Woke up to an email this morning that basically said our broken link campaign was a waste of time and they're pulling the plug. Coffee didn't help. This is for a health supplement brand, we were targeting those big 'best of' resource pages in the fitness space. Found over 200 dead links on high DR sites using Ahrefs and Screaming Frog, the usual process. The outreach was solid, good templates, personalization. The problem? We got links. A decent amount of them too, about a 12% placement rate which is above average for me. But the client's tracking showed zero movement in rankings after 60 days. Not even a tremor. They looked at thier competitor who just bought a few guest posts on obvious PBNs and saw jumps. So now I'm sitting here questioning the whole strategy again. The data says these are quality contextual links from relevant sites with real traffic. But if it doesn't move the needle for a commercial client in a competitive niche, what's the point? Maybe it's just too slow now, or you need such volume that it becomes pointless for most budgets. Has anyone actually seen broken link building work recently for anything other than branding or maybe super fresh sites? I'm talking real ranking shifts for competitive terms, not just diversifying a profile. Or are we all just doing busywork because it feels more white hat than buying links?
Just lost a client over broken link building. Here's what went wrong.
- Thread starter Sketch
- Start date
Just lost a client over broken link building. Here's what went wrong.
sorry but that's just wrong. 12% placement rate on high DR sites is actually solid, and if you got those links and no ranking movement after 60 days, the problem is probably not the links. maybe your client is expecting instant results or thinks links alone will push hard keywords. in my experience, especially in competitive niches, links are a long game. you need volume, consistent momentum, and a mix of tactics. buying PBNs or guest posts can work fast but only if done right and in combination with solid on-page and content strategy. broken links work for branding and newer sites, but for top competitive keywords, i rarely see them move the needle unless you hit a huge volume and diversify tactics. test, scale, repeat.
Locus
New member
Look, I've seen this movie before. Link building isn't a magic bullet and expecting fast results in a competitive niche is naive. 60 days is not enough time for quality contextual links to fully sink in and move rankings. The client's impatience and comparing to PBN buys is exactly why this is a problem. Real rankings shifts for competitive terms take longer, especially with white hat links.
honestly this whole "wait 60 days" thing is just a crutch. Back in the day I saw solid ranking lifts from broken link building in half that time, and it was more predictable. Clients expect instant results and get impatient, so they chug along with stuff that feels safer but often doesn't move the needle.
Royalty
New member
Look, broken link building is just a piece of the puzzle. It's slow, it's often overhyped for real ranking gains unless you're dealing with brand new sites or super niche keywords. The reality is if you're targeting competitive terms, 60 days of backlinks without any juice, then your client's expectations are off. Links help build authority over time, but they don't usually move the needle in a few months unless you're really pumping volume. And yeah, I've seen some lifts in half that
dead on arrival, just like all those old school tricks. expecting broken links to move the needle fast in a competitive niche is a myth imo. same as always, only volume and patience matter, if you got the budget
Blitz
New member
Client chasing quick wins again. CVR and LTV on these things can be brutal, especially in niche markets. 12% placement rate is solid, but if rankings stay flat, maybe the site authority just ain't enough yet. Or maybe those links aren't as relevant as they seem. I've seen similar stuff take 6 months to show real juice
Ember
New member
Hold my coffee. Flex, I get where you're coming from, but I gotta push back on the "volume and patience" mantra. Sure, in theory, that sounds good for the slow burn. But if you're chasing real ranking shifts for competitive terms in a niche where your client's just not gonna wait 6 months, you're throwing good money after bad. I've seen plenty of cases where a handful of really well-placed, high-DR contextual links moved the needle faster than stacking a mountain of dead links. Quality beats quantity, especially when your links are from sites with actual traffic and relevance.
If it's not moving after 60 days, my gut says either the links aren't as relevant as they look or the site authority isn't there yet, which is kinda what Royalty touched on. Waiting around for slow results in a hyper-competitive niche is a surefire way to become a bagholder. Sometimes you gotta ask if your strategy is just busywork to look white hat or if you're actually making an impact. I'd rather get fewer, more targeted links that have a real shot of shifting rankings faster than drown in volume hoping the algorithm finally notices. Sorry, but that "volume and patience" line is just a fancy way of saying hope it gets better someday. Most clients don't have that luxury.
interesting take on the slow burn. back in the day, you could just sprinkle some links here and there and see moves in a few weeks. now it feels like you need a volcano of links to even get a flicker. maybe the niche is just too saturated or the sites got so much noise that even legit links like these don't register. works on paper, but in the real game, sometimes it's just about volume and patience. maybe client expectations got too high too fast, or the competition just leveled up. i dunno, sometimes i think we're all just throwing pebbles in a river hoping for a tsunami.
Don't @ me but what if the whole broken link thing is just a distraction from the fact that most of these niche sites are just not authority enough anymore? Like maybe the links look good on paper but they don't matter if the site itself is weak or ghosted by Google. Could be that building links alone is just spinning your wheels if the site ain't already kinda climbing the ranks on its own. So maybe the real move is to boost the site quality first, then build links, instead of chasing ghosts that don't move the needle.
thanks for the thoughts, everyone. Since posting, I've been digging into the data more, trying to see if there's a pattern of ranking movement that maybe just takes longer to surface. Also testing some additional outreach tweaks, like more contextual content on the landing pages, to see if that helps. Still believing in the power of solid links but gotta admit, this one's feeling like a patience game right now.
Liquid
New member
Broken link building is risky if you dont vet your sources. Looks like they got burned by linking to dead content which kills trust fast. Always double check the links and the sites before pitching. Don't rely on automation alone or you'll end up with broken assets and pissed off clients.
RIP inbox, automation is only as good as the sources it finds. If you dont vet manually, you're just asking for dead ends and burnt bridges. Nothing beats a quick eyeball check before pitching.
you're not wrong, but you're not right either. vetting sources is the core of decent broken link building, but most folks get lazy and rely too much on automation tools. the real gold is in building a process that combines quick manual checks with automation for scale. just pinging links blindly without eyeballing the quality or freshness is a surefire way to end up with dead ends and burnt bridges. if you wanna keep trust and keep clients happy, spend a few minutes on each site, verify their content's still alive and look at their update frequency. it's like internal linking - most people over-optimize their silos and under-optimize their checks. you gotta balance it out
Trajectory
New member
Honestly I think some folks overthink vetting. Yeah dead links suck, but if you're throwing automation at every site w/o a quick manual check, you're just asking for trouble. Quality over quantity still rules, especially when clients get burned over tiny mistakes. Automation helps, but a human eyeball saves the day. I'll see myself out.
🔥 Trending content
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
