Link Insertions Into Pages That Already Rank

The rule we apply: An insertion is worth buying when the host page already ranks inside the top twenty for a query people actually search, and when the paragraph around your link can be rewritten so the link belongs there. Both conditions, not one. Around four fifths of the insertion inventory offered to us fails the first alone — the pages rank for nothing, and a link on a page nobody reaches is a line on an invoice. What we change on the host page: We write 150 to 300 words around the insertion point rather than dropping in a sentence. The rewrite adds what the page was missing — a figure, a date, a rule that changed since publication — so the edit has a reason to exist independent of your link. We ask the publisher to update the visible modified date and, where they have access, to resubmit the URL in Search Console. An insertion into a page Google last recrawled fourteen months ago is an insertion nobody sees. What disqualifies a page: Outbound commercial links already past a handful, because the page is inventory and the next buyer dilutes you. Roundups built to be sold into: top-ten casino lists on general-interest sites with no gambling coverage before or after. Pages ranking because of a sitewide template rather than anything the page did. Author archives Google has dropped. And any vendor who will not name the URL before payment, which is most of that market and the reason we do not buy from it. Where an insertion beats a placement: Age and accumulation. On a page that has ranked three years and gathered its own links, an insertion inherits standing a new post spends months building. That is the whole case for the tactic, and it collapses the moment the host page has neither age nor standing — which is why we will often recommend a placement instead when the only pages available were published last quarter. We would rather lose the sale than sell the weaker tactic. Regulated-vertical handling: Safer-gambling signposting applies to the page, not the paragraph. Inserting a gambling link into a page carrying no 18+ signposting creates a problem for the publisher, so we add it or we do not place. For UK consumer-facing crypto, an insertion is a financial promotion exactly as a new article is; the approval question does not disappear because the page already existed. Publishers rarely know this, which is why the route decision sits with us and is recorded before the edit goes live. Reporting: Each row shows the host page, its ranking position and query at time of insertion, the paragraph as published, and the anchor. We check survival at 90 days and again at six months. Insertions are more fragile than placements because the pages keep being edited, and where a link is removed inside that window we replace the row or refund it. Not included: Removals or renegotiation with vendors you already use — that sits in the programme service. Placements on domains we have not screened. Any commitment on rankings, since the host page's future is the publisher's decision and not ours. Not for: Anyone comparing suppliers on cost per link, where we will lose. Anyone who needs the insertion live this week, since editors who accept same-week edits are selling rather than editing. Operators already holding the top three positions for their head terms, who need conversion work and not links, and who should spend this budget elsewhere.