| This 55 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 55 ( 1  ) || |
|Register Domain for 10 years for higher rankings?|
| 8:31 pm on Nov 19, 2006 (gmt 0)|
<My domain registrar> is prompting me to register for 10 years, claiming that it will help my search engine ranking. Is there any evidence for this, or is it just dodgy marketing?
[edited by: tedster at 8:55 pm (utc) on Nov. 19, 2006]
| 1:24 am on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|<My domain registrar> is prompting me to register for 10 years, claiming that it will help my search engine ranking. Is there any evidence for this, or is it just dodgy marketing? |
This of course is complete bollox and just a sales pitch from the register company.
| 1:45 am on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Google.com - Expires on..............: 2011-Sep-14.
Make of that what you will.
| 2:22 am on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I have a few hundred domains, and I know others who have many, many more than I. |
You can maintain hundreds of high quality sites?
|I have lots of domains for various reasons - I am active in many different sectors, and I have registered many product-name-type domains to gather type-in traffic, which is substantial in many cases. |
I see, you just want type people to find you by mistake...
|I've simply done the math, and realized domains with type-in traffic are a cheap way to grab more traffic. |
Yeah, cheap traffic... right.
|There is a very legit reason why some people use private registration. |
Sure. For example, if I was embarrassed about a site I owned I would definately use private registration.
|Just build an awesome site that everyone wants to go to, and other webmasters feel compelled to link to! |
Okay, you lost me on that one. But I think you've made some very good points and readers should pay close attention to exactly what you're saying.
| 3:05 am on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"Google.com - Expires on..............: 2011-Sep-14. "
They've got cash to burn. ; )
| 4:14 am on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
There are so many sensible reasons for some people to prefer private domain registration that I expect it would be seen as a neutral factor unless the site was doing something that raised spam flags for other reasons.
Private registration on its own = neutral
Private registration in conjunction with spammy tactics = negative
| 4:56 am on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I think for this to have any creedence someone would have to be able to demonstrate some actual correlation between a sites quality and the length of their current domain expiration.
I would suspect if one were to undertake such a study as Google might have done, you would find very little correlation between the two.
| 8:12 am on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
may be they look if you're site is connected to big-time spamming or somewhere along the lines and that's it.
but when it comes down to it....
all seo=common sense.
people over-think and over-analyze all or most of seo.
why do you think we get mixed reactions about certain subjects. cause it's mostly theory. some are just better theories than others but most individuals can't make it work for them is all.
go ahead, registrar for ten years. not gonna hurt, but won't help out any IMHO.
| 2:05 pm on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
HELPNOW - "I have a few hundred domains, and I know others who have many, many more than I.
BILLYS - You can maintain hundreds of high quality sites?"
No, they're just redirected to my main site. The object is to grab the type-in traffic, that's all.
HELPNOW - "I have lots of domains for various reasons - I am active in many different sectors, and I have registered many product-name-type domains to gather type-in traffic, which is substantial in many cases.
BILLYS - I see, you just want type people to find you by mistake..."
No, no, I know what you are thinking, that's not it... There are people who perhaps don't know any better, who will type in, say bigredshinybox.com, instead of going to google and searching for "big red shiny box". So, I grab the domain for it, and then direct to my page where I am honestly really selling big red shiny boxes. Totally legit, totally makes sense, no sleight of hand, totally respectable, just an anomaly that occurs every day.
HELPNOW - "I've simply done the math, and realized domains with type-in traffic are a cheap way to grab more traffic.
BILLYS - Yeah, cheap traffic... right."
(Not sure why I'm trying to persuade you of this... ; ) ) $6 for the domain for a year. Traffic I wouldn't get otherwise. If I advertise for something along the lines of the domain name, it will cost me 0.05 a click. For $6, I just need 120 clicks in a year (!) off that domain, which is like 1 click every 3 days (!) to make it pay for itself, never mind my conversion ratio, etc. etc. Yeah, it is cheap.
HELPNOW - "There is a very legit reason why some people use private registration.
BILLYS - Sure. For example, if I was embarrassed about a site I owned I would definately use private registration. "
Ha-ha. ; ) No, I just don't people showing up at my door. I work at home. Who knows what someone somewhere might have in his head, why take a chance? I've got a wife, kids, not worth the risk. You just never know... And thus, if that's my reasoning, and it really is, then it is a bad criterion for google to consider.
HELPNOW - "Just build an awesome site that everyone wants to go to, and other webmasters feel compelled to link to!
BILLYS - Okay, you lost me on that one."
I mean, if you have a great site that solves a problem or provides a desired service or product, first, your vistors will like what you've built, and will bookmark you, etc., and, other sites will link to you, and those incoming links to your site ARE something that is valued by google. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy - you will get more traffic, and that will in turn lead to more bookmarks and links and that will get you even more traffic... Just build a good site, and the rest will come.
There are no shortcuts. Content, content, content.
Incoming links IS a criterion that DOES make sense. ; )
BILLYS - "But I think you've made some very good points and readers should pay close attention to exactly what you're saying."
Thank you for your kind words. I feel a bit indebted to this forum because I had some problems earlier this year, and what I learn at this forum showed me how to navigate my way out of it, so, it's a bit of pay it forward, if I can help someone at this forum like I've been helped at this forum, I will feel good about everything... Karma.
| 3:09 pm on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
So this thread comes down to proof and what people believe. Casual readers should not be tricked by poor logic such as "you can't prove it, so it cannot be true." You can choose to believe the opinions of people or you can believe Google's patent information:
United States Patent Application 20050071741
1. A method for scoring a document, comprising: identifying a document; obtaining one or more types of history data associated with the document; and generating a score for the document based on the one or more types of history data.
38. The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more types of history data includes domain-related information corresponding to domains associated with documents; and wherein the generating a score includes: analyzing domain-related information corresponding to a domain associated with the document over time, and scoring the document based, at least in part, on a result of the analyzing.
40. The method of claim 38, wherein the domain-related information is related to at least one of an expiration date of the domain, a domain name server record associated with the domain, and a name server associated with the domain.
I believe some people are arguing exactly what Google hopes for. It's too expensive to register domains for a long term if they are throw away sites. Most legitimate companies are here to stay and have no problem spending $100 or more to lock in their domain names for 10 years.
| 3:41 pm on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Not a fair criterion, and I believe google will agree.
"...throw away sites. Most legitimate companies are here to stay and have no problem spending $100 or more to lock in their domain names for 10 years."
1. None of my sites are throw away sites, and I still have a problem with renewing for 10 years when the internet as we know it has only been been around for about 10 years -> There is no way of knowing what will transpire with the net over the next 10 years to know if my 10 year renewal is a waste of money, not becuase my domains are throw aways, but, because the cost may come down in 10 years, or, maybe I will start my own domain registration company and do it myself, or well, who knows?
I cannot think of any expense in stable arenas that I have prepaid for 10 years, not even real estate leases. Not even my car will last 10 years. Never mind this very chaotic and ever-changing arena called the internet. 10 years is a very long time...
2. Again, a patent does not mean thus that it will be actively enacted as part of the algo. A patent simply means it is a possible idea that they want to own.
3. Because lots of people WILL think along the same lines as I do, and because many people in their simple innocence won't even think twice about renewing for just 1 year or even be aware of this debate, that makes domain time to expiry a very bad criterion to look at because it it will beget false positives in the quest to weed out "bad" domains.
Sorry, I am summarizing my comments above since it looks like we are trying to wind this thread down. ; )
| 11:58 pm on Nov 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|So this thread comes down to proof and what people believe. Casual readers should not be tricked by poor logic such as "you can't prove it, so it cannot be true." You can choose to believe the opinions of people or you can believe Google's patent information: |
What a bunch of crap. Ok here is "the proof" why google cannot possibly use the time a domain is registered as weight or authority of sites. Domain registration varies throughout the world and in most countries like the uk the maximum time a domain can be registered is two years so any length of time algo would fall flat on its arse.
[edited by: Pirates at 11:59 pm (utc) on Nov. 23, 2006]
| 12:19 am on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Pirates..magicians have long misdirected us to watch their right hands and listen to their patter ..and even more so the patent registrations that they make behind their curtains or within their smoke and mirrors ..
nice to see not everyone falls for the snake like lines drawn in the sand ..
and can say it straight
cheers "Jim lad" ..raises glass :))
| 12:46 am on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for kind comments Leosghost and by the way I thought you was #*$!ing excellent in Lord of the Rings.
| 2:47 am on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"Domain registration varies throughout the world and in most countries like the uk the maximum time a domain can be registered is two years so any length of time algo would fall flat on its arse."
How does that comment matter? Common sense should tell you if one type of domain can only and always be registered for the same time period, the statement in the patent is not talking about that.
Anyway, its a no brainer to see that ten years is a bigger commitment to something than one year, so take any benefits from that you can.
| 3:00 am on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>its a no brainer to see that ten years is a bigger commitment to something than one year
Not at all. There are many reasons why businesses and individuals alike may not choose to register for a 10 year period, some of which have been stated above. To infer a level of commitment from longevity of domain registration is akin to assuming that all Used Car Salesmen are, well, you get the idea.
Besides, from your assertion, are we to take it then that Google is only half committed to their enterprise?
| 3:46 am on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
You people are arguing pointlessly.
It is obvious that it's not a win or lose situation... you have pros and cons for your site and Google decides your score based on these things.
If two websites both have the same number of incoming links and similar content and similar clean urls, etc, etc, and one of them is registered for ten years and the other isn't, it is common sense that they will probably be treated the same.
But if both these sites have some OVER optimization implemented which could result in a penalization, it is completely feasible for Google to offset a minor error in SEO in this regard by nullifying it with the domain expiration...
Google is trying to be as HUMAN as possible. What makes you think their algo won't be able to tell the difference between .co.uk urls and .com urls?
If a person were to see two websites and try to judge which one is spammier given the same level of mistakes and content, obviously the domain expiration date will affect your "perspective" on the site.
Exactly HOW this perspective affects your rank is not debateable because that is an unknown without testing.
However, given the patent information it is clear that Google notices this... and if Google clearly states they notice it, then it is clearly relevant in some way.
Stop arguing because you don't think it makes sense. It makes sense because Google's algo isn't an algo... with enough "if" statements a simple script begins to "think".
Would you have the audacity to tell a human being that a website registered for 10 years is less legitimate than a website registered for 1 given the exact nature of everything else? Probably not.
Would you have the audacity to tell a human being that a website registered for 1 year is less legitimate than one for 10 years? Probably.
It's a no brainer. It is stupid... but it's a no brainer
(stupid because the Google algo is not human... therefore it can't be relied upon to adequately judge what content is BS and what content is good (as is described by their poor search results). What is relevent is that although it is innadequate, you can be sure Google will do everything you can logically think of to mimick a real person, and the domain expiry is something that a real person would check)
| 9:06 am on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"There are many reasons why businesses and individuals alike may not choose to register for a 10 year period, some of which have been stated above."
Obviously that is irrelevant. We aren't talking about why someone might prefer to register for a year. The fact remains that spending (about) ten times the money is a bigger commitment, period. It's just silly to pretend otherwise. It may not be any more important to Google than a piece of lint on Jupiter, but its an absolute that paying a larger chunk of money for a longer term shows a greater commitment.
| 9:32 am on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>the fact remains that spending (about) ten times the money is a bigger commitment, period.
Perhaps, but not necessarily. However, be that as it may, the fact that someone has not immediately spent (about) ten times the money does not of itself infer a lack of commitment, merely that the money has not been spent.
Absense of Evidence is not Evidence of Absense.
| 11:22 am on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
That doesn't make sense. Spending more money would have been a way to show more commitment. You can't hide from it. Regardless of whether the commitment is in fact the same is irrelevant. Something demonstrable is demonstrable.
But of course to the real point, it is clear that crap domains don't get registered as long as the key domain of major businesses, and since Google makes all kinds of arbritrary (and often nutty) generalizations, this is just one that they can't go wrong on. Clearly it would be wrong to think a one year registration shows *more* commitment than a ten year one.
| 12:02 pm on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Ranking wise - what you say & do for yourself is far less important than what others say & do about you.
If your domain registration was in the hands of others I would say Google would use this as a metrix of quality... the fact that you control it "absolutely"... it would (if at all) rate this criteria as a measure of quality at the level of hidden text, hidden links, Meta keyword, comment tags, etc., etc.
1. Buy a domain and register it for 10 years and park it... it won't be in Google.
2. submit it to Google... it still won't be in Google.
3. acquire lots links to it... it still won't be in Google.
So lack of these - suggests what?
Perception of a potential value... "isn't value".
The rational "against" a 10 year commitment as a measure of quality is that with major spammers and disposible domains the "fee" of 10 years is peanuts to the return they would make over 6 months before banned...
Then they can spounge on the hype of "long commitment" and resell the domain based off "domain registered for 10 years... but I don't have the time now to promote it... bid price starts at $50".
Lastly, trademark would be a better guage... and they don't apply either.
| 12:43 pm on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
If you are basing your SEO on how long you register a domain for, I think you are in big trouble.
| 12:56 pm on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Everyone, get a life! There are so many other more important parts to SEO.
| 1:05 pm on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>>If you are basing your SEO on how long you register a domain for, I think you are in big trouble.
Great point. I think if you're still doing SEO, you're in big trouble.
I treat my website like it is a real business. It's an LLC and quite frankly the extra money to register the domain for ten years is money well spent.
I also write for users, not search engines. That means I don't write copy for a hundred sites. I'm also interested in protecting my information. So you'll also find my website in the Directory of Service Provider Agents at the US Copyright Office (which also costs money).
Personally, I'd rather focus my efforts on producing quality, not quantity. But everyone's got a different POV and that's what makes this world so interesting.
| 9:05 pm on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I have a few hundred domains, and I know others who have many, many more than I. |
How does this differ from having 100 businesses and wanting leases to all those business and secure those leases? Maybe in this case you would need to prioritize, unless you really do have hundreds of sites all making money via the Internet.
Either way, I think it helps, how much is your guess.
| 10:28 pm on Nov 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
With a couple of exceptions, I don't usually register domains for more than a year or two at a time because I've been registering domains since back when they were free, and there's not one single registrar (and I've pretty much dealt with them all) with whom I would want my domains or my clients domains tied up for any more than a year or two. I STILL have to clean up after Network Solutions from back when they were the only game in town, and none of the others are much better. And I sure wish I'd had the option to keep my registration information private back in 1994 when I took out my main domain - might not be getting the 1000+ pieces of spam email I receive every single day (not to mention the two restraining orders I had to take out) If Google penalizes for that stuff, so be it.
| This 55 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 55 ( 1  ) |