|brotherhood of LAN|
| 7:14 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Not that I can confirm or deny but.... ;)
Have you checked their backward links? They might all be owned by the same people.....site rings, etc etc etc
"untitled document" ranks higher than me for a good phrase...but thats because they have a redirect :)
| 7:32 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Because the url is flush with keywords, it increases the chances that the anchor text of any incoming links to his "home" page will be also keyword rich. This may be the reason this page is trumping you.
| 7:33 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
good thought about the site rings - actualy not the case here, though.
The backward links check was telling - Of the top ten guys who had the keywords in their url, the range of backward links was from 34 to 78 and pr from 4 to 5. I am at #15 with pr6 and 662 backwards links - all from on theme sites.
this is making me bitter :(
| 7:45 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
> should I just join up and register smartbluewidgets.com?
| 7:46 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Maybe if you can't beat them, join them!
If keyword url's are helping in the SERP's, then it might be time to consider this as a component of your SEO strategy. (I know I have!)
| 7:52 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|should I just join up and register smartbluewidgets.com? |
Better would be smart-blue-widgets.com?
| 7:57 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Hey, but how would we look in our www.smart_blue_widgets.com tee shirts!?!?
This is going to be really hard to swallow....
| 7:58 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I do well without the hyphens or underbars. Google doesn't seem to have any trouble zeroing in on the phrase "keyword1 keyword2" in keyword1keyword2.com That said, I know some affiliates here doing well with the hypen ...I don't think Google really cares as long as the kws are there.
| 8:02 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>Google doesn't seem to have any trouble zeroing in on the phrase "keyword1 keyword2" in keyword1keyword2.com
That checks, in my example, there weren't any hyphens or underscores...
| 8:17 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>Is it time for Google to tone down the URL component of their Algo?
I just cannot duplicate any major change about this isolated factor from here. I monitor many hyphenated domains each month. I did not notice any unusual changes from this factor alone.
Like it has been sayed many times, just keep in mind hyphenated domains are probably promoted by some professionnal SEO guy also fighting on other fronts to improve rankings. Wich explains some people notice they get on top and all the noise beeing made around this.
From what I see from here, it is time to tone down on this rumor of any algo change regarding this perticular component.
| 8:49 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Macguru - I am not suggesting that the high ranking of keyword rich urls is necessarily new or a major algo change. I think that the algo may have always favored this and that more people are popping up keyword rich url sites. After all, you can register a domain for $12 and once you are in ODP you have a pr 5 - so its not too tough. What I am suggesting is that maybe its time for a little tweak of the algo to take us all away from this!
| 8:52 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|Google doesn't seem to have any trouble zeroing in on the phrase "keyword1 keyword2" in keyword1keyword2.com |
But perhaps because of the link text? The oft-quoted example of artsexpress.com comes to mind here - where does the engine make the break?
I agree with Macguru that I haven't seen much change with this. But if you are in an area which needs the extra edge, then the impetus from the sites that link by just using the URL may help.
Personally, I don't like the hyphens and think they cause more problems in other ways (phone calls, etc). But, for the original point, it may be this that is making the difference.
| 9:19 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>After all, you can register a domain for $12 and once you are in ODP you have a pr 5 - so its not too tough.
So a single link in ODP will get you a granted 5?
I am getting tired of this... ;)
Please take a deep breath and, like stever did, read this thread all over again. Especially the first 2 replies from brotherhood of LAN and pmac.
The keyword in URL has been a pimple on roaches butt for Google from start. It never had any important meaning.
| 9:35 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
OK, so maybe being in ODP doesn't guarantee you a pr 5, but let's not nitpick my point - the fact is that 7 of the top 10 (back to my example) on an important serp average less than 50 backward links each and they all have pr5 except for one pr4. They are beating pages that have higher pr and are (IMO) better optimized. From what I can tell, the only reason many of these are in the top 10 is because they have the keywords in their url.
I am sick of getting_serps_that_have_spammy_urls.
| 9:41 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The REAL question, is do those keyword-loaded-domains attract or repel visitors, once the rankings are attained. That is the only question I have. (Well, maybe just 7,484,986 others... but who's counting? :) )
What use is hey-look-im-number-one-for widgets.com if people look at it and laugh, but not click?
| 9:47 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>>>I am sick of getting_serps_that_have_spammy_urls.
Who says what spammy urls are? Are all those keywords relevent to the site? I bet they are. It seems to me that if they happen to be in front then they did both their homework and their job and deserve to be rightly rewarded for their work.
| 9:54 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>then they did both their homework and their job and deserve to be rightly rewarded for their work
How about the guy with "Home Page" for his page title?
| 9:56 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>From what I can tell, the only reason many of these are in the top 10 is because they have the keywords in their url.
The reason is not because they have keywords in their URL.
From brotherhood of LAN :
|Have you checked their backward links? |
What are the words used in eack anchor text area of links they are getting from other pages?
What is the PR of each of those pages?
How many links go out of each of those pages?
From pmac :
|Because the url is flush with keywords, it increases the chances that the anchor text of any incoming links to his "home" page will be also keyword rich. |
That is how Google works, the basics : if everybody links to you with "potato" you will score high with "potato" even if it is written only once on your "tomato" page, and even if page title is "Wecome to Adobe GoLive". If people use potato-company.com to link to you (most will) you score another potato point for each links.
If any is interested in digging deeper :
Those links do more than cover the basics. A must read.
[edited by: Macguru at 10:20 pm (utc) on Sep. 5, 2002]
| 10:02 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
i have a keyword1keyword2keyword3.com domain and rank well for all different searches with these keywords in most SE's.....the site is all to do with all the keywords and everyone links to my site using these keywords.......the searcher is getting what they look for and everybody is happy..including all the SE's.
Why does anyone find a problem with this?
| 10:21 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Macguru, I understand what you are saying. In this thread that you directed me to:
Easily brandable. You want "google.com" and not "mykeyword.com". Keyword domains are out - branding and name recognition are in - big time in. The value of keywords in a domain name have never been less to se's. Learn the lesson of "goto.com" becomes "Overture.com" and why they did it.
This thinking has been my marketing branding mantra - my url is not keyword1 etc. - i have worked to get over 650 links from authoritative sites in my market - i have lots of good content and i have worked hard to build a brand.
My achilles heel, though, is that lots of my inbound links aren't keyword rich. I can't control the text that most people use when they link to me. But a guy with a keyword1keyword2.com domain gets keyword rich link text on EVERY inbound link. I am not criticizing people who set up keyword1 urls, I am willing to do it myself if I have to. I just don't want to have to wear the t-shirt ;)
btw I am not talking about my profile domain
| 10:37 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I hope the day never comes when webmasters are in a position to tell google how to write their algorithms.
why do you think people laugh when they see keyword1-keyword2.com? I doubt many non seo's would laugh, the regular folk probably believe they are going to see what they are looking for and if an se's algorithm is so bad that a page with kw-kw comes up month after month, but does not have relevant content, then the se will probably die sooner than later.
| 10:41 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I dont see a problem with keyword1 domains and if you look at bretts sites webmasterworld.com..searchengineworld.com, you can have the best of both worlds (parden the pun) you have an easily brandable name with keywords also in there!
>added< look who hosts this site
| 10:52 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
From my own observations and tests I can confirm what wingslevel says: The keyword in the link text beats everything!
| 11:40 pm on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
To me it makes sense: Create a site name with keywords that are on theme:
Are the keywords used in my domain name, after 14 months of work, I am now ranking for very competative searches and doing very very well with secondary key word searches like:
Lately I have been branching out with new sites and have continued with this stratagy and my fingers are crossed. While I understand that "long_and_silly_keyword_stuffing" urls look goofy I see nothing wrong with using two or three keywords in a url.
| 12:17 am on Sep 6, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I don't think google should tone down their URL part of the algo.
Just think about it .. It makes perfect sense. If a website is about "widgets" (whatever the hell they are, actually can someone inform me?) then the company would go out of their way to get it in the URL, not for search engine friendlyness, but for user friendlyness, so they should be rewarded for that in some way I think.
Plus the anchor text is really a big bonus. I absolutly love my current domain, its got the 2 best keywords in the world (for my industry) and I think I should be rewarded for taking the time to research the name and get it right.
Also, a webmaster is likely to design a site whereby the pages reflect the contect (as on my site), where each filename identifies the product with good accuracy, but I've not done this to spam or get good search engine results. I did it because
a) it makes it easier for ME to find the pages instantly
b) it makes it easier for VISITORS to identify what the page will be before they even load it ...
Makes perfect sense to me.. I think google handle this aspect perfectly.
| 2:13 am on Sep 6, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I have to agree on this point that has probably been rehashed several times. In a keyphrase that I just recently established I have found that a site that is actually SELLING the domain name along with hundreds of othes ranks better than an un-optimized page that just has the keyword in the title. I am a bit tired of the 'link text' arguement to this debate because I think that point is moot to the debate. Google DOES give prevalence to URLS with keywords in the title. The question is weather or not the favoritism is intentional or unintentional. Either way I think keyword-rich-urls are here to stay. I just wish they'd crack down on people SELLING their domain names and obtaining high listings.
| 3:07 am on Sep 6, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Okay, if this dosn't cure you of the notion that Google give preference to urls with the keyword in the domain name myth, then nothing will. Here goes:
"Wedding web design" is quite likely the cheesiest category for keyword-in-the-domain-name url.
<snip>Click here to view these hideously spammy urls
Now, review this <snip> search on Google for the keywords "wedding web design" and you'll see that the first 5 listings aren't even wedding related, much less have the keywords in their domain name.
Number six and nine are maybe halfway spammy, then 7,8 and 10 don't have the word wedding in it.
Now the big question: Where are all those spammy url's that we looked at in dmoz? Nowhere. The keywords didn't help them.
Other factors, on the page and off the page are coming into play with a stronger force than the keyword in the domain. It's a mistake to insist that the keyworded domain has dominance.
Give it a rest. It's not the keyword in the domain name that counts, it's the keyword in the text of links linking into your site, it's the number of links, it's on the page factors, etc.
Quite possibly, your index page may inadevertantly be optimized for the word "home" because of all the inner pages in your web site with text links back to your home page with the word "home" in it.
[edited by: Brett_Tabke at 6:14 am (utc) on Sep. 8, 2002]
| 3:16 am on Sep 6, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Thats right they just rank high because evry link pointing to them is consistantly the keyword term anyways. URL has nothing or very little to do with rankings
| 3:18 am on Sep 6, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I can see how domain names can get out of hand, but not all keyword-rich URLs are "spammy." For example, if I write an article on doughnut shops in Venice, I'll call it something like doughnut-shops-in-venice.htm. Why? Not to do better in Google, but so I can:
1) Find the article more quickly when I want to revise it.
2) Provide the URL off the top of my head if I get an e-mail from somebody that asks, "Can you tell about doughnut shops in Venice"?
(Note to moderator: "doughnut shops in Venice" is not a real-life example; if there are any doughnut shops in Venice, as opposed to bakeries that happen to sell a few doughnuts, I have yet to find them.)
| This 74 message thread spans 3 pages: 74 (  2 3 ) > > |