301 redirect

menutd

Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
1
Likes
0
Degree
0
Hi,
I have a question about 301s.
Is there a proven and tested order when hitting a new site with links? SAPE, SPAM and PBN.
I believe we should send the PBN to the money site and then do the SAPE and SPAM to the 301 site. Is that correct? Is there any specific order in which this works best?
Appreciate any help with this.
 
I'm not sure if there's a right or wrong answer to your question. But if it were me, I'd probably run the PBN direct to the site, and filter your Sape/Spam through a 301. Can always pull the plug on the 301 if it doesn't work out.
 
I'm just in the process of testing this out. Yesterday I purchased a brand new domain for a local service to which I'll point my 301 after I blast it with SAPE+Spam combo. I'll wait until 301 is ranking somewhere <#200 and then it's showtime :smile:

Will start a case study for this soon
 
Yeah the only way to really know is to do your own testing.

If you do send spam through a 301, make sure it's not something off Fiverr. Confirm with the seller that most of the links are dofollow, have a wide variety of different IP's and if they're contextual.
 
If you're wanting to save the site for any reason, I'd filter ALL of the links through a 301. Even the PBN's, with them being under fire right now. You could use separate domains for the 301's. A spam one, a Sape one, and a PBN one. You could redirect them around as you please later.
 
I never believed in 301. I'm pretty much convinced it's a kind of algo fluctuation and thus G can shut this loophole in any given moment.

Who stops you from quickly slapping a couple page site? Maybe use old archive. Entire site, hundred times better than 301.
 
I've noticed more and more problems with 301's.
They definitely still work, but not as consistent to me as they once were. My team toyed a lot with 301'ing PBN links to sites. Half the time it did awesome as expected, an the other half just nothing. This was over the last few months. We tried setting up & indexing the sites first, immediately just 301'ing, buying quality expired domains vs new ones a couple of years ago. Always inconsistent.

To me it's just not the same as it once was. Or maybe I'm just a noob.
 
I agree with EvolutionVision, it seems like my testing with 301's is inconsistent at best.
 
Agree as above - so tempting to use this shortcut. It has saved my ass a few times when I linked to a site to hard and saw a drop - 301 fixed it in two days - clone old site to new domain 301 and voila. Going to have a go at an experiment this week - clone site x 3 - spam and then 301 all three to money site ( this worked magically before) and on another project leave sites as they are with unique content same nicheetc - and 301..will update
 
Is 301 generally considered a risk to be taken with websites prioritising long-term growth and ranking sustainability?
 
i've recently toyed with this idea and had relative results. I did not send spam to the 301 though and both domains were aged, the 301 was a little over a year old and the MS was 4 years old that I both owned, so no drops/changes. With enough content (greater than 1500 words per page outside of your homepage), I got on page #1 in a couple weeks after the 301 triggered. At one point, my 301 was ranking better than the MS with only SAPE (6 links I believe all with Trust Flow over 30). I have yet to do any citations to the local site yet, but have some very Niche/Industry relevant links coming to the MS which I think what has helped the site get to page 1. I think this last part was more what helped me than anything else - Backlinks from sites in the Same Industry/Niche. If your site is for Lawn Care, get as many links from home improvement related sites as possible and other local sites in your area.

Just my .02 cents. :smile:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back