Rate of procurement

some empirical results

[alphacooler]

I have managed to obtain a great site that had its content pulled off (for the most part...some archives were left up in a subdir and are still indexed) months ago.

Now I am going about my link building campgain on new subdirectories that have 0 links as of now.

This question goes out to those who have ever been in a situation where they are starting a link campain on a site that was once indexed but now is not. What type of link growth is acceptable? My bottom line is NOT to trigger the sandbox or any other SE filter for "artificial link growth".

I would think it wise to analyze the backlinks of the top 10 in the serp's for the main keyword to see how many links they have and how long they have been around. Then from this somehow derive an estimate of "natural" looking link growth. I believe this to be much more troublesome than it sounds as many sites follow less than linear link growth. Is this the approach that others take?

[Crush]

we think 30-40 a day from early analysis. Not many people can do that sort of link building anyway. We are going to run some tests over the next 6 months with a load of domains and I will post the results here.

You are still going to be thrown in the sandbox whatever you do, so I would not worry abuot it too much. Just build your links and wait 9 months.

[alphacooler]

I think I might be able to skirt out of the box. This site still has a front page that has a little bit of content on it, and google still has a couple of hundred archives pages indexed. And the kicker is that for the past 5 pr cycles it has maintained a strong 5. Site also has good ibl's (DMOZ and Yahoo directory).

[Crush]

sorry did not see you alreay had pages indexed. May already be out of the box.

[alphacooler]

I am surprised this issue hasn't drawn more attention around the boards.

When a site hasn't been touched in awhile and hasn't had content in awhile what type of link development is "ok"? I DEFINITELY don't want to trigger the sandbox.