Who makes this links in forums?
I 've seen many forums with structure like that when I watch competitors backlinks:
list of top cheapest host http://Listfreetop.pw
Top 200 best traffic exchange sites http://Listfreetop.pw
free link exchange sites list http://Listfreetop.pw
list of top ptc sites
list of top ptp sites
Name of keywords
top ranking sites on that keywords
then again keywords
then another forums sites
I don't know what is this and who make this and for what pupose?
You can check out backlinks report of this page if you want know what exactly I am talking about:techylist.com/gta-san-andreas-apk-obb-download-direct-links/
Why would anyone want to build a commercial enterprise (or anything they care about) on such a shoddy foundation?
If a person promises...
no hold backs of premium domains, then reserves 10s of thousands of domains
no price hikes for 5 years, then hikes prices
the eventual price hikes being inline with inflation, then hikes prices 3,000%
That's 3 strikes and the batter is out.
Doing the Math
The claim the new TLDs need more revenues to exist are untrue. Running an extension costs maybe $50,000 per year. If a registry operator wanted to build a vibrant & stable
ecosystem the first step would be dumping the concept of premium domains to encourage wide usage & adoption.
There are hundreds of these new TLD extensions and almost none of them can be trusted to be a wise investment when compared against similar names in established extensions like
.com, .net, .org & CCTLDs like .co.uk or .fr.
According to SEMrush's traffic rank, ampproject.org gets more monthly visits than Yahoo.com.
That actually understates the prevalence of AMP because AMP is generally designed for mobile AND not all AMP-formatted content is displayed on ampproject.org.
Part of how AMP was able to get widespread adoption was because in the news vertical the organic search result set was displaced by an AMP block. If you were a news site either
you were so differentiated that readers would scroll past the AMP block in the search results to look for you specifically, or you adopted AMP, or you were doomed.
Some news organizations like The Guardian have a team of about a dozen people reformatting their content to the duplicative & proprietary AMP format. That's wasteful, but
necessary "In theory, adoption of AMP is voluntary. In reality, publishers that don’t want to see their search traffic evaporate have little choice. New data from publisher
analytics firm Chartbeat shows just how much leverage Google has over publishers thanks to its dominant search engine."
It seems more than a bit backward that low margin publishers are doing duplicative work to distance themselves from their own readers while improving the profit margins of
monopolies. But it is what it is. And that no doubt drew the ire of many publishers across the EU.
And now there are AMP Stories to eat up even more visual real estate.
Who makes this links in forums?
If you spent a bunch of money to create a highly differentiated piece of content, why would you prefer that high spend flagship content appear on a third party website rather than
Google & Facebook have done such a fantastic job of eating the entire pie that some are celebrating Amazon as a prospective savior to the publishing industry. That view - IMHO -
is rather suspect.
Where any of the tech monopolies dominate they cram down on partners. The New York Times acquired The Wirecutter in Q4 of 2020. In Q1 of 2020 Amazon adjusted their affiliate fee
Amazon generally treats consumers well, but they have been much harder on business partners with tough pricing negotiations, counterfeit protections, forced ad buying to have a
high enough product rank to be able to rank organically, ad displacement of their organic search results below the fold (even for branded search queries), learning suppliers &
cutting out the partners, private label products patterned after top sellers, in some cases running pop over ads for the private label products on product level pages where brands
already spent money to drive traffic to the page, etc.
They've made things tougher for their partners in a way that mirrors the impact Facebook & Google have had on online publishers:
"Boyce’s experience on Amazon largely echoed what happens in the offline world: competitors entered the market, pushing down prices and making it harder to make a profit. So
Boyce adapted. He stopped selling basketball hoops and developed his own line of foosball tables, air hockey tables, bocce ball sets and exercise equipment. The best way to make a
decent profit on Amazon was to sell something no one else had and create your own brand. ... Amazon also started selling bocce ball sets that cost $15 less than Boyce’s. He says
his products are higher quality, but Amazon gives prominent page space to its generic version and wins the cost-conscious shopper."
m&b warband make money
host own forum