The skyscraper backlink technique is one of the few link building methods with a name most SEOs recognise. Find a page that has earned plenty of links, build something better, and tell the people who linked to the original. It is simple, it is logical, and it was copied so widely that the version most people run today barely resembles what made it work. The method survives. The lazy version of it does not.
What the skyscraper backlink technique actually is
Brian Dean set it out at Backlinko in his guide to the skyscraper technique, most recently updated in June 2024. It has three steps, in his words: “Find link-worthy content”, “Make something even better” and “Reach out to the right people.”
The results he reported are the reason the method spread. Dean says his site’s organic traffic “doubled in just 14 days.” He sent 160 outreach emails and got 17 links, which he describes as “an 11% success rate.” Those are one practitioner’s reported numbers from one campaign, not a benchmark, but they set expectations for a generation of link builders.
| Step | Dean’s version | What has to change now |
|---|---|---|
| Find link-worthy content | A page with many referring links | Check why it earned them, not just how many |
| Make something even better | Beat it on length, design and current information | Add something the original cannot: data, a tool, first-hand testing |
| Reach out to the right people | Email the sites linking to the original | Fewer, more specific pitches; assume the inbox is crowded |
Why “longer” stopped working
Dean’s own instruction was to “beat the existing content on every level: length, design, current information.” The received wisdom that grew out of it kept only the first word. Length was the easiest of the three to copy, so a decade of skyscraper content became a race to publish the longest page on every topic.
The trouble is that a longer page does not give anyone a reason to change a link. The editor who linked to the original did so because it answered something. A version with more words that answers the same thing gives them work to do and nothing in return. The pitch has also been received so often that many editors recognise it from the subject line.
What still differentiates is something the original page does not have. Original data that nobody else can cite. A calculator or template that saves the reader time. Testing you did yourself, with the results shown. Current information still matters too, and is the most underrated part of Dean’s line: a popular page that has gone stale is the easiest one to beat honestly.
Step one: find content worth beating
Start with pages in your topic that have earned links from many different sites, then ask why each earned them. A page cited for one statistic needs a better statistic, not a better introduction. A page cited as a general guide needs to be a better guide. Read a sample of the linking pages to see what they actually used it for.
Gaps help here. A content gap analysis shows the topics competitors cover and you do not, and the overlap between those gaps and heavily linked pages is where a skyscraper campaign is most likely to pay off. Look for pages that are dated, thin on evidence or missing a practical element, because those are the weaknesses you can fix without simply writing more.
Be honest about the size of the job before you commit. If the strongest page in the topic rests on a dataset you cannot match, pick a different target. A campaign built on a page you can only equal, not beat, will cost weeks and earn an inbox of polite silence. The best targets are popular, visibly ageing and within your reach.
Step two: make it better in a way that matters
Ask one question of your draft: if you were the editor who linked to the original, would this make your page better? If the honest answer is “slightly”, the campaign will struggle. You want a clear, nameable improvement you can state in one sentence of an email.
- Newer evidence. Replace old figures with current ones, sourced and dated.
- Original data. A survey, a dataset or a test you ran. This is the single strongest reason to link.
- Better utility. A tool, template or checklist the reader can use directly.
- Better design. Clearer structure and visuals that make a dense topic easy to scan.
Length can follow from those improvements. It should not be the improvement. A shorter page with one table nobody else has can outperform a long page that rewords the competition.
Step three: outreach to an inbox that has seen it before
The outreach step is where most modern campaigns fail. The template version, “I noticed you linked to X; I wrote something even better”, is now so familiar that it signals a mass campaign. Your email has to show you read the recipient’s page and to say exactly what your page adds for their readers.
That means smaller lists and more time per contact. Segment prospects by how closely their page matches yours, write the specific reason for each one, and follow up once. Our guide to link building outreach covers the mechanics: finding the right contact, writing subject lines and personalising at scale without sounding automated.
The skyscraper approach also combines well with broken link building. If the original page has gone offline or moved, the sites linking to it have a dead link, and your email is offering a fix rather than a comparison. That is a far easier request to say yes to.
Does it still work?
Yes, when the improvement is real. The structure of the method is just sound reasoning: go where links already are, offer something worth linking to, and tell the right person. What stopped working was the shortcut version, where “better” meant longer and outreach meant a mail merge to every linking domain.
The limitation is that you cannot know in advance how a campaign will land. Dean’s 11% was reported for one campaign, on one topic, at a time when the pitch was new. Your rate depends on the topic, the quality of your page and how many people have pitched the same editors before you. Treat his figures as a story about what was possible, not a target, and measure your own replies from the first batch of emails before sending the rest.
If the first batch returns nothing, change the page before changing the email. Silence usually means the improvement was not clear enough to justify the editor’s time.
Frequently asked questions
What is the skyscraper technique?
A link building method from Backlinko’s Brian Dean: find link-worthy content, make something even better, and reach out to the people linking to the original.
What success rate did Brian Dean report?
He reported 17 links from 160 outreach emails, which he called an 11% success rate. That was one campaign, not a benchmark.
Is making content longer enough?
No. Length alone gives an editor no reason to swap a link. Original data, better utility or clearly more current information does.
Does the skyscraper technique still work?
Yes, when the new page is genuinely more useful and the outreach is specific. The mass-template version works far less well than it once did.
The takeaway Keep the three steps, drop the idea that longer means better. Build something the original cannot offer, and pitch fewer people with a specific reason.
