FP - How to build authority of a website in 4 months

[biznics]

Hi all,

Last week, I was thinking to properly launch one of my website (resource-based) and was terribly stuck with the idea of how to turn that website into "authority site" within 3-4 months. The reason is that I have some fast monetization plans for that website but I want to wait till my site becomes an authority on the internet. So, I questioned myself many things and found answers of few, but still have few questions for you guys if you can help me out:

1. Content is the King and I truly have my belief on it. But how much content (within site) is good enough to let Google/Yahoo!/Bing know that I have what it takes to become an authority? (My site is not a micro-niche/adsense site, but I am referring to such sites as well; how can they be an authority; as they are very short with content and low in weight of links)

2. Creating quality backlinks helps all the time, but what should be my strategy (without overdoing anything) to start the process of becoming a recognized website?

3. After Google's Panda Update, which article marketing techniques should I be using?


Hope to hear soon.

Thanks,

[Thomas]

1) I don't think there's a set number to be honest. If you want to build a real authority site, I'd look to have at least 50 decent articles as a start.

2) Whitehat backlinks. Try getting quality links from websites in your niche (guest blogging is a good way to do this).

3) Mix it up. Do a bit of everything. Just put emphasis on quality of links rather than quantity.

[CALLMEBILL]

I would think that adding a ton of quality content on a regular basis as well using high quality links would be a good start.

[DomainMagnate]

You can't get authority these days by pumping a bunch of cheap articles and adding lots of low quality links. Real authority sites take years of consistent work to create. Only shortcuts are to get some great and successful linkbaits going or buying a lot of expensive links from high authority sites.

[superassassin]

Another great tip for quickly gaining authority is buying an aged domain with PR3+ and doing a 301 redirect to your new site. All of google's trustrank from the old site will flow to newer site, allowing you to rank faster, absorb backlinks better, and not dance nearly as much as a new site would.

[flaktrak]

Hi Guys,
One thing I would like to know is how do you judge an authoritative site? I have a few sites I think are authoritative.. mainly because of position in serps. However how do you know your site is truly an authority in that niche?

Flaktrak

[biznics]

Thanks guys for all the useful replies. I am sure these would help enough to get me started. Looking forward for more professional opinions please.

@Thomas: I really like No. 2; of getting related backlinks from blogging. Again; thanks.

@Callmebill: As I have a little SEO background, I do know the importance of quality content and to frequently update websites with unique articles. But the thing I wanted to know; what strategy of updating content should I go for? I usually update one of my site after every 3-4 days with a 400+ word article; does this sound OK to proceed? BTW, you never mentioned which links are qualified and how to get them?

@Domainmagnate: I might have to disagree with you a little. YES; you are right about the content and low/no-quality backlinks part. But it isn't necessary to wait and invest "years" to become authoritative. I've seen sites that are less than 6-8 months of age and they have been very well trafficked and monetized within a year. As far as buying links; I am the one who always go for free ones.lol

@superassassin: Very nice tip. When I read your response I instantly madeup my mid to go for it. Just wondering; does it help in short/long term goals? I mean, isn't redirecting an "SEO issue" for Google? (or redirecting too many URLs is the issue?)

[DomainMagnate]

the definition of "authority" is quite flexible, so it all depends on what you perceive as such. Sitelinks is one clue, but also things like having your new articles rank quickly and stable serps for competitive keywords

[BrettM]

IMO I'd define "authority site" as a site Google starts ranking for KWs, especially short-tail, you're not attempting to rank for. E.g., if I had a LEGO site and google started ranking me for "toys" or "games for youngsters", etc.

Content is king, and apparently Google is starting to look at grammar (onsite, and articles linking back to your site) -- not a surprise I'd say. I'm not talking New York Times grammar -- but average grammar vs. badly written / spun articles (e.g, "How on making a coffee good is the better morning tasks to be doing.").

However, IMO traffic is "king-er" . That is, all the content in the world doesn't mean traffic -- just like the best business in the world doesn't mean lots of leads. You have to create it. I'd start looking for the KWs with decent traffic that you can compete on. Build those up to rank / get traffic and start making some money.

Then re-invest and keep going, starting to look at slightly higher competition KWs, etc. And remember competition isn't all about SEOC / phrase match competition -- it's about the top ten.

Hope that helps, and good luck!

[biznics]

@DomaniMagnate: Very well said. I'm referring "authority" as described by @BrettM below.

@BrettM: I totally agree with your definition; bravo. That is exactly what I think; should be called an authoritative site (that ranks well in most terms). However, I think content is the King-er (if it's grand in your dictionary---lol), because like you said; "I'd start looking for keywords with decent traffic". You are then for sure; need optimized content to "fetch" traffic from those key phrases. If my content isn't worthy enough for readers; I won't expect them to revisit or refer my site to someone else. Apart from this, if my content is not qualitative; how can I ensure my ranking in Google and other search engines? What my experience tells and what I believe in; is that, content is the key to enter any search result page. Please correct me if I'm wrong.