Entries Tagged 'Black Hat Seo' ↓

There is one truth not even Matt Cutts will dare to challenge:

Buying links will help your indexing and your ranking.

Why does Google have a problem with it?

Well, let’s look at it from Google’s point of view.

• They figured out a way to make money by providing relevant results in their search engine listings.
• To achieve this they rely heavily on the link analysis component of their algorithm.
• Their link analysis relies on the fact that webmasters link to other websites out of a genuine interest to direct their audience to the target website due to its quality content.
• When webmasters link to other websites because of other reasons, Google results tend to decrease in quality and relevancy. Such reasons might be the following:
  • Paid links
  • Link exchanges
  • Authority Link Networks
  • In general terms, any other situation in which the objective of placing the link is not benefiting the audience with a quality link but rather benefiting the search engine positioning of the target website.
• There is a clear gap between the premise of their algorithm (that webmasters link to other websites out of a genuine interest to direct their audience to the target website due to its quality content) and reality (that webmasters link to other websites for a myriad of reasons that are sometimes commercial and sometimes not)
• Google has two ways to close this gap.
  • Change the algorithm
  • Change webmasters behavior
• Changing the algorithm must be too damn hard because Google is attempting to change webmasters’ behavior.
• They are doing so with methods like this one, or this one.

What does this mean to you, as a Black Hat SEO interested in making money online?

• You will keep buying links because they will keep helping your indexing and your rankings.
• You will do it under the radar, avoiding high profile websites with high PR to avoid human detection.

There is a new link broker in town. You can go ahead and grab your share of free paid link ads for a limited time.

Why am I recommending it? Simply because they provide a good way to purchase links under the radar: they allow publishers to sell links on every page of their websites, which means you can buy links on hundreds or thousands of deep pages in other websites.

Remember, with the new witch hunt on paid links only under the radar link buying will work. Under these circumstances TNX system allows you to operate slowly under the trenches and avoid unnecessary exposure.

They have some measures to prevent advertisers from placing links that contradict the content of the page where they are placed and they also forbid advertising of PPC (porn, pills and casino) sites, which is kind of a shame for people like us but it means that the quality of the outbound links will be harder to trace as spam.

Usual anti footprints measures are recommended: avoid repetitive anchor text and excessive linking from single domains and you’ll be fine.

Go Sign Up Here if you are still with me.

At the time of writing this post, this freelance website design blog enjoys the following rankings in Google:

• #59 for the term “Website Design”
• #6 for the term “Freelance Website Design”

in Yahoo:

• #5 for the term “Freelance Website Design”

in Live:

• #2 for the term “Freelance Website Design”

How did this site achieve these rankings? By comment spamming relevant blogs leaving interesting comments on relevant blogs.

That’s what he says. Is it true? I checked his backlinks and it seems to be true.

I thought Google didn’t follow nofollow links Maybe they are too busy policing paid links.

So what do you do now? Easy. Get this piece of software that finds relevant blogs to your topic with high PR, it will make life a lot easier for you. Then hire someone cheap to leave a few comments a day. Wait a couple of months and enjoy your new rankings.

I will just link to a post that describes why I think White Hat SEO Consultants Are Worthless Shady Criminals Themselves.

Ok, it’s non paid work. But you’ll have the chance to learn from Quadszilla who just happens to be one of the best Black Hat SEOs in business. You’ll have a tough job convincing him you’re the right guy or gal. But if you are a “sexy English major senior at an Ivy league University who has worked summers as a successful sales rep even though she’s a trust fund baby” I think you have an edge.

Can you speak russian? If you do, go ahead and read this post about Quick Indexing.

If you don’t, then I’m right there with you. I don’t speak russian either. Fortunately a talented russian black hat SEO who speaks english told me what this post is about.

Fortunately for you, I’ll write a post about it.

Basically, this is the principle:

• Create 100,000 pages using your page generator of choice. You can monetize these pages or use them as Doorways. Your choice.
• Create a bunch of Sitemaps. I’m not talking about xhtml sitemaps, just plain html pages full of links to your spammy pages. Don’t apply common knowledge here: don’t think that Google will only follow 100 links in your sitemap. Just dump tens of thousands of links to your pages.
• Sign Up in a bunch of trusted hosts and upload your sitemaps to them.
• Spam the living hell out of your sitemaps with your favourite Link Spamming Tool.

If you are confused this image should clear it up for you:

What are you waiting for? Go grab a bunch of long tail lists you surely have somewhere in your hard drive, generate those pages, create sitemaps, upload them, spam them. How long can that take.

Don’t worry I won’t go in detail about Aristotle’s philosophical legacy, even though it shaped western civilization for more than 2000 years after he died.

I’ll just say this. This dude realized that you could virtually classify anything in nature with the followig categories:

• Substance: what something is. For example, you are a gal, or a lad, and your cat is a cat, and your lappy is a freaking lappy. Don’t make me write an essay about it. You got it.
• Accidents: these are the modifications that substances undergo in real life. Ok maybe you are a gal or a lad, but you are also brunette, or blonde, thin, fat, tall, short, grumpy, smart; your lappy may be a cool ibook or a dirty old pc, lcd screen… well you get the idea. There are nine accidents to substance:
  • Quantity,
  • Quality,
  • Relation,
  • Action,
  • Passion,
  • Time,
  • Place,
  • Disposition (the arrangement of parts), and
  • Rainment (whether a thing is dressed or armed, etc.)

If you find this interesting you go ahead and read more about it.

I dare you to find more accidents to reality. You won’t find any

So can this help you? Ok let’s say you are setting up your generic articles on which you are going to inject keywords to make them keyword specific. What are you going to write about? Here’s what people will give you as an example in forums:

“I like KEYWORD very much. I would like to buy some KEYWORD product but I couldn’t find any good place to look around. Finlly I found this website [insert your affiliate link here]”

Those kind of sentences are well and good but they are not nearly enough to build millions of pages. You need to write a lot about something that could apply to ANYTHING you can think of.

If you are with me so far you know where this is going. Thanks much Aristotle Dude, bring on those nine accidents:

Accident 1: Quantity

How much of KEYWORD do we really need nowadays? My friends and I like big amounts of KEYWORD because we find it pleasant.

Accident 2: Quality

Which brings us to the next question. Does your KEYWORD really need to be top notch quality? I personally like imported KEYWORD because there quality is much better but some people don’t really feel the difference.

Etc.

You didn’t expect me to go all the way with the nine accidents did you? Go on lazy ass and do your own homework.

When you go through this routine you’ll have better quality content available to cover every niche you would like to attack. This will bring spiders, indexing, rankings, and money to your pockets.  And you thought Greek Philosophy was useless did you.

It’s funny how theres this small circle of SEO bloggers where everyone knows each other but whenever the mainstream media scoops in that’s something noteworthy.

The gem of the note is that Matt Cutts finally admits that Google Bowling exists, or as he prefers to call it, Search Engine Bowling.

So I’m chatting with Alex, the guy I talked about here, about his synonymizer tool:

[12:36] alexf: Even better, if settings for the rewrite of each article could be randomly variated (between certain ranges) to avoid having all the articles rewritten with the same parameters.
[12:36] alexf: but why you need this?
[12:37] alexf: if you set good settings any text will be rewritten different
[12:37] Q2hl: i dont know, im a fan of random
[12:37] alexf: even if you trying to rewrite same article twice - second copy will be different form first
[12:38] Q2hl: yes but dont you think rewriting all articles with same amount of nouns, adje, etc. will end up sharing some common pattern
[12:38] alexf: no
[12:38] Q2hl: in the sentence structure
[12:39] alexf: no, not at all
[12:39] alexf: first of all it depends on the source of the articles, if they are from different sources, synonymizer can’t make them look more like each other
[12:40] alexf: second - percentage of “mutation” only affects the quality of mutation
[12:41] alexf: the less percent - the better quality, article looks more like original, no silly mistakes
[12:42] alexf: but to make article look different from source, you need to put high % of mutation
[12:45] Q2hl: so for example
[12:46] Q2hl: if you had settings x y and z settings all the articles would have some degree of difference with original articles
[12:47] Q2hl: if youhad settings x-3 y+5 and z-6 the degree of difference with the original article would be different
[12:48] Q2hl: meaning if your settings vary from article to article, your articles would have some variation in respects to legibility
[12:49] alexf: this is not necessary to make article look different
[12:49] alexf: even with same x y z it still will look very different
[12:50] alexf: because synonyms itself will be different each time
[12:51] Q2hl: I can’t help thinking that randomizing these settings would add another layer of differentiation, but Im just stubborn
[12:51] Q2hl: do you mind if I post this conversation in the blog?
[12:52] alexf: sure, no problem

Why do I post this conversation? Not because I am trying to make Alex include a feature that he considers unnecessary. Truth be said, I trust his judgement more than mine.

I just thought the discussion was bringing up interesting points. This is what he says;

The quick brown fox skillfully jumps over the lazy dog

• nouns: fox, dog
• verbs: jumps
• adverbs: skillfully
• adjectives: quick, brown, lazy

Now let’s change 100% on each variable:

Output 1: The fast red wolf rapidly dances over the sleepy can

Now let’s change 100% on each variable except for the adjectives where we’ll change 33%:

Output 2: The speedy brown four legged animal rightly runs over the lazy pet

Now here’s the question we were talking about. Output 1 is 100% different from the original sentence but in Output 2 we have except for:

• brown
• lazy

Conclusion?

• Output 1 is more unique and less readable.
• Output 2 is more readable and less unique.

Deciding the amount of readability vs. uniqueness that you are going to give to your content is one of the basic decisions you need to make when planning your Black Hat Strategies.

At a first glance I thought being able to randomize this decision upon the rewriting of individual articles was a good idea. Now I can see Alex’s point and agree that is not necessary. I can’t really see a benefit to having one batch of sites with some pages filled with less readable and more unique content, and some pages with the opposite equation.

I just thought the whole thing was worth a post because it makes us think about this very basic element of content rewriting. So the million dollar question is:

Do you want unique, non readable content? Or do you want more less unique, less readable content?

I think that debate deserves a whole new post, or maybe even series of related posts.

Alex offers a free synonymizer. Don’t get intimidated by the russian characters, when you sign up you have the option to switch to english.

Alex is one very smart gentleman who also wears a black hat and offers a range of Black Hat SEO Tools specifically designed to generate doorway websites using computer generatd content that will pass dupe filters.

His synonymizer has some features I haven’t seen before: you can define the percentage of nouns, verbs, adverbs and adjectives that you want to replace. You can also define the minimum amount of characters words you want to have replaced. It’s not meant for manually rewriting, but for quick and dirty automatic rewriting it works very well.

I tried it and it’s spitting out results that look about 90% different from each other on each spin.

Feature suggestions:

• It would be nice to be able to import a bunch of articles and have them all automatically rewritten.
• Even better, if settings for the rewrite of each article could be randomly variated (between certain ranges) to avoid having all the articles rewritten with the same parameters.

Well done again buddy

Straight from Treadwatch, noticed by one of the most insightful SEO guys in the industry:

Wow Google what a great algo you’ve got and what a really terrific user experience you’re providing when you occupy 9 out of the top 10 results for a query with your own sites.

Screenshot.

It’s funny how the Big G says one thing and does the opposite.

I tend to agree with Graywolf when he claims, in the thread discussion, the following:

[…] but it’s the tip of the iceberg used to make a point. Google engineers do site review clinics at conferences and scold people who have lot’s of domains with very similar if not identical content. However in practice they do exactly they tell everyone else not to do. They publish guidelines about how not providing original content creates a bad user experience, but again do exactly what they tell everyone else not to do. They keep preaching it’s all about the user experience and providing great results yet for a search term that they describe as “volcanic” in volume they provide almost no value.

Have you ever seen what happens in the serps when you create a piece of linkbait on a fresh domain? All those pages from Netscape, Digg, Delicious and Reddit are likely to rank higher than your own domain. Even though they are using duplicate content.

Congratulations assholes, you managed to consolidate an algorithm that disfavours the small guys who play fair. And then you whine if the amount of Black Hat SEOs is on the rise.

Doorways anyone?