by Owen Jones
If you are an Internet marketer, then you will be promoting a website, whether you own that website or whether it is a generic site promoting an affiliate link is irrelevant.
Whichever scheme you operate, the problem is the same: how to get enough interested visitors to you website, so that, if they are interested in your product, you have a chance to sell it to them, if they can afford it, before they become so distracted that they click away.
This is the largest common problem that every single Internet marketer has, and it is called attracting targeted traffic, getting relevant visitors or something similar. All the phrases come to the same thing ultimately. If no one sees your product they cannot buy it or if your visitors are mainly young people interested in tennis, it is no good trying to sell them bird cages.
So, you obviously need as many visitors to your website, who are interested in your product, as you can handle. This means that you need to be highly ranked in the search engines in order that people can find your website. The most popular and most often-used search engine is Google. So, what is the best way get your site ranked highly in Google?
There are millions of books and ebooks on the subject, but without exception, the serious ones come to the same conclusion (unless they were written by self-interested safe-list or traffic exchange owners) and that conclusion is that you need links to your site.
Very few people will honestly admit to knowing how Google ranks sites, but most people agree that the more sites linking to your site the better. This has lead some webmasters to try exchanging links with each other. It sounds an easy way to get links but Google can recognize reciprocal links. The best links are one-way links, because it demonstrates that someone values your site enough to want to be associated with it. These are called back links.
Therefore, the real problem is how to get enough back links to your site to persuade Google (and the others) that you run an important enough site to rank it highly for your chosen keywords, which should be relevant to the content of your site. How do you do that?
There are many strategies you can employ such as traffic exchanges, safelists, FFAs, forums and writing articles, but to be blunt, the first three of these are a total waste of time. I used to own a safelist and have wasted thousands of hours on traffic exchanges, all for nothing. Posting to forums can be worthwhile, but then ONLY if the link on your post is a follow link. If it is not, it doesnt do any good and most are no follow links. This means that you have to do some research to find the forums where it is worth you posting to (more on this later). That leaves writing articles as the ONLY sure way to get rock-solid back-links to your site based on relevant keywords.
So, you write an article on a subject relevant to your site stuffed (but not over-stuffed) with relevant keywords but then what do you do? Thats easy! You search Google for article directories, lists and blogs; sign up to a couple of dozen of the relevant ones or in the related categories and post your article to them.
And that is the way to get the sort of links to get your site highly ranked, so that people can find you and have a chance to buy what you are selling. The only catch is that Google will expect to see new links appearing on the Internet on a regular basis, which means writing and posting time after time after time after time ad infinitum. Or does it?
Yes, it does, unfortunately. But the process can be automated and automation is the key to online marketing success. Set up a proven, successful process and let it run ” day and night: all day and all night! I use a system that helps turn an article into thousands of variations and posts them to thousands of search engines, directories, lists and websites, creating literally thousands of back-links!
But don’t think that these variations are just spun! (The industry standard way of creating article variations is to use spinning software to substitute synonyms and pseudo-synonyms eg crimson for scarlet in a random way. This works to a certain degree but can produce pure gibberish too sometimes – who would recognize Crimson O’Hara?). The system I use does not employ this method, but still produces thousands or variants all written by human hand. Then it sends them out to article directories and blogs etc.. Thousands of them. In fact today, there are over 11,000 sites on their list and the list is kept fresh on a monthly basis. Most similar lists are not well maintained because it is so time-consuming to do. Therefore, many contain lots of dead, useless links.
This system takes your article, creates thousands of variations and then posts them to thousands of sites. All with your sites link in the by-line, which can also be varied. But not only that! It only posts your article to lists and categories that deal with sites like yours (based on your chosen keywords) and posts according to a schedule chosen by you: ie 10, 20, 50, 100, 1,000 posts a day, starting on any future date you choose! So, for example, you could write three articles and have the first one go out starting the next day at 150 a day; the second one starting after seven days at 150 sites a day; and the third starting after two weeks at a rate of 75 sites a day.
That would give your site at least 3,000 links in a month or 100 a day ” all for 2-3 hours work! If you wrote one article a day (an hours work) and it got posted to only 1,000 relevant sites, you would have 30,000 relevant links in a month. And that does not include the bloggers, ezine publishers and webmasters who paste your article into their publication with your link. You could easily end up with 40-50k links. But it doesnt even stop there, because the article will be live for years and years, quietly beavering away at getting you noticed by the search engines and the people searching them. How many sales could that get you?
If you want to see an example of this systems output, you have just read one ” this article and if you would like to find out more, follow the link in my by-line attached to it.
