|Which engines to submit to...|
...and which to wait to find you via links?
Ever since the Inktomi announcement of a downgrade for submissions without external links, I've been a little bit cautious, and have almost adopted an across the board "let them spider my ODP listing" strategy.
There's also been some conjecture on the board, not substantiated, that AltaVista might have a submissions penalty... and there's been conjecture too about the relationship between Fast and ODP listings. We all know that Google spiders ODP. It's not clear anymore whether Google will be spidering Yahoo.
Problem is, ODP listings in some categories without editors are taking a long time to appear.
I'm wondering which engines others feel you might just as well go ahead an submit to, and which to wait for other directory listings or external links to be spidered (or to submit those listings to be spidered).
This question really got me thinking Robert, thank you.
I don't have a scheduled submission program to any search engines at this time, I work on the basis that it is better to be "found" than to use the free submit option.
For the big two, Google and Fast, all that is required is a couple of links from sites already listed in those engines, they will come and grab almost everything you have.
The second stringers are more difficult;
AltaVista are penalising new submissions, pages are buried so deep [and I mean deep!] that I can see no other explanation. The only point of contention in my mind is whether it is the "new" or the "submission" factor that attracts the penalty. Being the cynical old fool that I am I can't help but see the similarities with Ink situation of last year, my feeling is that they are going to launch a pay for play scheme shortly and in the same way as Ink did, are prepared to damage their index in an attempt to leave webmasters with no other choice than to pay.
With Inktomi the situation is crystal clear, submissions are penalised in comparison with spidered and paid pages. Again in this case I'll wait to be spidered. The pay for play scheme is in my experience a sure fire way to kill a growing site, so far none of the sites that I have used this scheme for have received any spidering on pages not paid for. I will not be using the scheme in the future, it is too expensive, Ink are second rate traffic generators [at best!], some of the companies who provide the scheme are in direct competition with SEO's and as we have seen [webmasterworld.com] data is being passed to Ink from these sources. My real worry is that this outsourcing will progress into area's that should be no business, imho, of these "resellers", I am not prepared to give them my game plan on a plate. If I had a little more courage I would give Ink an entry in robots.txt, they are in my opinion getting to the stage where they are a waste of good bandwidth.
Excite, well you tell me! ;) Again I just let them find the sites, although I do give them an occasional prompt every now and then.
The third string, they need us more than we need them. If they want to build a good index they are going to have to come and look.
The main benefit I find with this approach is that it forces me to look at things from a different angle. It is almost like giving yourself a challenge "how can I get listed without submitting" and I think that medium to long term it is a more rewarding strategy.
Of course, your mileage may vary.
Pretty much my thoughts... a fairly bleak landscape. We're really talking about two functioning engines, and even though we think about Fast as one of the big two, that may be only because it's working. The fact is that, via Lycos at least, it's not driving that much traffic.
For Inktomi... in another thread Brett suggested submitting a site that's linked to you and then a month later submitting your own site. Ink does still supply MSN, etc....
AV does indeed bury you. I made the mistake of trying the ransom note submissions option, thinking that it was so limiting that they wouldn't be penalizing for using it. Big mistake... Now I'm not sure how long it takes them to follow a link. They're ranking an ODP page I submitted (a rescue attempt) as #1, and don't yet show that I'm linked to it.
I fear that ODP is going to be a real bottleneck... and they may not find an Express Submission type option that can work with a volunteer editor setup.
If Yahoo and Looksmart aren't allowing themselves to be spidered (at least, not for free), there may be no dependable way to get that big boost quickly.
As I count the engines, the third tier you mention is basically just Northern Light... and I'm thinking they're spidering ODP as well... What does one tell one's clients?
PS - Forgot Direct Hit.... There's always been paranoia about them, since they might think you're trying to be manipulative. It's like trying to join the Apathy Club... if you show the slightest in joining, you're automatically disqualified. Not sure if this is the case, but it's an interesting idea.
I know we have the thread on Alta, but couple comments. Pages sumbitted to them are buried real deep. Hard to even find them under their exact title even when they are the only page in alta with that title. Free submit penalty? Of course. Time to submit any inbound links? Yes. Time to submit the competitions pages? Yes...
Northern Light is doing a pretty good job of spidering, although the db seems maxed out with old pages right now. I can't get a new one to stick for anything.
This is a very interesting discussion, especially, in light of the fact that Web Position Gold and TopGun tell you to tweak your page and resubmit if you get a low placement.
For a while, the debate was whether or not to submit by hand or to risk using a program like Web Position Gold or TopGun. Now, the debate is whether to submit at all versus linking to a new site on a page that is already in the search engine database.
If you are advocating just using links (and not submitting a new site at all), then the search engine submision rules have certainly changed!
So, what do think? If my primary site is already listed in Google, should all of my new sites go on a page of links on my primary site OR should I submit my new sites for indexing?
Dmitch - welcome to WmW.
>So, what do think? If my primary site is already listed in Google, should all of my new sites go on a page of links on my primary site OR should I submit my new sites for indexing?
My view is to utilise the links.
Ensure you have inbound links too - especially from sites already well placed in the indexes.
At the moment, the only major engines I will submit a site to (after I have established the inbound links) are Alltheweb (FAST), Google and NL.
Time is a major issue involved here - if you want traffic, and you want it quickly, you have to consider one of the pay routes (whether that be Yahoo, Looksmart or, dare I say it, GoTo). Although, look carefully at GoTo's partners to see who's taking GoTo results.
If you're selling left handed, blue widgets for spaceships, I don't think GoTo is the best route.
If, on the other hand, you're into consumer-type products, then, I'd look more favourably upon GoTo.
If you're happy to wait (and most people are not because they are impatient), use the links.
I don't understand waiting to get found rather than submitting. So you submit and get buried. Is that any worse than not submitting and not being listed at all? If you submit and get buried, at least you should be on their list to get spidered. When when they find your page by another source you should get an immediate boost in ranking as you will have already been spidered. What is it that I don't get?
I quit submitting to spidering engines about a year ago. I have enough pages in (some apparently classed as authority hubs) that I found that I could add to the site(s), cross-link, and forget it. This is one place where long-established publishers or SEOs managing a large number of clients or domains have an advantage, imo.
I think Xoc has hit a moot point... what exactly is the loss in manual submission, if the spam penalty is removed as soon as the spider finds you via a link?
Surely better to be in there and badly ranked in this interim period, than not there at all, given that ranking will improve when a link to you is followed.
Or is there any evidence that the spam penalty (or part of it) remains in place after the linked visit? Any ideas or clues?
>Or is there any evidence that the spam penalty (or part of it) remains in place
That's the concern, that free submits will forever be marked as just that, free submits. I believe we had a thread where INK indicated that it would be their policy to subordinate the freebies.
For me it's a two fold thing, firstly there is never a penalty for being "found" independently. Secondly, if you get into the mindset of not submitting then your chances of being "found" are higher.
>mindset of not submitting
One thing's for certain, you'll always have an eye on how well you're cross-linked!