People also ask
In practice
The allocation follows the target pages, because each page’s situation names its placement type: a commercial page needing precision on an existing roundup takes insertions (fast, pointed); a topic worth an argument takes guest posts (slower, durable); a market entry takes international placements (localised pages first, in-language publishers); an AI-answer ambition takes mentions on the pages engines cite.
The weighting inputs: the gap (where competitors hold placements you don’t — the shortfall sets the priority), the readiness (a market with no localised pages takes no international budget; a page mid-migration takes none at all), and the pacing (steady monthly volume beats bursts, which is why allocation is monthly, not project-shaped). The honest assumptions built in: response and negotiation variance (insertions land faster; guest posts cost more editorial effort), publisher fees inside the placement price, and a replacement reserve — links drop, and the budget that ignores churn re-buys the same authority twice.
The AI-era line item: brand mentions earn their allocation on the measurement side — if the prompt monitoring shows the citation layer drawing on pages you’re absent from, that cell gets budget next quarter. The review closes it: quarterly, the allocation is re-read against movement (pages ranked, presence gained, sources decayed), with the discipline to shift budget by evidence rather than by habit — and the flat per-placement cost structure makes that re-read arithmetic rather than archaeology.
See also: Placement types compared, Programme pacing.
Checklist: Link Building Strategy.
