Web 2.0 vs PBN - Which is better for SEO?

[Zack]

I have been reading some posts lately about both web 2.0 websites and PBN's which I don't know much about but there seem to be a lot of conflicting information on which of these will make the biggest SEO impact on a website.

It seems like a lot of the newer posts that I have read are ranting about web 2.0 and how it makes the biggest impact. Is that true or are PBN's better for an SEO impact on a website?

 

[hrishivardhan]

I think Web 2.0 is better and actually it does not harm our site. while if google find any glitch on your pbn network than it will harm our site and it's ranking in very large amount.

 

[paul1129]

My opinion is that PBN's far better. Yeah, it takes money, time, effort and patience to get it done right but its totally worth it after seeing the rise in ranks and traffic.

 

[SEOPub]

If you are talking about building a private network using old domains that have an existing link profile, then a private network will give far, far better results. Web 2.0's are extremely weak links. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. They are worthless unless you build links to them.

 

[Zack]

I think Web 2.0 is better and actually it does not harm our site. while if google find any glitch on your pbn network than it will harm our site and it's ranking in very large amount.

That's a good point and I didn't think of it like that. It's definitely something to take care with.

My opinion is that PBN's far better. Yeah, it takes money, time, effort and patience to get it done right but its totally worth it after seeing the rise in ranks and traffic.

Do PBN's make much of a difference right away or do they take time to work?

If you are talking about building a private network using old domains that have an existing link profile, then a private network will give far, far better results.

Ok, so the key is to find some old domains with good links and use those for the PBN?

 

[paul1129]

paul1129

If you are looking for over night. Then no but they can effect the SERP's for good within a short period of time.

 

[SEOPub]

I think Web 2.0 is better and actually it does not harm our site. while if google find any glitch on your pbn network than it will harm our site and it's ranking in very large amount.

That is silly. Google can penalize you if they think you are misusing Web 2.0 sites too.

And Web 2.0 sites are trash for links anyhow. Anyone can get a link from a Web 2.0 site with little to no effort. You think Google doesn't know that?

You have to build up your Web 2.0 page's authority for it to have any value. If you are going to do that, you are far better off just buying your own domain. At least then you own the authority you build to it and can do whatever you want with it.

Ok, so the key is to find some old domains with good links and use those for the PBN?

You can build a private network from brand new domains too, but then you need to do the work in building up their authority. It is definitely faster to find domains with an existing link profile.

 

[hrishivardhan]

hrishivardhan

That's where you lake most of people don't know they can build a good web2.0 with nice authority. and get very much amount of the fruite juice from the sites which are linked to that web 2.0 and you can eat that fruits with out any harm from google.

 

[SEOPub]

SEOPub

I don't know what fruit juice has to do with SEO, but what you are saying is wrong. You get no benefit from all the other links to the Web 2.0 site. You only get a benefit from links pointing to your page.

 

[Zack]

You can build a private network from brand new domains too, but then you need to do the work in building up their authority. It is definitely faster to find domains with an existing link profile.

Is it better to have domains with a lot of ok links or some that have less but the links are better quality links?

I know quality is better but say you have one with 100 middle of the road quality links and one that has 10 real good quality, which would be better with all esle being equal?

If you are looking for over night. Then no but they can effect the SERP's for good within a short period of time.

Would it take a couple of months or something like that?

 

[SEOPub]

SEOPub

You want the strongest link profile as far as you can determine. You also want links that you can feel relatively confident are going to stick around. You can never be 100% sure because other websites do disappear, but as an example, if it is a highly featured link on a really popular website, chances are they are going to notice the ownership change and remove the link.

 

[Zack]

Zack

They would remove the link just because of ownership changes? What if the site stays the same?

 

[SEOPub]

SEOPub

If there is a change, they could remove the link. If I write an article about how to build a shed and I link to an article that talks about a particular tool you need, but later I find out that the article is no longer there, I would change the link, right?

And the content cannot stay the same of a site you buy. That is violating someone's copyright and they can take legal action against you.

 

[Zack]

Zack

Ok, I get you.

What if you buy the site and it's content? Should you get something in writing about the copyright being yours to be safe?

 

[SEOPub]

SEOPub

I would get some sort of agreement yes.

If you re-register an expired domain or purchase something in an auction, which is how most people build a private network, you cannot legally use the old content.

 

[paul1129]

paul1129

That's correct.

If you buy an expired domain then you will have to build content from scratch. Atleast what you post have to be new. Using old content will only hurt you in the long run.

 

[Zack]

Zack

Unless otherwise stated then, a domain listing is just for the domain name and not any material on the site then?

I would think that the owner wouldn't care if they were not using the material again but I do understand the point of being safe.

 

[SEOPub]

SEOPub

It's not about them caring or not. It's about copyright laws. If you use their content that they did not give you permission to use, you are violating copyright laws. They can press charges if they choose to. It does not matter if they still own the domain or not.

 

[Zack]

Zack

Thanks for the advice, i'll just play it safe if I go that route and not reuse anything I don't have documented permission to use.

 

[earmoldsydney]

It's really easy to create links in web 2.0 with some contents. It is good for business but bad for SEO.

 

[Rakibul]

Hello Zack,

Let me know that if you follow white hat method then you must build web 2.0. Because google is now more tricky. they hate spamming and i prefer to build web 2.0.

 

[reCharge]

I doesn't matter!
Web 2.0 or PBN pages MUST have a high trust flow to sent this trust flow to their link partners (your page). So it doesn't matter which type of websites you have, they MUST have a trust flow (at least >15) anything below will not help you. That sounds hard but it is true.

I published a game changing article here: https://www.webmastersun.com/threads/16660-why-it-s-impossible-to-get-traffic-from-search-engines
If you read and understand this you know that 99% of all SEO techniques are pointless now here in 2017.

 

[Maxwell]

Maxwell

What is 1% SEO techniques that can worked with search engines and getting traffic from there?
As you said you are in 15 years of SEO career. Would you mind sharing any details?

 

[reCharge]

reCharge

As I already mentioned in my article. You need to find someone who is willing to share his own Trust Flow by building a dofollow link to you (Main-Page by a pinned article etc.). And this will cost some money. About 4 days ago I spoke an other SEO which rent high trustflow pages and he said that these rent are very expensive. 30 TF niche targeted 300 $ per month, a TF of 40% or 50% costs more than 1K. You will get on top within 1-2 months but you MUST generate more than you spent...


@SEOpub
I checked about 200 phrases and their first 3 pages of search results. About 95% were ordered by TF, for me thats a clear result. Sure you can do other stuff like SEO/SEM/Spam on social networks. These are the opportunities that you mentioned but you will get traffic from social networks but NOT significant more traffic from search engines because the most content in social networks are NOT accessible for their search engine bots.

All in all, you can get traffic these days but not primarily from search engines.

 

[SEOPub]

SEOPub

You need to look up the difference between correlation and causation.

And anyone that is spending $1000 or even $300 for a link just because the page has a certain TF value is a complete and total moron. They are selling snakeoil, and people are buying it up.

It's no different than it was 5+ years ago. Before it was people selling links on pages with high PR. Some of them were even using the home page PR as a selling point to trick people into buying. Hell, some of them were completely fake PR (it was easy to make any page look like a PR 7 or higher if you wanted to and knew how to do it).

Tomorrow it will be something else that scammers are using to separate idiots and their money.

 

[reCharge]

reCharge

You mentioning a great point here: Many SEO sellers are just publishing the Domain Trust Flow / Main-page Trust Flow which has nothing to do with a Trust Flow of a subpage. A subpage has ALWAYS a small amount of TF like the Domain or Main-page and even then when a dofollow link goes from the main-page to this particular subpage. If this link gets removed (old posts getting pushed down by newer posts) the Trust Flow falls down to 0.


@SEOPub: The prices which I mentioned were the TF-Flows from Main-Pages, which are linking directly to the target with a small text around it. So the a large amount of TF would get pass and a strong ranking increase would appear. But thanks for your tip I will post another article below my other one about these scamming techniques. So we can little reduce the TF-scam that is rising now.

 

[SEOPub]

SEOPub

That article is not game changing. Misleading maybe, but not game changing.

TF is not a metric used by search engines. Making decisions based solely on that is not wise. You'll miss a lot of good opportunities. You will also overrate a lot of opportunities that are not that great.

 

[RenderedElite]

PBN's are definitely better, but a risky solution if you're worried about longevity.

 

[harrygreen90]

harrygreen90

You're right, basically PBN are always better because they carry strong backlinks to your main website.

In the other hand, PBN has authority and pagerank, they will help to boost your keywords to top search in short time, web2.0s are good but could not compare with PBN unless you have to spend money and time for them but I think it is not worth investing like PBNs.

 

[Marc van Leeuwen]

...but a risky solution if you're worried about longevity.

Could you share why?

so web 2.0 are more stable for long term?

Hello Zack,

Let me know that if you follow white hat method then you must build web 2.0. Because google is now more tricky. they hate spamming and i prefer to build web 2.0.

On both web 2.0 or PBN, spams could happen if you did wrong way or just for purpose increasing backlinks fast.

 

[Abhishek_Jain]

Both are good in different different aspects. But support backlink profile but PBN Links need to be strong by building the authority.

 

[mikeandy01]

in my opinion web 2.0's are what i would consider whitehat link building(when used for whitehat purposes) and will not raise any alarms or get your website into any trouble, Where as with pbn's you can get yourself knabbed and your website/moneysite penalized and lose your rankings if your not careful in covering your tracks

 

[niimdigital]

Hello Jack, PBN is good for only event blogging that kinds of site only, rank for 2-3 months but for authority site you must be used to web 2.0 blogs because some time google demote the rank when you get the link from PBN Sites.

 

[SEOPub]

SEOPub

Ignore this. It is completely wrong.

 

[harrygreen90]

harrygreen90

Why you think it is wrong in that answer? or you are wanting to say web 2.0 backlinks are very weak and not worth building?

 

[SEOPub]

Why you think it is wrong in that answer? or you are wanting to say web 2.0 backlinks are very weak and not worth building?

Take a look at what they said.

Hello Jack, PBN is good for only event blogging that kinds of site only, rank for 2-3 months but for authority site you must be used to web 2.0 blogs because some time google demote the rank when you get the link from PBN Sites.

-A private network is not only good for 2-3 months.
-You do not need links from web 2.0 sites. In fact, links from web 2.0 sites are extremely weak and basically worthless.

 

[timmy tom]

web 2.0 gives some link juice
PBN also give some Link juice when you go with General/niche blogs.it will increase your ranking so i prefer for PBN

 

[harrygreen90]

harrygreen90

Is there a way to check or know if which PBN sites will be best or give more SEO benefit for my site when having links on them?

 

[paritosh]

To use a PBN network is more effective to use than any web 2.0 submission but has a risk to use than the web 2.0 submission.

 

[iseomaster]

Look I feel you want save money it`s ok check my replay on this post:
https://www.webmastersun.com/threads/761-should-i-automate-links-building?p=129969#post129969