Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.196.244.186

Forum Moderators: buckworks & webwork

Message Too Old, No Replies

Did Google Algo Change Reduce the Value of Keyword Domains?

     
12:50 pm on Jun 6, 2010 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:July 16, 2002
posts:2133
votes: 1


It appears to me that the potency of keyword domains is diminished in the "new" Google algo. If so, I would think this will have a negative impact on some domain portfolios. What do you think?
2:51 pm on June 6, 2010 (gmt 0)

Moderator This Forum

WebmasterWorld Administrator webwork is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:June 2, 2003
posts:7805
votes: 21


Since I've always viewed search engine love as ephemera I rarely attach value to ranking factors in pricing models. One exception: freely given quality inbound links.

There's a somewhat infamous SEO article with a title (like) "Shut The Frack Up!", which argues that it is stupid and self-defeating to crow about one's strategy for gaming the search engines, since ranking factors can easily/rapidly change or be changed. Such change could include a re-weighting of a value assigned to "exact match domain". With all the crowing in domain marketplaces about someone's "exact match domain" nothing would surprise me less than a downward re-weighting of "that factor".

So, is the "value of exact match domains" diminished by a recent algo change? That would depend, in part, on exactly what the (added) value was, wouldn't it?

Can someone please tell me what percentage of a domains fair market value was attributed, by domain value experts, to the domain's exact-matchedness?

I say "$0.00". In the case of a rock solid generic descriptive dot com with steady type-in traffic I say there's been no loss of value.

For all the other crap domains that have recently been hawked/marketed based on the domain's "exact match" attributes I'd say "possibly some value has been lost", but only if there were aftermarket buyers for such "gilded crap" in the first place. I'm talking loss of value in the case of lipstick on a pig-of-a-domains and the loss to people who made it their dream of domaining riches to register . . and resell . . crapola . . exact match domains.
6:14 pm on June 6, 2010 (gmt 0)

Junior Member from US 

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 4, 2004
posts:178
votes: 1


I can only speak for my web sites which are technical and business information sites. It comes back to what I was told/taught in an old usenet 'webmaster' group (or was it an old 'listserve' - Getting old and memory is fading) when I put my first website online in January 1996: Content is King.

SEO basics haven't really changed in years. Heck, I haven't used any key words in any of my domain names since 2001.
7:27 pm on June 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

New User

5+ Year Member

joined:Mar 12, 2010
posts: 2
votes: 0


Does this topic refer to the practice of establishing a keyword so that when one enters only the keyword in the address bar it goes to a particular site? (E.g. my site is keyword.com and someone just types keyword in the address bar it goes to my site?)

My company was contacted today by a business in China because someone was supposedly trying to register one of our trademarks as a keyword in China.

Is this practice of keyword domains legitimate and/or good practice?
11:37 pm on June 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member jane_doe is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:July 7, 2002
posts:2892
votes: 0


My company was contacted today by a business in China because someone was supposedly trying to register one of our trademarks as a keyword in China.


That particular email is a scam. Google the registrar's name and some of the wording from the email.
5:30 am on June 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 5, 2003
posts:61
votes: 3


That particular email is a scam.
Agreed, I got the same approach months ago.
6:47 am on June 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Jan 9, 2010
posts:118
votes: 0


My company was contacted today by a business in China because someone was supposedly trying to register one of our trademarks as a keyword in China


It may sound a bit off topic. But sometimes i get emails about any of my site's domain like " Dear abc.com owner, One of our clients has approached us to register abc as their brand and if you own this brand then please send us your details."
Almost every time email is from Singapore.
6:38 pm on June 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 12, 2003
posts: 52
votes: 0


Regardless of the weighted value dropping with respect to the algo, its still a large advantage with respect to CTRs for the same reason dynamic keyword insertion exists. The searchers' behavioral response to seeing an exact match domain name will likely not change for a long time, even if the algo's treatment of it changes. On a serp with no recognizable brand as an option, and all things other things being equal, I put my money on the exact match domain. It will always be bolded in the ad, when none of the others are on that given query.

In PPC, the exact match display domain routinely shows higher CTRs and contributes largely, I feel to, 10/10 QSs, given that it constitutes 25% of the ad.

My own experience with exact match keyword domains remains positive in the recent 2 months.
12:40 pm on June 15, 2010 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:July 16, 2002
posts:2133
votes: 1


Good points fenway. Thank you for your insight.
1:00 pm on June 15, 2010 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 15, 2001
posts:1436
votes: 0


Agreed, I got the same approach months ago.


I had it just last week!
8:08 pm on June 15, 2010 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:June 3, 2007
posts:6024
votes: 0


keyword domains is diminished in the "new" Google algo.


Not in my niche, I'm seeing some awful, spammy, MFA, exact keyword match domains appear from absolutely nowhere...I'm not at all impressed with this "improvement".