First of all I'm proud to say that I've gotten my first sale as a result of article marketing/bum marketing. Now, I have a question about a technique I have just thought about. I have a few landing pages on Hubpages, and I've noticed that more than a few are on the first page of google. I was thinking that I should try to write articles on Hubpages that relate to my landing page, and then just link the article to my landing page. I've already submitted 4 articles to ezinearticles, but they are still be reviewed. So, do you think that this might be a worthy technique for me to use?
That might work pretty well and I don't see any reason why Hubpages would have a problem with it. But they can be real picky sometimes.
I've never understood why people would write articles related to their site and add them to an article directory. Just add them as separate pages on your main site and reap full ownership benefits. That said, Hubpages and Squidoo are good for this.
The main reason to use such article directories, is that they already have a huge community, their traffic is already built up. Sites like Hubpages , EzineArticles , eHow. You chances to increase sales are much bigger.
1. "Piggybacking." 2. Links = SEO. You can have all the great content in the world on your own site, if no one is finding you - it will not help you.
Links have nothing to do with SEO. You're talking about SEM. Personally, I would consider it a gigantic waste of time to sit down and write a massive volume of articles only to submit them to somebody else's site. I'd rather write content for my own site - where it can be optimized to its true potential - and then grab links using basic social bookmarking services.
Here Affiliate buddies are saying about trusted and tested stuffs.To get ball roll it necessary to submit content on established sites with a link back to your site. Your just viewing one side of coin THE SEO PART Do some affiliate marketing you will come to know the rest...
That may be the most ludicrous thing I've ever read on DP, and that's really saying quite a lot. Links are about 90% of SEO (and most of that external linking, although internal linking is important too of course.) What do you think it is? On page optimization? Maybe in 1998. ... And you missed my point about "piggybacking." If I place an article on EZineArticles with a certain long tail phrase then there's a very good chance it will rank very highly for that phrase. If I place it on my own domain (unless obviously I have a strong domain with plenty of LINKS coming into it) it will not rank nearly as well. I'm "piggybacking" on the article directory to get traffic back to my website.
Off-page optimization is bull. There's no such thing. It's advertising and SEM. Anybody who thinks placing links on other sites is Search Engine Optimization should take a look at the meaning of the word optimization. Yeah, it's optimizing somebody else's site - but not yours. Links do NOT = SEO. Links = Advertising. Advertising and optimizing are two completely different fields. I may improve my rankings by placing links on other websites, but that's not a process of optimization. I can't optimize my website by posting on these forums, I can only market it. The fact that Google improves my rankings because of it is irrelevant. SEO is what it is. Yes, and it will rank on somebody else's site. To assume that everybody who visits that page will automatically clickthrough to the author's homepage is a massive presumption. I might not receive instant results by adding an article to my own site (although actually, I usually do) - but I certainly stand to gain more in the long term by increasing my own scope. When I do get traffic, I don't have to worry about EZine profiting from it.
I just can't imagine any way that you could possibly be more wrong. Maybe we're just having a disagreement based on semantics because I find it hard to believe you're saying what I think you're saying. I don't care if you call it "SEO" or "SEM" - the point is how many quality links to your site you have from other sites (off page optimization) is the absolute #1 factor (by a landslide) for how well your site ranks in Google (and the other SE.) This is a basic fact. I'm stunned that you would even argue against such a fact like that. "The fact that Google improves my rankings because of it is irrelevant. SEO is what it is." How is that irrelevant? It's the entire point of SEO. Again let me state that as clearly as possible: Improving your rankings is the entire point of SEO! I really think you just must have some insane definition for what SEO means. To everyone I've ever talked to it means trying to get your site to rank higher in the search engines. Folks like Andy Jenkins (I've been a member of StomperNet) would agree with me on that. I don't think I'm going to suddenly start using your definition - as I'm not even sure of what your definition is. In fact I'd love to hear what you think SEO is. --- As far as what you've said about presuming someone will click through to my site. No, of course I don't presume it. But if you set up your resource box correctly you can easily get 30%, 40%, and even 50%+ CTR to your landing page. If I get 200 views with a 50% CTR that's 100 visitors to my page. On the other side if I put it on my own site and get... 2 views... Well that's 2 visitors to my page. This is a very likely scenario for me and for many others. Creating content on your own site is one thing, getting people to your site is another. You have to do both to do well. Of course you could just make absolutely brilliant content and social bookmark it and do well with that. But the fact is landing pages designed to sell CB products are very unlikely to go "viral." PLUS when you put the article on the other site you are getting LINKS back to your site which helps SEO - regardless of whatever strange misguided notions you have - that's extremely important for getting your site to rank highly in the search engines. Links. Links. Links.
Yes, we are. You've gone off on a complete rant about the benefits of getting links from other sites. Yet, I'm not questioning that in the slightest. Link building IS one of the very best ways of improving your rankings in Google. But the fatal flaw of your first post was this: "Links = SEO" That is completely false. Link building is NOTHING to do with SEO. What on earth are you trying to prove with that? You say you don't care whether it's SEO or SEM, but that was the point of my initial post. I didn't say anything about the benefits of link building. You've simply jumped to the conclusion that when I say SEO, I mean every single marketing technique in the book. SEO is SEO. Link building is link building. You might not care if the terms get mixed up, but from a technical standpoint, it's simply not correct. Yes, improving your rankings is the point of SEO. But when I get contracted in to work on the SEO side for a company, that does NOT involve link building. It involves looking at the internal structure of a website, the keyword targeting and the ease of which Google can crawl the pages. It involves cutting down on messy code, using tags correctly and generally optimizing for the search engines. You're perfectly correct in saying that link building is just as important. But I'm afraid link building is not SEO. It's marketing, advertising and SEM. Two very different fields for two completely different professionals. How many times? It doesn't help SEO! It helps your rankings, but it doesn't optimize the pages on your website! It doesn't work like a title tag or a CSS-clean layout! It simply markets your website and improves the search engine marketing side of your campaign. It does jack fruit all for your SEO. People seem to use SEO as some uninformed umbrella term for all forms of Internet marketing. SEO is a small slice of the pie. I don't know what you're trying to get at it in your post, but I too give an enormous amount of consideration to the link building side of my projects. That doesn't mean it's SEO.
Wow, I guess that's what happens to you when you go black hat, lol. I almost laughed out loud for a bit there... From my point of view, and like 99% of others as well, SEM is PPC or paid inclusion. Why don't you two just make friends, because you're saying the exact same things but you have different definitions, though I will have to agree with Zibblu on those. finchy here is calling off page SEO (relevant, quality links) SEM, and Zibblu is calling "SEM" off page SEO. Give it a rest...
Linking between articles is a good way to strengthen your landing pages and retain the first page rankings
Dude - fine. You just have to realize that your definition of SEO is different from about 99% of the IM on the web. Which makes using it the way that you are a bad way to communicate. My definition of SEO is getting your site to rank higher in the SE - that includes all of the sub categories - link building (being the most important) on page link structure --- etc and so forth. If you want to call different things by a lot of different names and if that's how it's done in whatever fields you work in - that's fine. But you must understand that to most people SEO = getting your site to rank higher and that the #1 method of doing that is link building. So when you come in here and say "SEO has nothing to do with link building" you're not communicating very well. Easy. By getting your link put on the page. This is a ridiculous semantic argument man, WTF? The term SEO has been used to include all sub categories (link building + on page optimization (title tags etc) + internal link structure) by everyone I've ever heard use it. You can't simply come in here and say "well in my world it means this..." and expect us to all change our definition of it. That just doesn't make any sense.
No, you optimize your own site with the links from theirs. Lol. And yes, as Zib said, your definitions of SEO are different from 99% of every other internet marketer, I don't know about you black hats though...
I'm perfectly happy to be in the 1%! I'd rather base my argument on logic than "oh, well they said that so they must be right". You advertise their site - that's as far as it goes, there's no optimizing involved. Lemon: Most Black Hats are White Hats too.