|Are Directory Submissions Important?|
There are many web directories which are worth for nothing [excluding dmoz, zeal, and few others]. They rarely give any visitors.
As google PR is no more a striking criteria for SE ranking, is it worth wasting the time in building unwanted links?
PR is still a factor for ranking pages, and probably will be until there is a major technological shift in search. What's become less important is caring about the PR that is shown in the Google toolbar. So I say go ahead and get those links, why not?
I've found directories to be one of the best and easiest places for one way links. To me that makes it worth it.
they seem to help more in Yahoo! and MSN than in Google.
some sites rank well using almost exclusively directory links, though its best if you mix and match your link types.
I always have this waves flowing in my mind "is it worth spending time in link building". So if I can get 30000+ links will my site get huge visitors. How much then will be the share of direct visitors in the total unique visitors.
I just made a small analysis with the alexa top 100 websites. I excluded sites like google, yahoo, weather.
To make a good growth we have to have either
a) A good site that people will readily link too
b) Links that will realy covert in to visitors
So submission to directory or link exchanges or one way links that rarely converts are not worth the time.
[edited by: martinibuster at 2:14 pm (utc) on May 13, 2005]
[edit reason] No website specifics, please. Thanks. [/edit]
|So submission to directory or link exchanges or one way links that rarely converts are not worth the time |
Do some searching on WebmasterWorld and you will be surprised to see how many complain about Yahoo directory not giving any referrals. Besides many sites you have taken examples of, aren't getting bulk of their traffic from the links, but various other means and mostly regular visitors.
True. But getting links here is only a by-product.
|A good site that people will readily link too |
I suspect if anyone does directory submission for the direct traffic they send your way, but for the collateral benefits. What you should ask is - "which directories I should submit my sites to", not "should I submit my sites to directories?"
[edited by: martinibuster at 2:28 pm (utc) on May 13, 2005]
[edit reason] edited. [/edit]
Building quality links isn't wasting time, don't look at it as a feeder for bringing in customers directly. They are bricks and fabric to assist in the overall building.
McMohan and peewhy I think atlast it burns down to visitors.
If link building is not going to give visitors nor improve SE ranking what is the point in doing it.
Am I wrong in saying "link building has less to do with total visitors".
I do accept submission to directory like dmoz and zeal are importent. But to build links to 10000+ links, 20000+ links etc... does it have any meaning?
Its all part of the mix.
If quality inbound links are part of the search engines' algorithms then it will increase your ranking in those search engines.
By getting higher rankings, you get find easier and quicker ...and then comes the visitors.
Use links as building blocks not direct marketing tools.
|Am I wrong in saying "link building has less to do with total visitors". |
No. Though the concept of linking was started for getting direct visitors to sites, direct traffic has now almost taken a second fiddle.
|nor improve SE ranking what is the point in doing it. |
How did you arrive at that conlusion?
|But to build links to 10000+ links, 20000+ links etc... does it have any meaning? |
This question doesn't have anything to do with directory links. Links from directories or from other places, as long as they are relevant and of good quality, they are useful.
|Submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo! |
Note here, relevancy is the key and Google has only chosen to name ODP and Yahoo since their authority is beyond debate.
That doesn't discredit the other directories, even if they are a PR0.
I don't research directories, I just submit to them. Why waste the time find the highest PR that doesn't have to have a recip link, and that has PR on the page you'll be submitting to, and making sure that page is cached in google...blah blah blah.
By the time you figure out which 1 directory is best to submit to, I'll have submitted to 10 directories.
[edited by: martinibuster at 10:45 pm (utc) on May 20, 2005]
[edit reason] Please, no directory list websites. Thanks. [/edit]
Part of what we do is ongoing directory submission. Seems I can always find another hundred to submit to.
I do it because I'm trying to weave our sites into the fabric of the web, unless that sound goofy (it's the way I try and think of it). Above comments are correct about traffic though - we don't get any real traffic from them.
|That doesn't discredit the other directories, even if they are a PR0 |
Which is what I was saying :), though I wouldn't concur with the PR0 part.
|Don't participate in link schemes designed to increase your site's ranking or PageRank. In particular, avoid links to web spammers or "bad neighborhoods" on the web as your own ranking may be affected adversely by those links. |
Even when passing over similar 'talk' from Google I still thought that being linked to from 'bad' sites (and by bad I mean sites that contain a large number of low quality sites) will not really lower the rank of your site in SERPs. I even thought Google was justin saying that stuff to make people afraid from this kind of practice and that in reality links can only do you good, and in the worst cases will not harm you, but will just have a neutral effect.
Even after reading many discussions also talking about bad sites linkig to you and how this might affect your rank in SERPs negatively, I still had my solid conviction that they have no effect on you.
It was not untill recently when I submitted a site of mine to Zeal, and it was rejected there. Soon after that, I found Google remove it completely from its index! This hapenned right after my site was rejected at Zeal (rejected sites appear next to each other at Zeal, so it seems Google find my site with many other not-high-quality sites, and therefore concluded that my site was bad too).
Anyway, I later submitted another site of mine, but a better one to Zeal. That site did have top ranking for a specific keyword. The directory I submitted it to at Zeal was closed, and therefore this site of mine was rejected too. And guess what, Google dropped the rank of my site and I did not find it in its place at the top of the SERPs at Google, my heart sank down.
However, because this site of mine has been there for a while, and it has other good to it, it seemed to manage to climb pack to its postion again at Google. It is worth noting that the Zeal rejection effect was only for Google, Yahoo! did not pay any attention to that, in both of the 2 sites of mine that were rejected at Zeal (the first being rejected because of not meeting the standards, and the second because that particular directory I submitted it to was closed).
Now I started believing that yes, Google does take this serously, and whe exactly links to you will not only give you higher rank in SERPs, but can actually act as a negative thing decreasing your SERPs ranking if that "bad neighborhoods," in the words of Google, was to link to you.
> Zeal rejection effect
No such thing. You experience was 100% coincidence.