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
-
Broad keyword use
It seems that the broad keyword use is not very accurate. I have 3 very similar keywords: Dive Florida, scuba diving in Florida, Florida scuba diving. Why does the program not recognise them as broad usage when assessing the page title? And if the program cannot understand broad usage terms, how confident can we be that the program can properly measure for keyword stuffing?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Zambezikid0 -
White H1 Tag Hurting SEO?
Hi, We're having an issue with a client not wanting the H1 tag to display on their site and using an image of their logo instead. We made the H1 tag white (did not deliberately hide with CSS) and i just read an article where this is considered black hat SEO. https://www.websitemagazine.com/blog/16-faqs-of-seo The only reason we want to hide it is because it looks redundant appearing there along with the brand name logo. Does anyone have any suggestions? Would putting the brand logo image inside of an H1 tag be ok? Thanks for the help
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AliMac261 -
Are 2 sites in same niche from same company white hat?
Hello, We want to open a second eCommerce store. Our first one is doing well. It would be different code, different graphics, a different category/menu system, but many of the products will be the same. Will that be safe and white hat now and into the future to have 2? Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
A site is using their competitors names in their Meta Keywords and Descriptions
I can't imagine this is a White Hat SEO technique, but they don't seem to be punished for it by Google - yet. How does Google treat the use of your competitors names in your meta keywords/descriptions? Is it a good idea?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | PeterConnor0 -
Competitors using unsavoury methods of link building. How to combat?
A lot of my competitors are using a lot of unsavoury/old-fashioned SEO methods to build links but are actually doing really well from it. A few different competitors are buying links in directories, using blogspam comments, forum posts, buying links in other places. The problem is, they all seem to be doing very well with it! What I've always been taught is that these methods are out and they could actually harm you - yet I haven't seen this happen to my competitors. Should I be using these spammy methods too or just concentrate on building quality content and high quality link building?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | charliedouglas1230 -
White Hat/Black Hat: Incentivized SEO Competition?
General Idea: Rules: The winner is the person who ranks highest for "Random Easy to Rank for Key Phrase" Prize: Some cool prize White or Black hat?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | LaunchAStartup0 -
Here's some more proof white hat SEO works
I guess this is the most logical place to share this with you. I do SEO for many sites. I've recently been focusing on two in particular for the same client. We used Netfirms SEO services to get links--he insisted--which basically consists of writing articles in broken English and placing them all over blog networks with our desired anchor text. On the other site, I simply refused to employ those services. This was the client's main site, and was way too important to mess around with. I built links myself, the legit way. Long story short, for months I watched the shady, black hat site climb and climb in the SERPs, while the white hat one kept falling. This morning, I checked my SEOmoz campaigns and my white hat site went from #8 to #2 and my black hat site went from page 2 to no longer being in the top 50. Just another example of what's been happening with Google lately and how great it is. Interestingly, the black hat site never got a warning in GWT about buying links. Now I just have to figure out a way to break the news to my boss and tell him I told him so without actually using those words.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | UnderRugSwept5 -
Using Canonical Tags to Boost Lead Form Ranking
I presently have a number of whitepapers that bring traffic to our site. If a visitor elects to download the whitepaper they are taken to a lead form with an abstract of the whitepaper. The abstract is present because the visitor may or may not have come to the lead form directly. I imagine this would be a "no no," but how do you feel about placing a canoncial tag on a whitepaper that points to the lead form w/ abstract? The obvious idea being to take the umph of a whitepaper to direction search visitors directly to the lead form.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | shoffy0