Link profile audit
A full read of what you have, what is doing work, what is dead weight and what is actively risky. You get the audit whether or not you go on to buy placements.
Editorial link building for teams that check the placement before they pay for it.
Most link building fails quietly. The links go live, the report looks full, and six months later half the pages have been pruned, redirected or quietly stripped of their outbound references. We built this service around the opposite habit: place less, check more, and keep a record of every decision so nobody has to take our word for it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yes. Reports can go out unbranded or under your own, and we are used to being the party that never speaks to the end client.
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.
By placement, on the publisher, agreed before we start. There is no bulk discount for volume because volume is not what we are selling.
Often, yes. It usually starts with an audit and an unhappy conversation, and the first phase is subtraction rather than addition.
Placement and indexation are different problems. A link can be live and correct for weeks before a crawler gets to that page, particularly on smaller publishers. We report the live URL on the day it publishes so you are never waiting on a tool to tell you the work happened.
We have been doing this long enough to have made most of the available mistakes at our own expense. The process on this page is largely a list of things we now refuse to repeat.
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.
Below is roughly where the current publisher base sits. It shifts every quarter as sites are added and, more often, quietly dropped.
A full read of what you have, what is doing work, what is dead weight and what is actively risky. You get the audit whether or not you go on to buy placements.
You can send us a list of sites you are considering elsewhere and we will tell you which ones we would touch. Several clients started with exactly this and nothing else.
Publishers in Polish, Ukrainian, German and Spanish, approached in their own language by people who speak it. Translated outreach reads as translated outreach and gets ignored.
Unlinked brand mentions, broken references to pages you moved, links lost in a site redesign. Recovering these is unglamorous and it is frequently the highest-return work available.
For anyone who wants the reasoning rather than the pitch, most of it has been written up over at:
Send the URL you want to rank and the keywords you keep losing on. We will come back with an honest read on whether links are your bottleneck, which they are not always.