The skyscraper technique was popularised by Brian Dean at Backlinko around 2013.
The idea is simple: find content that already has a lot of backlinks, make something better, then reach out to the people linking to the original and suggest yours instead.
It became so popular that everybody started doing it. Which means the bar for "better" has risen significantly.
This guide covers how to find real skyscraper opportunities, what "better" actually means in practice, how to do the outreach, and when the whole approach makes sense — and when it doesn't.
Skyscraper link building has three core steps:
Sounds simple. The execution is where most people stumble.
You need to find content that:
Search for your target keyword. Look at the top-ranking pages. Check their backlink count in Ahrefs or Moz. If the top 3 results each have 100+ backlinks and the content has obvious weaknesses, you have a skyscraper opportunity.
This is where the skyscraper technique gets misunderstood.
"Better" does not mean longer.
Publishing a 6,000-word article when the original is 3,000 words does not automatically make yours better. A well-structured 2,500-word guide that actually answers the question is better than a bloated 6,000-word piece that circles the same points repeatedly.
Here's what actually makes content better:
If the original was written in 2019 and includes data from 2018, and your version covers current research and recent developments, yours is objectively better.
Check every statistic in the original. When was it published? When was it last updated? Are the tools and resources it references still relevant?
Vague advice is the most common weakness in high-ranking content.
If the original says "build relationships with journalists," your version should explain exactly how — media lists, the right way to pitch, follow-up timing, which tools to use.
Specificity wins. Readers can act on specific advice. They can't act on "build relationships."
Poor heading structure, walls of text, no table of contents, no summary — these are fixable.
Good structure means:
Original is text-only? Add a diagram, flowchart, comparison table, or original screenshot.
Visuals are often the fastest way to make a piece legitimately better. They also give other sites something specific to link to ("we're linking to this because of the helpful diagram on X").
You don't have to cover more topics. You can go deeper on the topics that matter most.
If the original covers "how to set up Google Search Console" in 200 words with no screenshots, and you cover it in 800 words with step-by-step screenshots, your section is simply better — even if your overall word count is similar.
Once your content is live and strong, it's time to reach out to everyone linking to the original.
In Ahrefs Site Explorer:
Not every backlink from the original is worth targeting:
The skyscraper outreach email needs to be honest without being arrogant.
You're not saying "your current link is terrible." You're saying "I built something on this topic and thought you might find it useful."
Here's a template:
Subject: [topic] resource for your article on [their page topic]
Hi [first name],
I noticed you linked to [original content URL] in your article at [their page URL].
I recently published a comprehensive guide on the same topic: [your URL]
It covers [one or two genuinely different things your version has that the original doesn't — be specific].
Thought it might be worth a look, given you're already covering this area.
[Your name]
Do not say "my guide is better than the one you linked to." That's arrogant and it backfires. Let the content speak for itself.
Do not ask them to "replace" the link. Just share your resource. If they like it, they'll link.
Skyscraper link building is effective. It's also a lot of work.
Be honest with yourself about conversion rates.
Most practitioners report:
So if you reach out to 200 sites, you might get 4–16 links.
That's not bad for organic editorial links. But the upfront investment — finding the opportunity, creating superior content, finding email addresses, personalising emails — is significant.
The math works best when:
It works because:
It doesn't work when:
This is the biggest honest caveat about skyscraper link building.
Some pages have links because they're excellent content. Others have links because they're on a domain with enormous authority and credibility — HubSpot, Moz, Neil Patel's site, and so on.
If the page you're trying to beat is on one of those domains, content quality is not the only factor. You might build objectively better content and still not get many people to swap out the link. People link to brands they trust.
That does not mean skyscraper is useless in these cases. But it does mean you should temper your expectations and focus on the realistic portion of the backlink profile — smaller blogs, niche publications, and resource pages where brand trust matters less.
Not actually improving the content. Adding word count without adding value is not a skyscraper strategy. It's just padding.
Targeting the wrong originals. If the original has 30 backlinks from low-quality sites, the ceiling on what you can earn is low. Find originals with lots of backlinks from genuinely strong domains.
Skipping the content and going straight to outreach. Some people try to run skyscraper outreach on content that isn't ready. If the journalist or blogger clicks through and your piece isn't clearly excellent, the email makes you look bad.
Generic outreach. "I made a better version of that guide you linked to" sent to 500 people unedited gets ignored. Name their specific page. Be specific about what's different about yours.
Not following up. A single follow-up 5–7 days later recovers a significant number of no-responses.
Both tactics involve reaching out to site owners with an alternative resource.
The key difference:
Both are valuable. Both require real content quality. Skyscraper tends to require more upfront investment in content creation.
For most sites, the right answer is both — running them in parallel as part of a broader link building strategy.