Scale
- Capped by our capacity, not your budget
- Dedicated publisher relationships
- Digital PR campaigns included
- White-label reporting
- Direct line to the person doing the work
Editorial link building for teams that check the placement before they pay for it.
We are not the cheapest option and we are deliberately not the fastest. What we offer instead is a process you can inspect at every step, publishers you can visit and read before we approach them, and placements that survive editorial clean-ups because they were meant to be there.
Coverage grew out of the work rather than a plan. These are the areas where we have publishers we trust and editors who take our calls.
The team is small on purpose. Every publisher relationship is held by a person rather than a database, and there is a hard limit on how many of those relationships one person can maintain honestly. That limit is what caps our capacity.
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.
We started as an in-house team doing this for one portfolio of sites, which is a useful way to learn the trade because you cannot hand the consequences to somebody else at the end of the quarter. When the process worked well enough that people started asking to borrow it, it became a service.
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.
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.
If a placement did not happen, the report says which one and why. Campaigns that only ever report successes are hiding the interesting part.
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.
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.
By default yes, and the report states the attribute for every placement. A natural profile contains a mix, so we do not treat a nofollow from a strong publisher as a failure.
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.
You always do. Nothing is pitched to a site you have not seen and signed off. If you want to be involved in the drafting as well, that is fine too.
We do, to the publisher's brief. If you would rather supply drafts, we will edit them to the publisher's standard before submission.
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.
We keep a separate project going where the working notes and the longer write-ups live. It is less polished and rather more detailed:
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.