Competitor Link Gap Analysis With an Acquisition Order

A standard gap export returns three to four thousand domains. Ours returns between forty and ninety, and each carries a named reason and a route. Finding what a competitor has takes a tool a minute. The work is deciding which of it you could get, which of it you could not get at any price, and which of it you should not want. How the set is built: We intersect at domain level across three to six competitors you name, then remove everything that cannot be acted on: dead domains, pages excluded from the index, domains with no measurable traffic in your market's language, wire syndication copies of one press release, directories, the competitor's own satellite properties, and links from their parent company, their platform provider or their licensor. In igaming that last group alone is often a fifth of the export. The three buckets: Structural. Shirt sponsorships, regulator and licensee directories, exchange listings, affiliate contracts, an investor's portfolio page. These are not link building problems and no amount of outreach produces them. Naming them is half the value of the exercise, because it stops a team spending a year chasing something that arrived with a five-year contract. Editorial. A journalist made a decision. These are pitchable, and we write what the pitch would have to be: the story, the data you would need to carry it, and whether you have that data. Paid. Inventory with a rate card. We name it as paid so that when you see a competitor's domain count you know which part of it is a budget line rather than a reputation. What you get: A working sheet with the classification and per-domain notes, and — the part that matters — a written call on the ten we would pitch first, in order, with the reason and the likely cost in time. Also the list of competitor links we would not pursue, with reasons, usually because the title will run anybody or because the link points at a page type you do not have and should not build. What this analysis cannot tell you: Why a competitor outranks you. Links are one input and in Spanish-language gambling and finance queries they are often not the deciding one. If the gap turns up nothing that explains a position difference, we write that sentence and hand it back. You will have paid for a clear no rather than a plan built on the wrong cause, which is the cheaper of the two. How the competitor set is chosen: You name them. We add up to two more where the results page says your real competitor is not who you think — in Spanish gambling queries that is frequently an affiliate rather than another operator, which changes what the analysis is for and what you can do about it. Not for: Teams who want the export. If a list of referring domains is the deliverable, a tool subscription does that for a fraction of this and we would rather you spent the money there. Also not for anyone tracking progress as the number of domains a competitor has that they do not: that figure rises when a competitor buys badly and falls when a competitor is audited, and it has moved in the wrong direction for the right reason more than once. Delivery and what follows: Two to three weeks, ending in a call where we walk through the ten. Around half of clients then run the acquisition themselves off the back of it, which is a fine outcome. We do not price this as a route into a retainer and we do not hold back the reasoning to make one necessary.