How much am i likely to be spending on addwords?? Also I am a bit reluctent to sign up for addwords as i saw a report on a webpage that says google penalises sites that sign up for addwords just so they can charge them more money I would prefer going for oveture or something else.
There are a lot of conspiracy theorists out there that say all sorts of things like that. I would trust Google more than an MSN or something similar. AdWords costs a minimum of 5 cents per click. If you just want generic traffic there are other, shady, places out there. If you decide to sign up for Overture you can use this link and get a $10 Credit. http://www.qksrv.net/click-1514318-9460468
Despite Google's well known evilness, I've had a lot better success with Adwords than Overture. You just want to make sure to use negative keyword matches so you don't blow your whole budget on crap traffic.
Thanks for the info.
No problem. If you turn off broad matching and use - you get a lot more bang for the buck.
Very handy to know. Thanks. hey bling. what sort of shady places. do they have good music? sounds like something i would be curious about.
I've seen some good results with links and write-ups in blogs. If you want to write about my site in a blog that you have and include a link on the word "bling" I'll do the same for your site. Perhaps we can get a community going here. Google caches an includes my blog changes within 2 days but my blog is a PR 4 site so that may have something to do with it.
I have a number of blogs that I could put into such a community. They range from PR 3 to PR 5.
i would like to be in this fake blogging community too!
I didnt realise bling was such a compettitive search term? can I see a few of your blogs?
My blog is at http://blogger.thinkbling.com and I actually just started a [url=http://forums.thinkbling.com]forum for blog sharing[/url]. It isn't a [i:a1f54a8250]fake[/i:a1f54a8250] blog community, just a general one. You use your own words to write an honest blurb about another site. Doing so will probably get the other to write about your site. You benefit by making more content and getting more links.
sounds like a plan to me. because if it was a scheme to increase link popularity i wouldnt particpate. :P
My allinanchor search for the keyword "bling" jumped from 71st to 11th overnight. This almost proves blog-links are fast acting.
I didnt think bling was a compettitive term?
I didn't think so either, that's why I didn't put a lot of time into link exchanges. I though I wouldn't even have to try to get into the top ten. I currently feel that most of my links are still considered "in the sandbox" so they don't count as much.
I dont think sandbox applies to links. try puting dynamic content on your site. not that increasing backlinks hurts.
the sandbox is very real.
I have seen links from new pages and sites counted as backlinks. Not saying no sandbox, just questioning paramiters.
It seems like new links, especially those from blogs, are picked up rather quickly and given inflated effect. Then after a short while, the effect drops and the resurfaces weeks or months later. Has anybody feel the same?
i've seen the "count it fast and then diminish" thing with links a few time. some sort of initial bias for freshness then back to the sandbox. but the sandbox for me is links being quarantined for 90-120 days. especially multiple links from one ip address.
From new sites or established sites?
new site
what about a new subdomain or new subfolder.
those are you best bests. seems to me like the filter is based on the age of the overall domain. and the older the better. when people talked about the hilltop theory a lot it would result in something like this. google trusts older links better and older domains better and the new ones less. but people also say if they add to many links too fast to any page it gets the sandbox. i dont think that is true if they have enough different ip ranges.
Makes sense. I have added new backlinks off new freeserver sites/subdomain and they got picked up. question [i:a57b1738c6]many new links making a site get sandboxed[/i:a57b1738c6]. I just added a large site map to the bottom of my page with over 100 links as i needed a load of new pages indexed. its showig up position 6 in allinanchor text for my keyword and position 3 in every other engine but the serps show it in position 700+ and crawling up at about 6 positions a day, should I ditch the sitemap?? seems like a plan.(god im not thinking this week, dont need it anymore. google has spidered all the new pages. gonna do it tomorrow unless you think its a bad idea.
if the pages are spidered already you probably don't need it. but the thing is to vary anchor text. too many links with identical anchor text are definitely triggering filters.
I know, have heard different things about the percentages though.
Linking these days is an Art, not a Science. Being subtle seems to be the key. If you try to hammer a page to the top with too much force, it backfires.
Thanks for the info. very good help for your 666th post.
I would definitely keep the sitemap. Even though it isn't the ideal target site of your search terms, it is still on your site and I'd be willing to bet that it will not be there for long.
Sitemaps are great, and should almost always be included. Great way to spread PR, use targeted anchor text, and improve usability.
Yeah but i figure a sitemap page is better than having 150+ links on the bottom of every page. the site has been fully spidered anyway. I am just going to put links to the main pages in instead.
The 150+ link thing is absolutely horrible to look at. It works though. I think 50+ links on a clearly labeled menu is a decent way to structure many sites. It's still a little unseemly, but the fact that every page is linked from every page usually makes the PR spread very even and the pages usually rank well.
Any idea why my site is ranking so low i the serps so. I come up position 3 in all the other engines for company formation and position 6 in allinanchor search but im in the low 700s in the serps for google????
How long has the site existed? Was it your domain originally?
I started work for this company a little over 2 months ago and the domain itself is around 2 years old i think. I recently redesigned the site and its serps improved in every other engine. it wasnt even showing up in google before because it was to similar to another site this company own. Im doing ok for a local regional search for a few noncompetitive terms in google but I am targeting company formation mainly.
Sort of a basic question, but you didn't rename the pages when you redesigned did you? If page names changed, that might be a culprit..
Yeah I did but that shouldnt affect the root page.
i bet that is a pretty competetive term. lots of links needed.
Not only tough keywords, but vague too. The word "company" has 324 million matches! I think the first thing I would consider is driving some traffic to the site with 3 and 4 word search phrases. What I've noticed is that if you rank higher on the 3 and 4 and 5 word variations, it's easier to rank for the 2 word variety.
How do you find the best keyword phrases to go after? Are most of your backlinks from link exchanges?
Wordtracker is very nice. It's sort of expensive but worth the money. It will show you many of the common variations that people are looking for. One thing I do is get the list of 300 related keywords at Wordtracker, then I dump them in AdWords, use a variable title tag, turn off broad matching, and and see how the fish are biting. AdWords can send you a daily report in Excel that will give you the best idea of how much traffic they really have for every phase.
..and don't forget about mis spellings. That accounts for a lot of search traffic..
And your customers have a higher percentage chance of being gullible.
its an interesting idea. people who mis-spell words convert more because they're dumb?
Hmmm.. Don't know if it is a tested theory on conversions, but it gives you the opportunity to get some extra traffic, anyhow. Google will even try to correct you if you mis spell in a search, by saying "Did you mean <Correct spelling KW>?" I would guess a great number don't click on the corrected search term. But that is just a guess..
I always do.
I will still say it is worth traffic. Some people might not even see the correction and continue their search..
probably, just dont go investing to much effort or hope in misspellings,
the main point of mis-spellings is to pick up easy traffic. just add it in your meta tags and the body.
Body?? meta keyword and alt image tags for me only.
Let's face it. Dumbasses are a huge market.
LOL :lol:
The mis spelling thing may not apply so much in company formation, but was just an idea. :)
If you use a php-nuke site like this one, just link to the main page in the footer (in preferences) You will have a link to whatever page you link to...my php-nuke site has about 11000 pages indexed by google...that will get you noticed immediately!
i think for proper names you should be very concerned with typos.
For names it's a must. Most people have no clue how to spell names.