How does a cyber squatter beat a legitimate site?

widget.com for sale ranks higher than a site optimized for 'widget'

[stuntdubl]

I am wondering how a site from a cyber squatter selling the name "widgetfest.com" can beat a site that is all about widgetfest with links to several on-topic pages about the same topic. It also has links FROM hundreds of pages about "widgetfest"

This seems very strange to me that the domain name alone would pull this much weight. The site that is coming in second has h1 tags, title etc. done properly.

If someone would like the exact example feel free to sticky me.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

[plasma]

My guess is that they have almost no content.
That would make the keyword density high.

Could you sticky me? :)

[rfgdxm1]

I asked him to stick me to. What surprises me is that he writes the #2 site "also has links FROM hundreds of pages about "widgetfest". I would think this would be enough to beat keyword in domain name + high KWD. I wouldn't expect such unless the #1 site also managed to get some very high PR inbound links. High PR + high KWD might do it.

[HitProf]

I'm also interested stuntdubl. Please sticky search term and the url's of the sites you're talking about. (Rankings are not enough, they may fluctuate). I'report back :)

[stuntdubl]

Okay,

I sticky'd everyone the keyphrase. I guess there aren't hundreds of links pointing to the page that comes up, but their are about 40 and all on topic.

There are some blatant spamming techniques in the squatters page, but I guess I am more interested in what is giving them such a large boost.

[rfgdxm1]

I already stickied you about this stuntdubl. This is a case of if you want to beat someone who as the all-important keyword in domain name, you have to work hard. Your "widgetfest" page has a scant 4 instances of "widgetfest" in the on page text. You are barely even trying to get #1 if it only appears 4 times on the page. Particularly when that widgetfest page is a lowly PR4.

[stuntdubl]

Upon another glance I confess to my sheer laziness. It's not a very lucrative phrase, so I guess I was asking more out of curiosity than concern. It seems strange to me that such a thing would not be considered spam.

Thanks for your thoughts. I will definitely be taking back that spot before next year anyhow, if only out of pride:)

[rfgdxm1]

>It seems strange to me that such a thing would not be considered spam.

If you mean the repetition, so long as it is visible to the reader, and not blatantly done in such a way just for the SE bots, it isn't spam. And of course, you would want it in a form that was palatable to human readers to keep them from surfing away.

[HitProf]

I've looked at it and will sticky you some suggestions tomorrow.

I agree that the 'spam'-site has everything it takes and yours need some SEO power in the form of content and navigation.