Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
eg new-york.theaccomblablabsite.com
Each subdomain, to have links to the other subdaomins, as part of its sitemap.
Subdomains may or may not be on the same c class.
Its reasonable for users, but will it flag excessive interlinking? CLients is also considering NOT subdomaining and just buying the domains(CLient with deep pockets)
Who thinks it will be penalised... who think just dicsounted?
Google treats subdomains in all respects the same as full domains.
Your proposed network only needs one rival to report it. It'll get at least 50 complaints, for sure. :)
will 10,000 sub domains do it, hmm, will observe with interest
By rights it should be kicked straight out of the index however, i have seen a site that has absolutely no original content just data from 6 of its own sites making up its content that ranks in google for every area.widget known to man. Its entire site is made up of subdomains for every area of the UK.
The site belongs to a uk publisher so i can only conclude that its own network of links are enough for google to treat it as not spam!, despite it being the most spammy site ever seen!
So in my opinion whilst i would strongly argue against this kind of arrangement (lets face it, its to game google) the fact is that unfortunately it can work providing you can create enough links to it.
Frankly i can see any advantage to doing this from a users perspective
Rich
the fact is that unfortunately it can work
For a while.
It's too 2005 to last for long, if you have any competitors at all.
Your proposed network only needs one rival to report it.
Not always. I report my rival all the time for creating over 1000 directories and each directory links to 4 other directories and so on, and so on...and I still see him showing up for searches...
But I suspect something as blatant as this suggestion - which (in my guestimation) will probably get many, many complaints, will not last so long.
BTW, I suspect Google doesn't bother to ban cr*p directories; it simply discounts them. I know of people who have (quite innocently) got submitted to hundreds of directories with zero benefit; simply a waste of time, effort and marketing cr*p to webmasters who have yet to learn ...
The structure of the site relationships through sub domains, if legitimate could be good - but 10,000 sounds a bit unecessary and unweildy from a legitimacy point of view.
BTW, I suspect Google doesn't bother to ban cr*p directories; it simply discounts them.
Sometimes I wonder if they do. If I search for "keyword directory" without the quotes (10 results per page) I see 2 directories of an interlinking directory network on the first page, 1 on the second page, 1 on the third page, 1 on the sixth page, probably more after that but...
At least one of these sites has been around for a few years but I only started watching them last year. They might have some original content but I see alot of it is duplicated from other directories as well as duplicated within their own network.
Do you want 1,000 subdomains or one subdomain for every place (worldwide?) with more than 10,00 people?
[edited by: MLHmptn at 8:57 am (utc) on Feb. 9, 2007]
Its entirely not an issue of being dobbed in by a competitor. ON the day of lauanch, I would email google myself to tell them what was being done.
Its being done to ensure each site keeps a local flavor, and the client can not afford to buy 10,000 domains.
But it makes sense to link them, not for internet marketing, but instead for users who may wish to traverse a global sitemap of accommodation sites in the network.
I am trying to figure out whether google will automatically penalise for too much interlinking. I am not the least concerned by a human google review, i believe it would pass it.
Is your client dedicating an enomous amount of cash towards this project anyway, I am just curious because 10,000 sub domains , is , well awe inspiring
The only thing that would concern me is:
Each subdomain, to have links to the other subdaomins, as part of its sitemap
I'd shy away from that, don't really see how it's helpful for the sites or the users and, to me, just seems like much too heavy interlinking. If I were to try to carry this off I think I'd go with a traditional pyramid navigation...
Main site home page > Region/State > Locality (subdomain)
...with links from the third- (or whatever-) level pages back up to the other levels.
I think I would only interlink subdomains if they were closely related, something along the lines of "See hotels in nearby Widget City". These links would be very relevant, would support each page, and would actually be helpful to the user.
And, to echo some of the caveats above, this has been done many times before. That doesn't mean it can't be done again, it's just going to be a much bigger challenge the umpteenth time around.
I'm not sure thats the wisest move to be honest :P I can't see this site NOT getting flagged by Google either through algos or a competitor.
It will do well in MSN at least:)
I am however going to go with having the sitemap lisitng the subdomains, on just the main domain, with links to the sitemap from each of the subdomains.
This, does seem safer, and removes the argument that it is being done for internet maarketing purposes(sitemap in every subdomain)
I think it will be fine.
WIll advise the world in 6 months
