The importance of backlinks from Directories

[guang]

What I found from the old WebmasterWorld forum postings is that those backlinks are just like other normal backlinks, no more no less. But my test seems to contradict this theory. Using one keyword search, some sites that are on top SERP actually have 404 or page not found error. The only reason that they are there is because of the directory backlinks (link:sitename only shows the directory backlink). First I thought maybe Google still has the old cache of the site. But I abserved it for several months, those sites are still there. I was trying to click "cache" button to verify my suspicion, but the strange thing is there is no "cache" for those sites!

My conclusion is Google really trusts the Directory backline and description for a site, despite the fact the the Googlebot returns no content.

[JasonHamilton]

I've seen a site that closed down for over four months retain it's rank and position in google. Even when the site was closed, and no longer had any content on it's pages (all content was replaced with a messageboard that discussed only the iraqi war).

Yet that site ranked #1 on three key terms on a specific subject it USED to contain over *4* months previous.

I'm guessing the issue is a lot bigger than just directories.

[guang]

Do you see the google "cache" in your case? does the cache still show the relevant contents? When you say "closed down", do you mean the site is inaccessible or the site is still up but with totally different content? I don't know how Googlebot works, it may keep the old content if it can't access the site. But in my case, it does see the new content (the "not found" error page), but it decides to ignore it.

BTW, one of the top list site on my test SERP has the "the site is temperarily down, will be back soon" for the last 3 years :)