>You find a high DA site that allows user generated content to be added and indexed. (the host)
>Common parasites include Medium, Amazon s3, Github, Linkedin, Quora, Youtube, ect.
Google rank does not apply to subdomains. The subdomain does not inherit any of the rank of the parent. That is why blogspot and s3 will never work in this regard.
Parasite SEO boost only works if the link passes ranking, the page itself has a lot of SEO authority, and there are not too many outgoing links. Medium will not work for this reason unless you get your link on a very high ranking medium page. Just posting your link on a new medium blog is useless. Same for Github, Quora, Youtube, linkedin for these reasons.
Google still does apply this to some domains. Blogspot is a good example of this. and the s3.amazonaws.com is the same domain for EVERY bucket, so it definitely has link authority. The thing the article missed is that most of these medium/s3/blogspot parasites are a few years old. While a year ago you could chuck up a Medium blog and rank it in under a month, with the most recent Google update, it takes a lot longer to see things ranking.
However yesterday I saw an exception to this, as this Medium account ranked in literally 2 days without any backlinks (the page has since been deleted): https://i.imgur.com/8lPHUYs.png
Parasites do work well, you just need to find the right 'secret sauce'. Some people can still spam 1000's of backlinks using Xrumer and/or GSA or slowly drip feed cheap PBN links.
The article shows looking for keywords such as 'HostGator coupon' or 'Clash of Clans hack' and you'll see that the top 10 results literally change on a daily basis.
People are doing of lot 301 redirects (buy a expired domains with lots of high authority backlinks and 301 it to your URL) and then block the bots for SEO tools like Ahrefs/Majestic/SEMRush etc. so other SEO's can't find their backlinks.
Search google for "biology 10th edition free pdf" and see what I mean. Some top-ranking hosts are: Quora, Pinterest, and DailyMotion. The parasites are the videos/PDFs/questions/images (user generated content) that link to the low-rank spam site.
In some cases like Quora, the link juice is there, because it's not on a subdomain. For subdomains like S3, it's about the traffic/lead-gen, not the pagerank.
However, just recently Google hit these sites hard--giving those subdomains penalties.
So this "parasite SEO" is really no longer an issue, especially the subdomain "trick".
"Google rank does not apply to subdomains. The subdomain does not inherit any of the rank of the parent."
Enter coupons.businessinsider.com, coupons.cnn.com, or discountcode.dailymail.co.uk into Ahrefs and you will see this is not true.
"That is why blogspot and s3 will never work in this regard"
The article has multiple examples of s3 parasites ranking for competitive affiliate terms like "Hostgator coupon" and "Bluehost coupon". If you search those terms now you will see sites.google and s3 parasites.
The #3 and #4 results for me for "HostGator coupon" are Amazon s3 and a Google sites page
Obviously it still works.
Clearly there's ways to do it wrong that won't work, just like anything else.
The biggest benefit to doing this strategy is 0 risk for spammy and abusive SEO practices.
Since you're not connecting them to a domain you own, this could be done fully anonymously.
Google: Correct! We don't use those signals anymore! We're soo smart.
Me: But my competitors are blatantly using those techniques and they outrank me.
SEO Expert: Ummm, yeah but one day it will stop working!
Google: Pretend like we don't exist, focus on your users!
Me: But I need to make a living now and I don't have any users.
Though influencer marketing has been having a good shot at that title in this past 5 years
Google already has a rule to deal with this: buying and selling links (and, by extension, renting links) is against their guidelines. They just don't enforce it for big publishing companies.
What annoys me now is that copy catting a decent article and just filling it full of ad shit, ranks so well. :( gone are the days where googling for something felt good, it's now a web of sales tactics and copied texts.
Why wouldn't I just type in the domain at moz.com and look it up there ? </retorical>
I would say Ahrefs's is marginally more accurate then the others but to be honest any of these numbers can be gamed and are not a accurate representation of a domain and/or backlink.
Ironic typo; was that supposed to be common hosts include? ;)
Even if Google deindexes these subdomains tomorrow, tens of millions of dollars have been made in a 1 year time period from this tactic alone.
People say things like this and then wonder why SEO has a bad reputation.
In the beginning I just deleted them when I saw them, but then I had to turn on moderation.
Wordpress and Disqus didn't act fast enough to auto-detect this spam and prevent them from being published, and it wasn't long before conversations started moving to FB, Twitter and Medium.
Seems like more of a savvy business move on behalf of CNN instead of scummy/greyhat/parasite-seo type stuff, no?
It's right up their alley, too. They sell advertisements. Coupons are advertisements.
CNN doesn't. Somebody else "rents" the subdomain from CNN, and they are the parasite that is feeding off of CNN's brand.
Constantly referring to "Google's algorithm" misses the real issue. Google can do whatever it wants. Google can "trust" anyone or no one but itself.
Google has all the traffic, not the coupon websites.
Do we need laws that govern such middlemen?
I seem to remember reading somewhere that they get audited to make sure they don't do this, although can't find the link.
What I would expect to be illegal would be overly favoring their own sites/services over those of competitors, since they are so big and that would be abusing their search marketshare to spread into other markets.
They've been doing this for years in search results, progressively so.
The practice continues (and continues to worsen), at least in their US version. I can't speak for their European sites.
Several people have tried to rank as #1 using s3, but Google's ranking algorithm eventually pulls or removes the content from being listed entirely.
We're talking about Google here, I'm pretty sure they're aware of this type of SEO hacking.
But it's about Parasitic Search Enginge Optimizations.