Anyone Using Link Emperor?

medway said:
Have you considered doing some of these services in house?

Most services are already marked up quite a bit from what a VA could do for you. Then being further marked up here (although I see your point about the other bits of the interface contributing to that) causes ROI to drop more.

Considering how well it looks coded overall it seems you could whip up some automated stuff of your own.
Click to expand...

Not really. We really would like to remained focused on providing the marketplace and infrastructure for the clients. We are actively seeking vendors to add services to the marketplace. We believe in open competition and a wide variety of sources. Just takes time to grow :)

Brett :)
 


Thanks Berto! We are really working hard to attract more vendors like Quacklinks! They have been a great addition to the marketplace. So far we have no problems reported from clients on the Blog Posts and they just rolled out the wiki links.

Awesome stuff!


Yours in Service,


Brett Phillips
Customer Support Specialist
 
Question for the team: What is your process to include new vendors in the Default link allocation?

I would guess you try out their links first and test them once or twice, but how do you pick which allocation of which type of link and so on from that point when there is a new vendor?

Cheers,
Luke
 
Hi Luke & All,

Here's basically what we do

We try to allocate across the service types according to these general percentages:

Article Directory Submissions - 20%
Forum Profiles - 15%
Blog Comments - 15%
Social Bookmarking - 15%
Mixed or Multi-Tier Blasts - 15%
Private Network Blog Posts - 10%
Social Signals (non-links such as +1s, likes, tweets, etc.) - 10%


Then within each service type, we allocate between the vendors based on the vendors cost per successful link (lower is better), ability to successfully place anchor text in the link (more anchor text is better), and size of the chunk of link building (someone offering 500 links for 500 credits would be considered better than someone offering 5000 links for 5000 credits) It's not winner take all. Rather, if two vendors are larely equal in these respects, they'll split the allocation close to equally. If one is a lot better than the other, then the split will be favored toward the one that is a lot better.

Hope this helps!

Brett :)
 
What would be nice is a scoring/rating system by existing users as to what providers are working well, in terms of both successful completion % of "links indexed" and SERP movement.

Clearly, SERP movement is highly subjective and depends on many factors, but there needs to be a way to find/monitor/rank the best providers so new users know what they're getting into. This is especially true since there are now dozens of choices for allocation.

I am interested in this service for sure and if anyone can PM me which providers are giving consistent results, it would be much appreciated.

One question though... Say I have 200 sites, but I only want to use a smaller plan, is there a way to allocate some link building to each? Or would I need to have a plan with at least 200 landers?
 
Oh boy...

So I got a ton of links delivered (Wikis and Bookmarks from 2 different providers within Link Emperor)... and they were NOT SPUN AT ALL.

As we know, this is a miserable idea and leaves a huge footprint and is completely unacceptable. Have been waiting for a response to this, so stay tuned.

Anyone else noticing this?

I hear Cardine might have an awesome spinner in the works. These two link packages only would have needed to be spun once and it would have been great. Now I'm fearing some serious penalization if I stay with this.
 
Hey Berto,

I'm really sorry about that. We meant to roll out the spun feature last week, but ASW kinda slowed us down on it. Either way, we just made that priority #1 so Kevin's working on programming it out right now with TBS. I'll also refund you on those blasts right now, since that does suck. Sorry.

Meatytreats - I definitely agree with you on that, it's something we're thinking about and trying to figure the best way to compare everybody. We keep a lot of internal numbers regarding successful links delivered and effective price per link built, but something that showed some type of correlation in ranking improvements would be the best. I'm just not sure what the most effective way to track it would be.

We do plan on sharing more of the link building success rates in one way or another pretty soon, because it's obviously important info and I think it also increases competition among vendors to provide a quality product. As Brett said above, we already build it into the algorithm of who goes into the default allocation, so you can glean some info based on who is included in there.

Regarding managing 200 sites with less than 200 landers, it would be pretty tough. Technically, you could go in and delete some of your landers every month and rotate in new ones. But the biggest issue is that you wouldn't necessarily be guaranteed that you were getting an even link rotation with that strategy, since we tend to use a longer time horizon for making sure that things even out (closer to 2-3 months.) You'd be losing out on the advantage of the target values auto-balancing things.

Bobby
Co-Founder of Link Emperor
 
Just to update, I don't like posting twice in a row but we now have fully-spun articles with TBS, and are working on integrating Cardine's spinner as well since upon our first trials, it seems to be better than TBS. Not to mention a great deal in terms of price.

Bobby
 
Berto said:
Oh boy...

So I got a ton of links delivered (Wikis and Bookmarks from 2 different providers within Link Emperor)... and they were NOT SPUN AT ALL.

As we know, this is a miserable idea and leaves a huge footprint and is completely unacceptable. Have been waiting for a response to this, so stay tuned.

Anyone else noticing this?

I hear Cardine might have an awesome spinner in the works. These two link packages only would have needed to be spun once and it would have been great. Now I'm fearing some serious penalization if I stay with this.
Click to expand...

I've had a few projects delivered like this. Can't remember which vendor it was but I'm pretty sure I put them to 0% after I noticed it. Other projects have been delivered with complete unreadable junk content. One project was for a freebie site and the content was mashed nonsense about achne and medical stuff. If these orderes were placed directly with vendors I'm pretty sure the content would be relevant and at least slightly readable.

More recently content has been a little better but some reports come with a load of garbage included and not that many URLs. Stuff like the following:
http://0http://window.fbAsyncInit = function() {0http://FB.init({ appId: 'ed69093c48862f780eaff06453c04cb3', status: true, cookie: true, xfbml: true });0http://};0http://(function() {0http://var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true;0http://e.src = document.location.protocol + '//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js';0http://document.getElementById('fb-root').appendChild(e);0http://}());0http://0http://

Another issue is that even with the content that is spun, the titles aren't (at least on the projects I just checked they aren't). Spinning the titles is vital and can massively increase indexing rates when reusing content so would be good if the titles could be spun using manual nested spinning.

Hoping this will improve as currently spending $987 per month with LE and I'm starting to think it would be more effective to employ a part time VA with a monthly budget assigned to them to manage SEO and place orders directly with some of the services available here on WF.
 
If you get an issue with articles sucking can you send it to support to bring it to our attention? It's the newest feature of the program so we've been working the hardest on it as of late trying to get it fully up to speed, and if particular vendors aren't as good as others that's important for us to know.

Sorry about the past orders going out not being fully spun, that's our fault not the vendors'. But as of today we should have full spinning on all titles & content. We're going to keep a close watch on how they come out to continue the improvements, including getting Cardine's spinner in there.

Well-spun articles are the most important thing these days so we've been making a real push to get Link Emperor 100% optimized for them, and it is a work in progress...

If there's anything in particular we can do to make this 100% better than hiring a VA, please let me know. You're a big customer and we really appreciate that.

Bobby
 
Keyword Query

Hi,

Some fab info on here, I'm interested in testing the Alexander package, I'm concerned though at the number of references to long tail keywords. I've been let down by an outsource supplier and have 3 sites that need a rankings lift each with 2/3 landing pages with 3-5 two word keyphrases. Is Link Emperor going to be able to cope with this in so far as really making a difference to current Google page 1 & 2 ranking positions? Or is it really only suitable for multiple long tails?

Please someone from LE respond, or if any of you other guys have tried short keyphrases have you had a result?

Cheers.
 
GangsterProfit said:
Meatytreats - I definitely agree with you on that, it's something we're thinking about and trying to figure the best way to compare everybody. We keep a lot of internal numbers regarding successful links delivered and effective price per link built, but something that showed some type of correlation in ranking improvements would be the best. I'm just not sure what the most effective way to track it would be.

We do plan on sharing more of the link building success rates in one way or another pretty soon, because it's obviously important info and I think it also increases competition among vendors to provide a quality product. As Brett said above, we already build it into the algorithm of who goes into the default allocation, so you can glean some info based on who is included in there.
Click to expand...

This information is critical to me and I am sure many others.

Are you saying that the default allocation is what works on your own sites?
 
Parua said:
Hi,

Some fab info on here, I'm interested in testing the Alexander package, I'm concerned though at the number of references to long tail keywords. I've been let down by an outsource supplier and have 3 sites that need a rankings lift each with 2/3 landing pages with 3-5 two word keyphrases. Is Link Emperor going to be able to cope with this in so far as really making a difference to current Google page 1 & 2 ranking positions? Or is it really only suitable for multiple long tails?

Please someone from LE respond, or if any of you other guys have tried short keyphrases have you had a result?

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Hey --

We definitely use it not only for long tails but also for getting #1 rankings on big keywords. LE can handle large volumes of keywords, but you don't need to use it that way.

Kevin
 
Parua said:
Hi,

Some fab info on here, I'm interested in testing the Alexander package, I'm concerned though at the number of references to long tail keywords. I've been let down by an outsource supplier and have 3 sites that need a rankings lift each with 2/3 landing pages with 3-5 two word keyphrases. Is Link Emperor going to be able to cope with this in so far as really making a difference to current Google page 1 & 2 ranking positions? Or is it really only suitable for multiple long tails?

Please someone from LE respond, or if any of you other guys have tried short keyphrases have you had a result?

Cheers.
Click to expand...

To add to what Kevin said though, if you're on the alexander plan it may not be enough to make a dent in 15 or so lander/keyword combos to push them to #1&2 spots. The alexander plan just isn't that much firepower. It really depends on the keyword difficulty though.

If you'd like, you can email support with the specific phrases you're going after and we can give you an estimation of our best guess as to what you might want.

Meatytreats said:
This information is critical to me and I am sure many others.

Are you saying that the default allocation is what works on your own sites?
Click to expand...

We do use the default allocation. You should realize though that as you purchase more credits, your default allocation will grow. Some of the services cost something like 20k credits and that would suck for a base level alexander that only gets 30k for the whole month. But for a Khan plan or something it would be great because often the more expensive services have better success rates.

What we're going to do is create a forum thread for every service, and mail out to our list asking people to write reviews and build it up similarly to how you can read reviews in SBT. I'll see if we can get this together in the next day or two.

Down the road we're also going to release our numbers of average successful links / blast, though that's more like a phase 2 because we need to make sure that everything's adequately comparable.

Bobby
 
Ok, thanks for the response, given your concern on the power of the lower plan I have signed up for Alexander but am testing with just two landers, two keywords each, two currently ranking Google Page one and two Google page two. Be very interested over the coming weeks to see if there is any improvement.

I understand there is a daily budget allocation, slightly concerned on day two that nothing had been added to the link building since the first 6000 credits were allocated? I for one would be happy to spend the credits early in the monthly cycle, given it can take a couple of weeks for delivery then another for indexing...

Cheers,

Steff
 
Parua said:
Ok, thanks for the response, given your concern on the power of the lower plan I have signed up for Alexander but am testing with just two landers, two keywords each, two currently ranking Google Page one and two Google page two. Be very interested over the coming weeks to see if there is any improvement.

I understand there is a daily budget allocation, slightly concerned on day two that nothing had been added to the link building since the first 6000 credits were allocated? I for one would be happy to spend the credits early in the monthly cycle, given it can take a couple of weeks for delivery then another for indexing...

Cheers,

Steff
Click to expand...

Awesome, glad you signed up. We do our best to front-load new signups if possible, but if you're on the base plan you've got 1k per day and since the first blast cost 6k that means you might have to wait another day or so for the next blast to get ordered, otherwise you'd have no credits left over for the last week of the month.

It's programmed for a long-term strategy to try to be as steady and consistent as possible. Once the first few days are over it falls into a pretty steady routine.

Most of the deliveries should not take a couple weeks, the majority of our vendors deliver in just a couple days. We tend to overestimate the time limits in the projected delivery times so that people don't get too mad if a vendor is slow.

Hope that helps,

Bobby
 
Any subscribers have any updates good or bad about the service.

GP, any updates on your end as far as the complaints above?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back