| 9:11 pm on Feb 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
It's hard to say unless the 40% that is "under construction" looks like it is under construction. I would launch the site as long as it looks (to the visitor and a spider) like your site is complete. If your site looks like it is incomplete to -- let's say Gbot -- well then you risk having your site thrown into the supplemental index. If the site looks incomplete to a human visitor... and let's say the visitor is someone working for Y, G or MSN -- well then your are violating their TOS.
I presently build small websites (between 12-30 pages) so I can get them launched quickly. I then add pages to the websites over time.
| 9:13 pm on Feb 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Oops! I didn't answer the whole question. Definitely have your on-page optimization in place before you launch.
| 9:18 pm on Feb 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
>> I am 60% done with my site and expect to be 100% done within 1 to 5 weeks. Should I submit to Google now to being "aging" my site, but before I fine-tune the search engine keyword optimization?
If that 40% does not consist of pages whose content is "coming soon - information about product X and product Z", then I would say yes, go ahead and start submitting (provided you are adding content every day.
If you have a lot of pages that are simply place-holders, do not submit it, as they will look very spammy (assuming you are running ads, etc., now).
| 9:27 pm on Feb 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
We submit once our home page is built.
| 9:43 pm on Feb 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I always start out with placing a few good links to the main page of a new site, even if it's months until launch.
At times, I have even placed links to sites that don't exist yet, which has (historically i must add, since I really don't know if this still works) provided the site with instant PageRank even before it is even in place.
Let's face it. In most areas, you won't get very many visitors to a brand new site, and as long as you (in a non-spiderable image) declare that this site is far from finished, people don't really mind ending up on a new site. Google doesn't mind at all, as long as the site doesn't only consist of duplicate content page holders.
Build with real content in place. Keep adding it, but have a clear picture about what your are doing. Always 301 redirect away from pages that you abandon during the construction. Be careful that your URLs and site structure is consistant during the build-up phase, and Google might just love your site right from the very beginning.
| 9:45 pm on Feb 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I haven't submitted a url to any search engine for years. I think the best approach is to allow Google a "natural" crawl, based on the inbound links that they discover.
| 10:37 pm on Feb 20, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the advice. I'll be digesting it. :-)
The site is already pretty "tight" link structure wise. I just have to go back and re-edit the text for SEO after testing it with the keyword testers out on the net.
Meanwhile I posted my URL to one obscure search engine and figure google will pick it up from there at some point.
Later when it's fully ready I'll be adding the URL to my (un-banned*, hehe) blogs and forum signatures and Google.
*I have non-spam "real" blog, but once the blogpot robot decided my blog was a splog, I stopped getting organic google results from that blog. So sad as I still get 2000 uniques a day coming to it from non-google sources...would have been double or triple that if not for the blogspot robot's error in judgement....
| 11:42 am on Feb 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
> expect to be 100% done within 1 to 5 weeks.
I hope I die, before I get old...
Normally websites undergo constant improvement and adding of pages. This should be reflected by the link-structure at ALL stages and right from the beginning. No placeholders. Never.
There are some minimal legal pecularities to obey (for instance commercial websites need an impressum page here in Germany), but in general a small website should be designed in such a way, that it may be submitted as soon as the homepage is ready, as trinorthlighting said.
If you have another site with 2000 daily uniques form google, I'd suspect you know that. Is it a third party-project with a clearly defined volume? Your customer might be thankful for the idea the site should be growing in the future.
| 11:47 am on Feb 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
> The site is already pretty "tight" link structure wise. I just have to go back and re-edit the text for SEO after testing it with the keyword testers out on the net.
Sry, I overread that. The title tags and the link-anchor tags are essential. I doubt kw-meta tags are even worth the effort of a three weeks re-editing at the moment.
| 2:27 pm on Feb 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
>>I haven't submitted a url to any search engine for years. I think the best approach is to allow Google a "natural" crawl, based on the inbound links that they discover.
My thoughts exactly. And certainly don't submit before you think it's ready for prime time. Google will pick it up fast enough.
| 3:40 pm on Feb 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|My thoughts exactly. And certainly don't submit before you think it's ready for prime time. Google will pick it up fast enough. |
Too true. Theoretically I try to password protect sites I'm working on till they're at least somewhat ready for prime time - otherwise, Google comes by and spiders it before I've got the final navigation worked out, or unique page titles and descriptions set, or some other weirdness, and then I have to deal with getting the bad wrong pages out of the index and the good right ones in. But I keep forgetting, and I keep making more work for myself.