paynt - 2:55 pm on Nov 17, 2001 (gmt 0)

Ah netcommr,

Thanks for bring new life into the portal/hub discussion. You have made some terrific points here and I appreciate your willingness to share. I have a few answers for you and comments. I hope others will join in.

>…Liane's thread…>

She’s going to be ticked at me for bringing up her name. The comment was from the discussion we’re having on
Yahoo teams up with overture [webmasterworld.com]. The only reason I used her comment to jumpstart this discussion again was because she was so against them and probably because I am so for them. Plus she expressed her opposition so fluidly. I’ll hope she comes back in again to this discussion because I think a lot of healthy growth can come from disagreements. I want to publicly state that I think Liane is absolutely terrific and is a valuable member of this community. I expect many to disagree with my theories and ideas. It’s definitely not a surprise.

I don’t develop all of my projects around portals although I do include many of the principals as often as possible. Portals have many things about them that search engines find attractive and we often discuss those pieces, particularly in terms of Google. For me the portal is a creative way of bringing these pieces together and enjoying the benefits.

Topic specific/niche sites with directories and smaller portals are where I start looking for links even before I submit to search engines. As most of the big SE's have gone to links relationship to rank sites, these seem to be the biggest source of getting some link pop quickly with low or no cost.

I absolutely agree. We’ve had some terrific discussion about this. Here are just a few for those, for you looking at the idea of portals for the first time or like me, revisiting the topic with a fresh eye.

Methods to research specialized search and vortals links [webmasterworld.com]
Inbound links - pointers please [webmasterworld.com]

I have a file of titles/descriptions I use and will use many different combinations depending on the categories available, the type of site it is, and to spread different combos around. The different combinations gives me the ability to see what works good together, either to pre-qualify my visitors better or just get more hits.

I think that’s a terrific tip.

I also agree with you tips and points of view from the surfer perspective. Clutter isn’t better. I like a clean and simple look, with pertinent and viable information provided upfront. I also like to develop specific pages for each new topic or product. Make each page count and when possible stand-alone. Someone else said that recently and I really agree. A hub isn’t about putting a mess of stuff on each page.

I do like each page to pay for itself in terms of all it’s taken to create the page and submit it to directories and search engines plus the ongoing linking campaigns. And, as you’ve mentioned, the maintenance because if you are going to have a portal you have to maintain it. In terms of how the page is perceived by the visitor though, much consideration should go into this.

Your >>>…portal owner's view…>>> points are well taken.

On Brett’s theme-pyramid page, what can be said except he’s brilliant and it’s so incredible that he shares that brilliance with the world. I never tire of reading about this stuff.

Don't run dynamic, publish your directory to static pages always. If your software can't do that, get new software.

I absolutely agree. When you see the affects of a well spidered portal that’s been set up with static pages, indexed in the search engines, particularly Google and the traffic that comes in from that, it’s amazing. Tie that in with the results you see in your referrer logs and like you’ve mentioned, the keywords and keyword combinations you begin to see and can build upon is unbelievable.

On the ODP data I’m only going to point out the obvious. It’s free and to jumpstart a directory, for some with low-end pockets but high-end dreams, the ODP data may be the best place to start. I’ve given pointers regarding my experience with it and I’ll make just a few more points before we move on.

First, if you use ODP data, make it your own and this takes work. No mirrors. I use it as a jumpstart. It gives me a whole lot of links to work from to develop a page or even a category. I pick which sites I want to list and I modify titles and descriptions. Many an email I’ve received thanking me for listing a site and for the title and description I’ve used with a request that could I change it to that in the ODP. Unfortunately if it’s not a category I already edit then, no.

I have moved away from using the ODP search box and really only use the info for the data already generated as filler for my own information. These listings are also great leads for further requests for their participation. I give them a free listing as a beginning, I write and let them know that and request an exchange, and then I suggest they can become involved further with an article or paid sponsorship links or maybe they have an affiliate opportunity of some sort I can develop. I figure if they are already in ODP then they’ve made some strides to be seen or found and are more likely to be interested in further development.

As to links on a page, 40 are my maximum. I have a little top-40 thing I play off of on a portal I worked on and it’s a fun idea and worked well. I personally liked Brett’s idea once where he developed a page around a link. Man, that’s a powerful exchange. I agree that 15-20 is better. Lately I find 10 good ones, along with all my internal navigation is more than enough. As often as I can lead to that one page per link on topic and for a specific keyword, the better.

Thanks again for your ideas and input. Very helpful.