Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I read on a forum recently that someone was using blog networks as his primary tool for SEO. I'm not sure what he meant beyond this, however... Can anyone provide tips on how I might use one, and which are some of the best? Thank you very much in advance.

I also use Market Samurai, and I've noticed what seem to be big discrepancies with the keyword data presented by this (data comes from Majestic SEO) and the Keyword Difficulty Tool. To take just one example, I analyze the term "how to remove tea stains" In the Keyword Difficulty Tool, this returns the following: Root Domain Linking Root Domains: 2,233 Page Linking Root Domains: 4 When I use Market Samurai, however, the data returned is: RDD (Domains linking to this domain): 19,911 RDP (Domains linking to this page): 19 I thought that these two metrics were the same for both tools, but I've written them out in case someone sees a difference. As I say, Market Samurai data is sourced from Majestic SEO - a reputable SEO company - but I have no idea where the Keyword Difficulty Tool data is from, nor why these differences are so pronounced? Are they indeed the same metrics in both cases, or am I missing something? Any insight would be much appreciated.

Exact match is perfectly easy for me to get my head around - broad match, not so much! Take the phrase, "removing blueberry stains." Is the broad match data for this that I'm seeing in the Google keyword tool for searches that involve any of these particular words, in any phrase, in any order - just so long as they're all there? Any help with this concept would be much appreciated.

I reported this as a bug in OSE, because often I explore these links and find that the pages include both a brand-name link AND a regular keyword link, but for some reason OSE was only reporting the brand-name link... This led me to wonder how many links this occurred for, and therefore whether or not to trust the fact that the majority of the sites I ran OSE on returned at least (in most cases, more) than 90% brand-name links. I understand that brand-name links are amongst the most important to obtain, but that it's also important to get anchor text for keywords to build a varied profile. Given this apparent flaw in OSE, is it wrong - in the case of very successful sites - to take this ~90% as being anywhere near the correct percentage of brand-name links that I should be aiming for as a proportion of the total profile? Extra Credit :)... And this may help potentially help resolve the issue: does "Inbound Links" tab in OSE just report links to the Root Domain, or to that and every other page on the site?

I know that Google prefers a varied back link profile, and so it's ideal to get both - but I wanted to know, are followed back links from blog comments, forum posts etc. (i.e. The low-hanging fruit) weighted significantly lower by Google than links appearing within the of a page, for example? If so, is it possible to quantify by how much?

I'm launching a new stain removal website, and wanted to know what would be considered the best way to organize the content? Since most articles will roughly involve "removing X from Y" or "how to remove Z," I can see two ways... 1. Organize articles by Stained Items, Stain Agents and perhaps Cleaning Detergents. 2. Spread the categories out more, to try and group stained items according to categories... E.g. Hard surfaces, delicates, fabrics, ceramics etc. Any thoughts on which of these two might be the best way to organize the site, or are there any better suggestions? Not sure what the main considerations are here... Either of these two seem equally user-friendly.

I'm looking at a lot of competitor's sites, and they only seem to have gone after root domain anchor text in their link-building campaigns. Since I am just launching and am essentially a one-man band (with some hired help), is it worth my while to attempt to optimize individual keywords or pages at this point, or should I just do as they have done, and try to get domain-name links wherever I can? For that matter, should I spend more time going for the low-hanging fruit of followed blog comments, forum posts etc, or emailing influencers to try and get editorial links? Sorry if that last one is a bit broad, and thanks very much in advance for any and all help.

I'm building a content site (the model is AdSense revenue) around a certain niche, and I'm currently paying for about 6 articles to be contributed per week. I have the capacity to be paying for a lot more articles, however, so I'm wondering what, if any, factors exist to recommend building the site up slowly as opposed to throwing on e.g. 100 articles over the next week? Those I can think of are: 1. Going slowly leaves room for better keyword optimization etc. 2. Google seems to favor aged domains/content, so 100 good articles now certainly isn't as advantageous as 100 articles 2 years from now. All that being said, I still feel like the benefit in terms of traffic of adding more content now - since I can - might outweigh these considerations. Does anyone have any thoughts?

I operate a stain removal website and was wondering how consistent it was worth being from title tag to title tag. To give you an example, here is a group of keyword phrases that I might wish to target: "getting out pet stains with vinegar" "how do I remove water stains from wood" "removing chocolate stains" Does the benefit to be gained (whatever that might be) from making these consistently of the form "how to remove X from Y, " or "how to remove X" outweigh simply giving articles titles based on the exact phrases above? I heard from someone that Google is getting more proficient at spotting "clumsy" title tags, although I'm not sure if any of the above examples would fall into that category, and was thinking that I should then probably proceed on the basis of directly titling articles based on the exact keywords I am uncovering... Any advice much appreciated.

I understand that the scores it generates are essentially based on the difficulty of appearing on the first SERP for the keyword in question. That said, I am having a lot of difficulty finding keywords in my niche which return a score that would make this easily achievable for a site of my size.... The reason I'm pointing this out is because theoretically, a keyword could have a HIGHLY competitive first SERP, with a significant drop-off on the second SERP, which would make achieving a top ranking on that page substantially easier. So my question really is, is the importance of appearing on the first SERP so unequivocally important that it is a pointless activity to attempt deliberately to rank for keywords on the second SERP, which is ignored by the keyword difficulty tool? I know the breakdown of clicks goes something like 40% for top spot, 12% for second and downwards from there, but if a certain query has over a million searches per month, for example, it would still be possible to get considerable amounts of traffic by trying to rank highly on the second SERP, which the keyword difficulty tool cannot help with. So is this really a useless activity?

I know that words in their 20's or 30's would be ideal, but it's proving hard for me to find relevant keywords with such scores (just a couple with scores in the 30's). Is going for words between 40-50 a waste of time? Thanks.