How to get tens of thousands of back links.

arius · 07-20-2004, 01:07 PM

If you search for search engine optimization company in Google you notice that the first result in the SERPs in over 2,390,000 possible matches is guy called pa tri ck ga vi n (spaces intended) his site is named after him.
A certain link popularity tool show the following stats for the site:

AltaVista: 320,000

Alltheweb: 313,000

HotBot: 33,000

Google/ AOL: 26,100

MSN: 21,465

Total: 713,565

Do you have any idea how a site can generate that many back links?

I, Brian · 07-20-2004, 01:23 PM

I, Brian · 07-20-2004, 01:25 PM

Heh, I should add - time and money.

Don't total the links, though - they are all counting the same links.

arius · 07-20-2004, 01:34 PM

So I have more time than money;
What steps should I take?

The remarkable thing is that when you try to find the site in the back links, you often can't find a reference to it.

This does not make it easy to repeat what he has achieved.
TIA

Shawn · 07-20-2004, 01:57 PM

Most of his backlinks are from advertising links

arius · 07-20-2004, 02:09 PM

Nothing breeds success like success I guess.

It seems that only very large sites are ever going to get noticed due to the high volume of internal and external links. This seems to be working to the detriment of search in that large sites will occupy all of the indexing resources of the search engines and small new players will hardly ever be noticed. Google tries to counter this by its "More results from ..." links.
I'm not sure this is a good trend.

What do you think?

awall19 · 07-20-2004, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arius

What do you think?

small focused sites can get a ton more links pointing at them for their niche and outrank big broad sites for their specific topics.

thebassman · 07-20-2004, 04:41 PM

Patrick Gavin is the man...

A smart guy, that's for sure...

hurricane_sh · 07-20-2004, 06:09 PM

The number is dazzling, I think he pays tons of money just for links.

arius · 07-21-2004, 04:47 AM

But what options do the less affluent have?
How can we gain as many links?
There have to be ways to stimulate a greater number of artificial links organically.

Can any of you suggest some?

I reason that only sites with 10's of thousands of in bound links will ever succeed in fulfilling there owner's goals.

ferret77 · 07-21-2004, 06:24 AM

maybe in seo field but in most little fields a thousand or so is good enough

awall19 · 07-21-2004, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ferret77

maybe in seo field but in most little fields a thousand or so is good enough

this is a fundamentally important quote that most people do not realize. you and I go for terms like "website design" or "seo"

but most of the terms on the web really are not that competitive.

most businesses that use a keyword rich domain name (which inspires keyword rich linking) and register in a ton of directories can really dominate their competition.

cltwebs · 07-21-2004, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by awall19

most businesses that use a keyword rich domain name (which inspires keyword rich linking) and register in a ton of directories can really dominate their competition.

I agree with this also. I have had much success with keyword domains because of that.

Stats_Man · 07-22-2004, 11:31 AM

It seems that the "Time and Money" answer has the answer to the orginal intent. Getting 25K + back links would most definetly take time even at 50 per day that would be 500 days. That would be nearly one year and a little less than 5 months. There are services that you can pay for this type of back link generating. That's the time factor, now the money. If you paid for such a service at maybe $100 a month USD for 17 months, providing that no back links drop at any time during the 17 months, would be an investment of $1,700. If, having 25K back links obtained a #1 spot in SERPs across all major SE for a high volume search term the ROI would seem to be fantastic. Provided the site receiving all of the SE traffic was adequately designed to sell. hmmm time and money.
But, 25K in the example above is the number that Google gives credability to. So if it actually takes the high end of back links to get Google to and all other SE to provide the #1 position in SERPs than you need, roughly 300K backlinks. At 50 per day would take 16 and one half years to aquire. 16.5 years at $100 per month would total $19,800. hmmm we definetly would need a service with something around 1,000 provided back links per day. Anyway, time and money are probably the best answer. The better solution, I think, is to help a customer identify less competitive Internet market segments.

wozza · 07-22-2004, 08:00 PM

actually in many areas, smaller sites rank just as high as the large advertising sites if they are just as relevant to the search term

Quote:

Originally Posted by arius

Nothing breeds success like success I guess.

It seems that only very large sites are ever going to get noticed due to the high volume of internal and external links. This seems to be working to the detriment of search in that large sites will occupy all of the indexing resources of the search engines and small new players will hardly ever be noticed. Google tries to counter this by its "More results from ..." links.
I'm not sure this is a good trend.

What do you think?

awall19 · 07-22-2004, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wozza

actually in many areas, smaller sites rank just as high as the large advertising sites if they are just as relevant to the search term

I think this is the first post of yours I agree with wozza. perhaps you are starting to see the light

I think small extremely focused sites are a really good idea for SEO.

arius · 07-23-2004, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stats_Man

It seems that the "Time and Money" answer has the answer to the orginal intent. Getting 25K + back links would most definetly take time even at 50 per day that would be 500 days. That would be nearly one year and a little less than 5 months. There are services that you can pay for this type of back link generating. That's the time factor, now the money. If you paid for such a service at maybe $100 a month USD for 17 months, providing that no back links drop at any time during the 17 months, would be an investment of $1,700. If, having 25K back links obtained a #1 spot in SERPs across all major SE for a high volume search term the ROI would seem to be fantastic. Provided the site receiving all of the SE traffic was adequately designed to sell. hmmm time and money...

That is some good analysis stats man.
But if the 1000's of links are getting generated from ads that are bought and that appear on many web sites that end up getting spidered with hard links back to the advertising site; that is really effective advertising.
It lasts beyond the campaign as it seems to live on in the search engine's cache.

How would you go about finding some of the places this guy has advertised apart from scanning the back links?

Do you know of any Advertising networks or services with reasonable rates?
TIA.

bytech · 07-26-2004, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stats_Man

It seems that the "Time and Money" answer has the answer to the orginal intent. Getting 25K + back links would most definetly take time even at 50 per day that would be 500 days.

You missed one thing: chances are that the guy in top spot will have many more backlinks after those 500 days are up. So, you would need to gain 50 links per day over the number of links that the other guy gets during the time period you specified...

arius · 07-28-2004, 07:05 PM

Further to my argument about the back link giants having a disproportionate share of the SE engines processing time or interest.

Do you think that after a point a search engine should just stop counting?

Total
www. About .com 553,521
www. Patrick gavin .com 636,040
www. NBA .com 887,361
www. Drudge Report .com 1,339,496
www. White house .gov 1,674,516
www. aol .com 1,835,464
www. Expedia .com 4,526,672
www. CNN .com 5,482,479
www. MP3 .com 10,631,917
www. Microsoft .com 14,621,772
www. Amazon .com 19,617,460
www. Yahoo .com 26,892,514

Is anybody really going to unseat these guys? Maybe they should just stop counting at a million links.

Are SE resources being wasted spidering all the pages from these sites?

Is popularity really equivalent to relevance?

Most of the time you end up filtering the SERPS (100,000+ choices) with more and more specific key words and combinations to be disappointed in the lack of what you were searching for.

I say time is wasted with Spiders always roaming around in the pages of these back link giants rather than finding the really relevant new latest greatest stuff. Maybe spiders could sequentially visit DNS entries and Ping port 80 to find new content. Kinda of invasive I guess.

True these sites don't always come to the top of the list when you are searching for something so some sort of compensation must be occurring.

I guess the key is to find a way to leverage what they have already done to your own advantage.

Some how get links from these guys to point to your own site.

I just needed to get that off my chest.

Back to you.

Stats_Man · 07-28-2004, 08:32 PM

That made me laugh pretty hard. I needed that too. Those are huge numbers when you are stuck in the dull drums of chasing after one link at a time. There are a few hundred thousand areas to compete where you aren't having to go to war with those giants. Awesome perspective transfer though -- thanks.