Content support
If the page you want to build links to is not worth linking to yet, we will say so, and we can help fix it. Building links to a thin page is money spent teaching people the page is thin.
Fewer links, chosen properly, reported honestly.
Link building has a reputation problem, and mostly it earns it. The industry rewards speed, and speed rewards shortcuts. We took the opposite position: a slower pipeline, a smaller monthly ceiling, and a review step that occasionally kills a placement we have already paid for. It costs us margin and it keeps the results defensible.
If the page you want to build links to is not worth linking to yet, we will say so, and we can help fix it. Building links to a thin page is money spent teaching people the page is thin.
Where an existing page already covers your topic well, we approach the editor about adding a reference. Cheaper than a new post and often better placed, because the page already has history.
Publishers in Polish, Ukrainian, German and Spanish, approached in their own language by people who speak it. Translated outreach reads as translated outreach and gets ignored.
Site moves are where profiles quietly bleed out. We map the old link targets, watch the redirects and chase the publishers whose links broke in the process.
A full read of what you have, what is doing work, what is dead weight and what is actively risky. You get the audit whether or not you go on to buy placements.
Every placement we make is re-checked on a schedule for as long as you are with us. If a link disappears, you hear it from us before you notice it in a tool.
You get a spreadsheet and a short written summary. The spreadsheet is the record; the summary is there so that whoever forwards it to a finance director does not have to interpret it themselves.
Nothing in the report is a score we invented. Where we quote a third-party metric we name the tool and the date it was pulled, because those numbers move and a figure without a date is decoration.
Alongside new placements, each report lists everything we re-checked from previous cycles and its current state. Links that disappeared appear in the report as clearly as links that went live.
By default yes, and the report states the attribute for every placement. A natural profile contains a mix, so we do not treat a nofollow from a strong publisher as a failure.
Placement and indexation are different problems. A link can be live and correct for weeks before a crawler gets to that page, particularly on smaller publishers. We report the live URL on the day it publishes so you are never waiting on a tool to tell you the work happened.
No, and you should be wary of anyone who does. We can guarantee where a link is placed, that it is live, and that we will keep checking it. What a search engine does with that is outside anybody's control.
Often, yes. It usually starts with an audit and an unhappy conversation, and the first phase is subtraction rather than addition.
Yes. Reports can go out unbranded or under your own, and we are used to being the party that never speaks to the end client.
The publisher list is deliberately narrow and grows slowly. Every addition is read, checked and usually trialled on our own projects before a client sees it.
A companion project of ours goes deeper into the measurement side of all this:
Send the URL you want to rank and the keywords you keep losing on. We will come back with an honest read on whether links are your bottleneck, which they are not always.