If you've come to the conclusion that the core update was for back link devaluation and this was the reason your website fell, I wouldn't suggest building anymore tiers to those tier 1 links.
If Google has recognised that your backlinks are garbage and they've devalued them, there's not going to be a chance you can save those for the foreseeable future, especially if they were Web 2.0s or Spam, if Google roll out a future update and reverse some of these rules, then great, you'll eventually obtain more authority down the line but for now, in this situation, I would just store your current campaign links and perhaps just check them every so often to see link retention numbers.
Going back to my initial comment, if you think your rankings have fallen because of link devaluing, (which I don't think is the case for this update but it could be different for certain niches) Then I would proceed with rebuilding a new set of Tier 1 links and then tier-ing these again taking into consideration your already built tier 1 anchor ratios.
" Then I would proceed with rebuilding a new set of Tier 1 links and then
tier-ing these again taking into consideration your already built tier 1
anchor ratios. "
Hmm...Had a shared Majestic account. Not for months, tho. Unsure of current ratios, but drop in SERPs is across so many pages, I doubt ratios are the sole problem. I do understand what you mean; built forward with awareness of keeping ratios good. Got it!
" if you think your rankings have fallen because of link devaluing"
Could this be because I ran SER very hard one day on T1, after skipping T1 for many whiles? Is it ever a manual devaluation? Lastly, the pages that tanked still rank for the newest KWs I did campaigns for on those same pages, did manual blogs as T1 and only used SER at higher-numbered-tiers.
Do those clues seem to suggest anything in particular?
If you bombard your tier 1's with tier 2's, fluctuations do normally occur and it would be very obvious in your SERPs, you will know if this is the problem.
Generally, I don't go mad building lots of tier 2's, I usually stick to around 10-20 back links per tier 1 link otherwise, with my testing, when you start to build hundreds of tier 2 and 3 links to each link, there is more of a chance of getting those links penalised, I'm not saying to only build 20 links as a maximum...
You can always run a fresh campaign with fresh content to those tiers again every few months to replenish links lost and increase authority, but I would say it is a bad idea to smash tier 1 links with 1000's of links in one go even if you're not using an indexing service, it'll still cause the "google dance" and from there, it could be a very long waiting game. Slow and steady wins the race plus, it's much easier to see what's happening.
My tiers would look something like this;
Tier 1 link
20x tier 2 links (pointing to each tier 1 link so, 20 links in total)
20x tier 3 links (pointing to each tier 2 link so in this case, 400 links in total (20x20);)
rinse and repeat for however many Tier 1s you need to compete in your niche
I'll say this again though... Tier 1 content should be priority, I'm not suggesting you should write an essay or pay hundreds for tier 1 content, but it should make sense and should be passable to an administrator, imagine the lowest quality article you personally would be happy posting to your own money-site, it should have some sort of value for it to stick for a long time. Tiers 2/3+ do not really matter, these can be replenished throughout the entire link building campaign, ongoing.
I would rather have strong tier 1 links that are aged and simply have SER building tier 2 and 3 links continuously, than having my tier 1's die as this is pointing directly to my money-site and google can see links that are pointing to my resource are dying and that doesn't show much trust.
It's all about imitating what's natural when you're using tools, My approach has changed over the years with the way I use link building tools, I used to spam millions of links within tiers and I ranked very quickly but it will not last.
Thanks, Tim. I've tried to mix both quality T1s (on my own blog networks and from well-known article sites) and just lots of different types of links from SER, of course limiting it to the types of links suggested here on the GSA board, namely links that have a chance at longevity. I admit I haven't used SEREngines, and that is probably where I can improve, at least one way...
What I find interesting: checking out the spam comments on my own sites that others try posting. I see some SEOs use a TON of articles on only one or two article sites, others vary it a lot and use many different article sites.
I am trying to make new T1s that aren't just "personal blog"-type stuff (I have many of these), just thinking of new ideas for that...Anyone know of a resource that lists the types of content one can write?
My "personal blogs" are RIDICULOUS. I can be silly and just write insane stuff. I try to keep them from being boring. Some actually get hundreds of views from other users on their respective article platforms! haha
What I found strange was when checking Majestic yesterday. (I had a shared account, and the other users were always hogging all the data, so I cancelled. Yesterday I reinstated an account, this time my own.)
I found that it seems many of the key anchors aren't even listed on there. Like, many T1s are now gone. These are my own links on my own quality PBNs, sites that could stand on their own as money sites.
I know that sites come and go, and so that's why we replenish links. Maybe the links SER made to these T1s have all been removed at once, due to sites disappearing?
I just don't understand how so many pages could tank at one time. Each is dealt with separately, with different SEO projects. Though on the same site, the pages are very different and thus treated accordingly.
Comments
Do those clues seem to suggest anything in particular?