yes, it is just excellent.
I have used many software for link development. but Arelis is the best one.
It is decent. It is one of the most commonly used ones. Personally, I prefer something server-side, and one that allows multiple editors to work on it at the same time.
OK lets say I use Arelis to send out 100 invites to exchange links, targetting sites that link to my competition.
My site is new so I have almost nothing to offer for the moment, but I will put up the recips in good faith beforehand, how many out of 100 (all thing being equal) should I reasonably expect to link back, and how long should I leave the good faith recip up before taking it down because of no reply or no reciprocal link? (1 week? 3 months?)
I know this is question is like "how long is a piece of string" but I'm just wondering how many would some of you consider a success/failure.
if its got no PR I wouldn't expect a great response as unfortunately when it comes to linking the world revolves around it!
As for how long to leave the link I would leave it up for 4 weeks then send a chase up after 3 saying you will remove the link if they don't recp
I have arelis but haven't really used it too much. Frankly, I found that it takes too much energy to ask for links en-mass like that, even if automated. I've had better luck getting links just by sending a few targeted emails to others in my industry and asking directly. The return on arelis emails is so low i wouldn't recommend it or any other link management program. I get unsolicited link requests and if I suspect it is even slightly automated, I delete without responding. I suspect most webmasters do the same.
in the situation you describe, you'll probably get a link back rate of 5%, more or less. Give them six weeks or so.
I have pretty good results using SEO Elite with link manager. Asking half-way automatically for links is pretty straightforward and yields quite good results.
I have used Arelis previouly and didn't find it worth using. And keeping Jagger Update in mind softwares like Arelis are not going to bring any diffenence in you rankings
The reason inbound links are so influential is because they are difficult to manipulate. A good quality inbound link is hard to come by and needs to be well earned.
This type of software effectively tries to make things easier, but I don't think it is the answer because easy means the spammers can use it and anything the spammers can use with such ease is likely to be disregarded as a ranking factor by the search engines.
I am using the trial version of Arelis, but instead of using it to set up reciprocal links, I am simply using it to identify potential sites from which to request links.
Its a bit quicker than trawling through the SERPs to find sites.
Reciprocal links and the methods suggested by arelis and other link building products whereby you set up links to other sites etc. are to me a waste of time.
|I get unsolicited link requests and if I suspect it is even slightly automated, I delete without responding. I suspect most webmasters do the same. |
I certainly do likewise, just delete the begging emails and privately cuss the sender.
I think it potentially dangerous if you use auto-generated links farms. On other fronts, I didn't find it very useful either. There is, sadly, no way around the laborious and painfully slow process of digging for relevant sites and composing individualized emails begging for links. I find I do MUCH better with a smaller number of highly targeted links than masses of garbage. God knows link building is the worst part of being a webmaster.
The automated software can still be very usefull, if the automated software allows you to personalize each link request email.
Even semi-automating the link management process, saves an incredible amount of time.
Let me come at this from the other side for a moment...
Aren't link directories kind of passe? Do they actually still work? I wouldn't know as I've never used a links program to develop a resources page or something similar.
I would think that personal contact (as close as you can get) is going to be the best option for establishing links.
I would also think that quality content (not copied from somewhere else) is going to be another best option for establishing links.
Another thing to think about are footprints. We've had various discussions over the years as to the problems associated with developing links on a mass scale like this. Typically, the links program is going to leave a footprint somewhere. And, you can be assured that there are users abusing the program. The search engines see the abuse and then zap your links directory. It happens every day. Do you think the risk is worth it?
I'm not saying that you can't use a program like this to maintain a links directory. But, based on experience and the topics that have been posted at WebmasterWorld over the years, automated link exchange requests are not the way to obtain quality links. If you are using a program just for the sake of obtaining mass links, you will most likely fall prey to a flag(s) somewhere along the way.
pageoneresults makes an excellent point.
With the advent of algorithms looking for signals of no-quality and dampening the ranking ability of sites that fit the profile of link manipulators- i.e. leave a footprint, who you link to and how you do it is playing an increasingly important role.
Regarding quality links, I agree that a little goes a long way. They're harder to obtain, and this is automation's weak spot.
I was hunting down .edu's last night and there are too many variables that automation cannot handle. Emailing the owner per the whois doesn't work, and then there's the issue of finding the right page for links and hunting down the proper contact, then personalizing the email based on this data. Automation doesn't work for that.
Is there any way to add text around 200 words in each link pages useing Arelis?
I use Arelis only to check linkpopularity of targeted sites ( usually competitors ).
I do not use it to ask links in an automatic way.
What I appreciate is that you can filter results.
It means that, in your targeted sectors, you can have a good filter to check links; in this way you easily monitor any new link your competitors get.
In several sectors those links usually are easy to get....
In this way you can naturally increase your links...
pageoneresults hit the nail on the head with "leaving footprints".
That is exactly my fear. Anything that makes it easier to get links is going to get abused by the spammers and will eventually come back and bite you in the ass.
I use it from time to time, but mostly to find interesting sites and to monitor competition. I think WebCEO is the more complete solution, but the two together are quite useful.
Most webmasters who own/manage active websites are aware about such software and their email templates/patterns, so they dont care about emails recieved from websites who want to do link exchange with them.
I also ignore such emails, as I know 90% of these emails are from non-related websites and most of them are very new.
Google penalize for linking to too many sites which are not related to the content of website and have lesser PR. So nobody will wish to link to a new website.
So best is to put good content on your website, submit to free directories, search engines and do send link exchange emails manually to few websites which you think are related to your business. If any webmaster finds your content useful, then he will be happy to give you a link back from the website he manages :)