Link building
In competitive markets link building is not an option but a fixed cost. What separates a solid profile from a risky one is not buying itself: it is anchor variety, velocity and topical relevance. I am an independent SEO consultant based in Thailand.
A link is counted and justified
On a single site I had 14,000 backlinks acquired in one year, with pace and anchor distribution held day by day. On another, a €200 media partnership returned over €30,000. Two opposite strategies, both driven by numbers.
Before spending, I quantify the real gap with the top 3: referring domains, acquisition pace, anchors. Without that baseline, a link budget is an expensive hunch.
Who it is for
- Sites stuck on page 2 with solid content already.
- Armed markets where competitors have been buying for years.
- New domains that must exist fast without burning themselves.
- In-house teams wanting to bring acquisition inside.
What you get
- Quantified gap with the three sites holding the top.
- Acquisition plan: volume, pace, anchor distribution.
- Selection filters for placements, including what gets refused and why.
- Monthly tracking of links won, lost, and their effect.
What link acquisition covers
Costed gap with the top 3, pace, anchors and placement filters.
Gap analysis
Anchors and velocity
Expired domains
Reasoned buying
Landing content
Monitoring
Six months of link building, month by month
A spread budget rather than a wave: pace is what holds.
Scoping
Diagnosis
Execution
Consolidation
Frequently asked questions
Can you rank without buying links?
On long tail yes. On head terms the gap is too wide to close otherwise.
What monthly budget?
It follows from the measured gap with the top 3. On hard niches it is often half the total budget.
Does disavow still work?
As a last resort and surgical. Mass disavowing usually hurts more than it helps.