I know, I know... no good. Except tons of people do it, with tons of success. In some verticals more than others. So for example I have a couple clients who are contractors and their websites are relatively new (6 months) so they do not rank well. Their page 1 competitors are either very old businesses (domain age of 10 to 20 years) or they have high relative DA with a lot of questionable backlinks - the kind that are clearly purchased.
list of top cheapest host http://Listfreetop.pw
Top 200 best traffic exchange sites http://Listfreetop.pw/surf
free link exchange sites list http://Listfreetop.pw/links
list of top ptc sites
list of top ptp sites
I have purchased through authority.builders (just once) and noticed an increase in DA from just one relatively low DA backlink (I didn't want to push it). What do you guys think about this? I have been a strictly-white-hat guy for years, and it definitely does pay off in the long run. But am considering shades of gray to help needy clients.
DA is a Moz metric that is not part of any SE algo, so chasing after a higher score means nothing - unless you are getting more "qualified" traffic because of whatever tactics you are using, which in turn, gives you a higher Moz score.
So figure out if getting DA is a result of getting more prominence, and therefore more qualified traffic that help with conversions. That's what's the most important stat at the end of the day.
Right, Moz's DA is just a score that is meant to weigh a domain's link profile hopefully in a similar way that Google's ranking algorithms weigh it. Same with Ahrefs score(s). And I've seen plenty of examples where they have wildly different scores for the same website, so obviously neither one is always right/wrong.
It is inarguable that it is a net GOOD for my clients construction company's sites to have high-traffic sites pointing links to them. Period. Right? That must increase rankings. And when I look at their competitors: all the page 1 sites for local companies have a backlink profile that screams "paid SEO efforts" ya know - blogs that are clearly created with only the purpose of providing a link. Relevant subject matter, but basic thin content. And google seems to be rewarding these link profiles. So....
Wonder if I am missing something...
No you are not. Google has wonderous ways of saying one thing, and rewarding sites that don't exactly follow guidelines.
All I was inferring is that DA is only derived from a small fraction of samplings on the internet (those that use the Moz tool bar) and since PageRank is now only accessible to a privileged group of Google employees, a lot of web people on the Internet seem to want something to cling to. And since PR metrics have gone stealthy, that "something" is DA.
Google has wonderous ways of saying one thing, and rewarding sites that don't exactly follow guidelines.
Ain't that the truth. I think it may be the case that (in at least some verticals) you have no hope of ranking without at least some grayish-hat linkbuilding. Which is a bummer, because it sure would be nice if the highest quality content always ranked. It SHOULD be that way, anyway. Maybe when Google's AI gets more advanced.
So I am probably on the right track by analyzing competitors' backlink profiles and trying to get more of the same types of links they have, or better. In addition to making sure we have great content and all the other things Google talks about in its quality guidelines.
DA is not everything to rank a website on a particular keyword. It just a determination of your domain reputation. Why don't you focus on your on-page structure? Hope you did it, but not well. Optimize heading, content, alt and all other things after that focus on backlinks whether you purchase it or naturally build it.
Yeah I certainly did it that and don't really think there's much room for improvement on-page. Our images rank really well because no one else used alt tags. Same with schema. The only difference I can see is backlinks. We outrank some others who have a higher DA, but those coveted top 5 spots - that's the biggest difference. Tons of ditectory citations and many editorial backlinks.
Search engine optimization is the only way to complete goals and achieve this target. I hope to offer you an understanding of what backlinks are, why they are essential to SEO, and why they are important for your online success. To fulfill that need you have to get backlinks from different platforms so that you can attract search engine bots to your webpages.
Thanks for offering that, but from your post, it's pretty clear the OP has a better understanding of links and their results than you do. I'm sure if you really read the posts in this thread, you'd agree.
Paid backlinks aren't 'grey hat' Now Google says that it is 'sponsored' (please use the attribute).
From my experience you can buy backlinks if it make a sense. Domain age, DA or other "SEO things" don't make a sense.
Now Google is changing link part of their algo. Links help Google to understand context of webpages. So, Google understand a content better.
If you investigate other sites, you should pay attention that there is trap. In fact you don't know why other sites are having better position in SERP at the moment. The position isn't stable or constant. Position depends on over 200 factors. It depends on where from searcher (Lids or london), which device does he use (mobile or desktop), what does he really search (shoes or 'specific' shoes).
So, if you going to purchase links you should know how it will help Google and a searcher. For example, there no sense to purchase 'shoes' links if you sale 'specific shoes'.
hosting 7 days to die server
make money youtube
8 domains of life