering winners' badges with links and anchor text embedded has been something that worked very well for a client. However, we are now noticing that the badging strategy does not seem to be producing the same results for us. We are only reaching out to quality blogs in particular niches - e.g., Top Fashion Blogs, Top Health Blogs, Top Design Blogs, etc. Most blogs that post the badges are in the PageRank 3-5 range. Has anyone else engaged in badging strategy and noticed that the success rates are declining? Could it be that in-text, contextual links are given much more weight than sidebar links? (The badges are most typically posted in bloggers' sidebars). Any insight would be appreciated, thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | brmckenna0 -
Will too many [img no alt-text] links harm a link profile?
Hi everyone. I have a client who has a lot of sponsorships etc and therefore a lot of inbound image links (many of them sitewide). Unfortunately most of these don't have alt text, and [img no alt-text] links now make up over 50% of their link profile. Should I be trying to correct this and requesting updates from the people who are linking? Obviously I wouldn't want loads of keyword stuffed alt texts, but maybe I should request alt texts on the brand name or URL instead. Do you think this would make a significant difference and be worth the time it will take to contact all these webmasters? Thanks in advance.
Algorithm Updates | | QubaSEO0