Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199 , register , free tools , login , search , pro membership , help , library , announcements , recent posts , open posts Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Submitting a small site to google 12 months to success article suggests 100 page min. before submitting to G nickc001
In Bretts infamous 12 months to successful site with Google alone Brett states that the site should have 100 page content minimum before launch.
Given that it can take about a year to get out of the sandbox is it now more sensible to launch the site with less articles and then build the article count up whilst still in the sandbox?
I realise that building links will be easier if you have more content but most directories will still exchange links if the site has SOME content.
I am starting a site that will be more heavily used in Spring and Summer so am wanting to launch it now so it is out of the sandbox this time next year.
What do people think about launching a site with fewer articles and then consistently and steadily building up the article count?
Is there any other verdicts on a recommended minimum?
Since some sites do very well with considerably fewer than 100 pages total, why would you HAVE to have that many to launch? Just make sure that there is good representative content and no dead-end "under construction" areas.
At a minimum, I would put up the entire framework and have at least one article in every area.
Just launch what you have as long as the site holds together on its own.
And "infamous"? Sure you mean to use that term? Not "famous"? Or how about "ignominious"? Or "odious"? Anyway, just struck me as an odd choice of words.