Competitor gap analysis
We pull the profiles of the sites beating you, strip out the noise, and show you the publishers that link to several of them and not to you. That list is usually the fastest route forward.
Slow, checked, permanent placements — the opposite of a bulk link package.
The question we get asked most is not how many links we can build, but how many will still be there next year. It is the right question. Everything in this process — the vetting, the manual outreach, the post-publication checks — exists to make the answer to that question a good one.
We pull the profiles of the sites beating you, strip out the noise, and show you the publishers that link to several of them and not to you. That list is usually the fastest route forward.
We pitch a genuine article idea to the publisher, write it to their standard, and place your link inside the body where it supports the argument. No author boxes, no sidebar dumping.
Longer campaigns built around something worth writing about — original data, a strong opinion, a tool. Slower to start, but the coverage tends to keep arriving after the campaign ends.
Before anything is placed we map what your profile already looks like and where it is lopsided. The plan then fills the gaps rather than piling more of the same anchors on top.
We do, to the publisher's brief. If you would rather supply drafts, we will edit them to the publisher's standard before submission.
Sometimes, and it depends entirely on the page. We will look at it and give you an honest read on whether publishers will take it.
We find out on the next scheduled check, tell you, and go back to the publisher. If it cannot be restored we replace it or credit it. This is written into how we work rather than offered case by case.
A profile audit on its own is worthwhile and plenty of people stop there. For placements, anything under a few months tends not to tell you much either way.
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.
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.
Reports are written on the assumption that somebody sceptical will read them. Every placement carries the live URL, the anchor used, the target page, the publication date and a short note explaining why that publisher was on the list in the first place.
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.
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.
We would rather cover six niches properly than claim forty. If your sector is not one we know, we will say so rather than improvise with a general-interest blog.
This began as an internal tool for a small group of site owners who were tired of buying links and then auditing them afterwards. Most of the rules on this page exist because at some point we broke one of them and had to clean up after ourselves.
Nobody here came from a link marketplace. The background is in editorial and in running sites that depended on traffic, which is a different set of instincts than optimising a placement count.
Related work from the same team, with more detail on process and less on services:
There is no sales sequence at the end of this. You write, we reply, and if it is not a fit we will usually be able to point you somewhere better.