Is Squidoo And Other Web 2.0 Sites Still Relevant To Google and SEO?

[Tim Buchalka]

Hi guys,

We get this question from time to time, with people asking, does "web 2.0" and using sites like squidoo, hubpages, etc still work ?

Has the rules changed? Do Google now "ignore" web 2.0 content. Is it harder to rank now?

Well in our experiences, web 2.0 is as powerful as ever, if you do it "right" Now we do have free and paid courses to show you just how to do that, but this post is not about promoting these courses. Let me give you an example of some content we put up in 2008 that is still ranking and driving traffic day after day to our sites.

Here is a squidoo lens we made

Getting Free Yorkies for Adoption. Where do you go?

If you take a look you will see it has a VERY short article, a video (that itself has now been viewed over 37,000 times) some photos, a place for feedback, and some more links.

Note the style of the article, it is informational in nature and does not even try to sell the click. Yet this one squidoo lens has a pagerank of 4 and sends over 1400 unique visitors to our "money page" each month.

One free lens that took about 30 mins to put up.

Now I know you're probably thinking, ok so it must have 1000 backlinks or something, right?

WRONG! Try 18 on for size, and a full one third of those are internal links from other squidoo lens!

It's in position #1, page #1 for our term in broad match and in position #1 in phrase match.

We also have a total of SEVEN links on the page to our content. If we were putting up the lens today, I'd tone it down to 2-3 links to the same site maximum (including the links at the bottom).

My point to all this? Web 2.0 is still working! Very little content yet Google and squidoo love it. Squidoo rank this as the #12 best lens in the Animals section. This particular lens was created by an outsourcer with no real direction from us, and look at the results.

So this should prove beyond all doubt the web 2.0 still works, otherwise this squidoo lens would not be in the search engine rankings at all, let alone on page 1.

The fact that people are finding this content and clicking through despite the "no sales" approach to the lens is also a great sign. People like the content and want more.

And Anthony and myself have a policy on all our hubpages and squidoo lens to donate 100% of the profits to charity.

Look at what these 3 lens have donated since they started (see attached image). You can click both the images to see a larger version of them.

cash..jpg

$117.50 which is our half share of the adsense clicks. Not too shabby for 30 minutes work and a bit of backlinking. Just imagine if you outsourced people creating lens like this (and other sites like hubpages). The revenue would get serious quickly wouldn't it. Remember this one lens is bringing in 1400 visitors a month to people who reach the site and click through to our money page as well.

Look at the stats of this lens (note the date it was last updated and the number of visitors to it). The visitor count is the number of visitors in the PAST SEVEN DAYS!

Also note when the content was last updated. Close to TWO YEARS AGO!

stats..jpg

I hope this pumps you up and makes you realize, web 2.0 IS relevant today and can and does not only give you kick in rankings and traffic but continues to do so for the long term.

So if you have some "guru" or "seo expert" telling you web 2.0 no longer works, just agree and then go out and continue creating web 2.0 content. Chances are you will be outranking your competitors in the very near future, and they won't know what him 'em.

Comments, Questions, Criticisms? Offers to buy the site (ha ha, joking).

Let 'em rip! We want to answer all your questions.

Cheers


Tim

[bruusk]

does "web 2.0" and using sites like squidoo, hubpages, etc still work ?

Has the rules changed? Do Google now "ignore" web 2.0 content. Is it harder to rank now?

Well in our experiences, web 2.0 is as powerful as ever, if you do it "right"

I can quote similar (or better) results from Squidoo or Hubpages. However, it does not really answer the question that you asked yourself imo.

does "web 2.0" and using sites like squidoo, hubpages, etc still work ?

Why not use a test case with a NEW squidoo or hubpage instead of a 2 year old one?

Yes it works on sites that were setup 2 years ago. They didn't get "slapped" because of policy change. But as you point out, there have been some changes.

If we were putting up the lens today, I'd tone it down to 2-3 links to the same site maximum

So why not get with an exciting new test case, that proves current effectiveness, instead of this aged lens?

Just a thought.

[chriselliss]

hello Everyone,
I think hubpages and squidoo lens are still very important for ranking and back links. but don't put all your eggs in just thees two baskets, spreed it out I use up to 50 of thees site to help my ranking. hubpages can get a little Nazi on you sometime about content.

[w3bmast3r]

who said WEB 2.0 is dead... its only just getting started as far as I can tell. As you said Tim y6ou need to do it right! and if you don't know how then seek advice.

[w3bmast3r]

Actually I should mention that sites like squidoo and hubpages are becoming more and more frequent, I was promoting an offer last fortnight which goes into great detail about how to profit from these type of sites but there's many more out there. It's worth having a look just to see what other sites are available.. (disclaimer affiliate link) in all its ugliness I learned a few tricks from this guy Phil

[DJorge]

Hi Ninja Sensei,
I agree with you.
I know that Google is the number one search engine but it covers just 20-30 % of traffic.
It also has his own problems, like Facebook, Twitter, etc.
We, marketers, should help Squidoo, Hub, etc to keep being relevant and not
permitting Google own the hole net.
All the Best,
J.

[Tim Buchalka]

Hey bruusk

Good to see you back in the forum again

My main point is the squidoo lens I showed you has been ranking in page one for close to 2 years now. So Google obviously think the content is relevant enough to put on page 1 despite no further promotional work from us at all.

Squidoo have clamped down on overly promotional (AKA Spammy) lens and some niches (like weight loss I believe). Good on them too as this type of junk content should not be anywhere on the net if you ask me.

The point is, I'd lay odds this type of lens (similar to what I have showed) will not get flagged by squidoo because it's good content, not spammy and helpful to the visitor. Possibly it might need a little more content and a few less links, but that's it.

And remember google has despite a change in the google algorithm still ranks the lens on page 1 consistently with just a handful of backlinks.

An aged lens or not, google would not rank it if it felt the content was not good/useful content. Same applies to a new or an old lens.

So while some things have changed (you can't just put up any ol' crappy content with huge numbers of links to your spammy offers and expect not to get flagged - Incidentally I never thought that was a good idea anyway) my point about posting is you can still get page one rankings easily with squidoo.

Yes it works on sites that were setup 2 years ago. They didn't get "slapped" because of policy change. But as you point out, there have been some changes.

Yes, it's on the to do list bruusk. But the point of the post today is to show conclusive proof that web 2.0 (and squidoo in this instance) can and still does rank well and will drive a heap of traffic. I specifically posted it here with examples to show people that this stuff still works.

Nothing stopping anyone from doing a little keyword research and putting up some content and doing a new test case in the interim as well. I'll certainly do this when I get some time and get my outsourcing team on to it.

I'm pretty pumped up about web 2.0, mainly because I see some many spammers trying to take short cuts and having their content taken down or if it does happen to pass the site owner filters not get indexed or rank in the search engines who are getting a lot smarter with detecting crappy content.

Taking the time to follow the site rules and putting something half decent us is going to give you killer results! Perhaps even more so because the web 2.0 sites and now removing all your competition who still think posting spammy content is going to help them.

Cheers


Tim

So why not get with an exciting new test case, that proves current effectiveness, instead of this aged lens?

Just a thought.

[Steve1943]

Squidoo and Hub Pages make excellent parasite hosts for link farming - because you also leverage their authority status.
They are free, expendable and easy to replace.

Indirect linking ("chaining") is a powerful, proven technique for collecting and forwarding link juice.
Less generally appreciated is the potential for "laundering" link automation and so protecting a money site from penalty or ban.

[Tim Buchalka]

Exactly, use all the high ranking web 2.0 services you can. Hubpages and squidoo are two sites getting a little strong with content. Solution? Put up good content, problem solved

Secondly of course hubpages has the rule about nofollow links, not giving your links any real juice now until I think your hub score (their ranking of the quality of your hub) reaches I believe 75.

I would be interested in seeing if they are using nofollow links still, given that nofollow no longer really prevents link juice. But in any event you still wait to aim to have a quality page of content.

hello Everyone,
I think hubpages and squidoo lens are still very important for ranking and back links. but don't put all your eggs in just thees two baskets, spreed it out I use up to 50 of thees site to help my ranking. hubpages can get a little Nazi on you sometime about content.

Exactly, do what most of your competition are not doing. Put up a bit of content that is half decent and you are half way there already

who said WEB 2.0 is dead... its only just getting started as far as I can tell. As you said Tim y6ou need to do it right! and if you don't know how then seek advice.

Yes there are a lot there, but also a lot being booted out of the search engine rankings in my experience.

Take the time to put some decent content on there, and do a little bit of linking and you will make it

Actually I should mention that sites like squidoo and hubpages are becoming more and more frequent, I was promoting an offer last fortnight which goes into great detail about how to profit from these type of sites but there's many more out there. It's worth having a look just to see what other sites are available

Google commands more than that I believe, but I am not up on the exact number. Certainly for "search engine" traffic it's around 60-70 I believe.

I think it's a good think to focus on web 2.0, because it covers squidoo, hubpages, etc ss well as twitter/facebook and of course video.

Hi Ninja Sensei,
I agree with you.
I know that Google is the number one search engine but it covers just 20-30 % of traffic.
It also has his own problems, like Facebook, Twitter, etc.
We, marketers, should help Squidoo, Hub, etc to keep being relevant and not
permitting Google own the hole net.
All the Best,
J.

Cheers



Tim

[Tim Buchalka]

Steve,

It does all depend on the quality of the content. In the example we showed here on this thread, we did not bother creating networks of links to protect the money site. Generally you would only do that if the quality of your content was quite low, or you were looking to create 100's of lens and to go real wide.

In these situations e.g. "link farms" there is a need to protect the money page because if google finds it, it will likely knock the money page out of the search engines as well as your link farm.

I have no doubt that this method (networks of links) will continue to work well, indeed we teach the very strategy in our web traffic and marketing blueprint.

This is an alternative method that is, well effectively white hat seo. Just creating content and linking directly to the money page. Less work, less backlinks required, and easier/faster to implement.

Sure it may not work quite as fast in all niches/competition, you may need a few more backlinks possibly, maybe a little more content, but I am sure you would have to agree it's a heck of a lot easier than creating elaborate "link farms"

For the record I have always used the term "networks of links" but essentially we are talking the same thing.

Also, in our testing I have to say Google is getting smart at finding link farms. In particular link wheels are effectively useless in our recent tests, getting next to no results.

Cheers


Tim

Squidoo and Hub Pages make excellent parasite hosts for link farming - because you also leverage their authority status.
They are free, expendable and easy to replace.

Indirect linking ("chaining") is a powerful, proven technique for collecting and forwarding link juice.
Less generally appreciated is the potential for "laundering" link automation and so protecting a money site from penalty or ban.