Britecorp Linking Program

Jeez! What a let down. And here I thought I knew it all

 

We talk about this over and over.

If G, or any SE, ever starts trying to use "relevance" of the origin page of a link as a criterion, they will be even deeper into the intellectual toilet than they are now, and as it is only their feet from the knees up are still above the porcelain rim.

The point has been made seemingly endlessly, and it is extraordinarily obvious: "relevant" is simply not something that can be determined with meaningful accuracy by anything that can't pass a Turing Test. Perfectly rational, reasonable, meaningful, interesting, and enlightening references to topics apparently widely separated from a page's nominal "theme" can--and, on good sites, frequently do--pop up all over the page. What is the relevance of Zippy the Pinhead to, let us say, vegetable gardening? ZERO. But if a page on vegetable gardening finds occasion to quote the phrase--now in major published dictionaries of quotations--"Are we having fun yet?", it is right, good, and interesting that a link to the Zippy home site be included. What would G's algo make of that?

Pfui.

 

I think that's more the S Bend Vs the dunny brush..

Be nice to see a sliding scale of relativity.. after all, everything IS relative in one way or another. But then, I don't think Eistein had Google in mind..

Either way, humour is a great filler because it's generic in nature. I have a sneaking suspicion the theme issue is closely related to frequency giving a weighting of sorts. I think it's less about ferreting out granular thematic references, and more about aggregate thematic convergance (as in Hilltop).

Theme or no, sourcing links from DMOZ listed sites is something I always have on the go - never hurts to be forward looking

 

That's an interesting comment that I have never hear or thought of before. Can you expand on this a bit?

1. Are you targeting DMOZ listed pages because you think they are relevant to their category?

2. Are you targeting DMOZ listed pages because you think that will ensure that you backlink will get crawled and will carry some additional value?

Or both of these and more?

 

I never said I knew anything for a "fact".

I'm 99.9% sure there were no other links besides my own pointing to the sites in question. I won't go into all the reasons why, but there are reasons why it would have been pretty difficult (and make no sense what-so-ever) for anyone to link to the sites in question. Maybe not a "fact", but evidence enough for me.

 

I'm seeing some nice movement in my SERPS for a couple of tough keywords. Seeing as I've had zero time for any SEO I can only assume that Britecorp's linking program is starting to show some benefit. Does this sound unreasonable?

 

That's really hard to say without knowing everything you've ever done with the site(s)...and when you did it.

 

I haven't done anything for at least 6 weeks and really hadn't seen any SERPs changes for the last four weeks.

 

I would be very hesitant to suggest any kind of result for the moment - simply because I've already had experience with the Google Sandbox slowing things up.

My personal interpretation is that the Sandbox doesn't completely devalue links, as much as specifically devalues anchor text - PR will update for the links as applicable. Therefore I'm tempted to believe that any movements in the SERPs are mainly due to changes in PR, rather than the targeted anchor text benefits - which is what the current program specifically targets.

As for comments on theming - I've had plenty of pages rank well with without any kind of theming whatsoever. However, I have also noticed that non-themed links are effectively low-quality and need to work in number to create effects. Even then, it certainly should not be recommended that any company targeting competitive SERPs should rely only on non-themed links - theming is definitely the future of SEO and the groundwork should definitely be put in play now.

Which is precisely why this week I've started working on the next stage of the britecorp link-building process - an entensive theming network. I hope to have 15 themes across 100 C class IPs developed by the end of August, and all clients will be upgraded to that service without incurring any extra charge.

 

Has anyone seen any effect of the Britecorp link building program yet? After trying Shawn's Coop Ad Network I've become a bit sceptic.

I signed up for the Britecorp program over a month ago, and so far neither Google nor Yahoo seem to have picked up a single link. And, I am not only referring to the fact that none are shown using the link: command, but that no effect is shown using allinanchor either.

So, if anyone has any experiences with the program that they'd like share, I'd be very interested.

 

I've had the same (unsatisfying) experience with the Britecorp program to date. Not only have I not seen any impact on rankings or backlinks, but none of the pages where he put links are even indexed in Google. That was the whole point, wasn't it? The promise was that he would put lots of (admittedly low PR) links on domains that he said were already well indexed. The suggestion, if not explicit promise, was that the new pages would be indexed immediately and the backlinks would then follow. Hasn't happened to date.

 

I don't think Brian promised anything actually.

Yes they are low PR pages and specifically "dead" pages - the search engines would pick them up but not necessarily straight away.

 

I'm not surprised that you haven't seen results if you've only been a "over a month". Report back in 3 - 4 months.

I have a site in the program and have seen some of the links Britecorp has been putting up. Not 50 a day mind you, but I don't expect the to see the full spectrum, ever. A few have been reported so that's indication to me that the program is moving ahead.

For the term I'm after I just recently started to appear in the top 20 in Yahoo, but still not on Google. That's expected though, no real surprise. I'm #1 for allinanchor in Google for my term though. I've been doing some work on the term myself so I don't attribute all the movement to Britecorp, but I do give them credit for some.

My advice to anyone already in or just considering the program: if you expect to see results in less than 3 months don't join. This is not a program designed to produce immediate results.

 

I think we can all agree that meaningful results (in rankings) can take months, if they occur at all. But is it unrealistic to expect to have some/most of the pages be indexed in 30 days? I'm not an SEO expert, but I know that I can typically get new pages on my site indexed in Google within 2-3 days.

 

I am very interested in the Britecorp program, however I have some questions. In this post I ask, how long do you get to keep the links.

I think the Britecorp policy is, Brian is not going to answer this question, and I respect that. I would be interested to hear DPers thoughts / speculations on what the real deal here is though.

PRAdnetwork of "Bob Massa the guy who sued google" fame specifically sells links for a month, but is a LOT more expensive than Britecorp. But they spell out what they are doing in more detail...

Any ideas?

Thomas.

 

Hi all, and sorry for the slow response - I wasn't actually subscribed to this thread - I'll try to correct that now.

As for the slowness in links being indexed - indeed, and I can only apologise as there has been some issues of poor communication. This is especially the case as - as this is a rather new program - we've had a lot of adjusting to do ourselves.

For a start we completely failed to appreciate that clients would like to see form form of report - more specifically, assurances - that the link building was progressing as paid for, and the general process has not been as transparent as many would have liked.

A very specific issue on the client side is that there are simply no quick fixes in SEO, and in this instance we've tried to advise everyone not to expect to see results for around 12-14 weeks.

For all this I can only apologise quite sincerely for concerns not having been addressed to everyone's satisfaction so far in so timely a manner.

However, clients should expect to see e-mails on Monday detailing information on the new link network. This will will offer not simply more links, but better quality links, including on-topic theming -> and the whole process entirely transparent so that clients may check all 10,000 pages they are linked on, to ensure that the links are not simply present, but that the anchor text is exactly as designated. We'll also be recommending a series of free tools so that clients may be able to keep close tabs on which search engines are spidering which pages.

Anyway, if anyone has any direct questions do feel free to e-mail myself:
enquiries @ britecorp.co.uk

 

as of today, does anyone got the detailed email brian was referring to. I would love to see such the system/reports he mentions.

 

E-mail not yet sent - slight delay on the FTP - it's going to be a long night.

I will also be *quite* recommending that clients never share such information - if anyone would like to know anything about how the system operates, best to come to britecorp.

 

If anyone has privileged information about how the britecorp program works do NOT share it because Brian seems to be a nice guy and I might wind up using the system.

On the other hand, if you think you can draw logical conclusions about how it works with the publicly available information, in an entertaining way, I think this could be legitimate and helpful. Er, I will bug off now.

thomas.

 

See if this helps explain things:
http://www.britecorp.co.uk/search-engine-optimisation/link-building/