Paying for sitemaps - Google, Yahoo, MSN, General?

[hulahoop]

Hi,

I have been approached to have my sitemaps done (current none). This company offers 1 stemap for $125 and all four sitemaps for $375. Basically it is for Google, MSN, Yahoo and a General Sitemap file.

I don't know much about sitemaps execpt that google requires a txt file (but that means I have to update it all the time plus what about all the dynamic pages). Alternatively a python file (what in the world is that! A reptile I assume. Ha ha, i know it's some prog language.)

My question is if it is worth doing all the other sitemap except for Google. I know google advises that all sites have one.

The other question is...i don;t update my site reqularly so having a sitemap may let google see my inactivity. Would it be wiser if I don't have one?

Please advice.

[tedster]

Are you concerned that your site isn't easly spidered? Otherwise, Google already sees your level of site changes.

[Simsi]

There is some good free sitemapping software out there that does (at least) Google-ready sitemaps for you. Google in fact has a page of recommended tools at [code.google.com...]

[Kristos]

Providing that you have inbound links, (check your server logs) Google already indexes everything.
Our Policy is the less interaction with Google, the better.
no red flags, no causes for deeper probing to find our paid links, etc.

anytime you can keep your head from popping up under google's radar the better.

I would advise against google sitemaps, paid or free.

We used it one site and lost all rankings (it was #1 for scores of terms), it now has the +30 penalty and in 18 months has not come back.

stay away from google-sitemaps unless you have good counsel and good reason.

[sailorjwd]

If you have nothing to hide, download one of the free ones. I downloaded one written in ASP that works great. Never have to touch it since it generates the map when the sitemap.asp is loaded every time.

I learn interesting stuff from the google sitemaps tool.

[Marcia]

I'm sure others will disagree with me, but my personal opinion is that unless a site has enough PR (and PR distribution) to have the entire, or most of the site in the primary rather than most in the Supplemental, I'd rather not have the entire site linked to in a generated site map. I'd rather be selective and use a hierarchy of PR distribution that's by choice.

Keeping that(personal preference)in mind, can anyone tell me why a .py or .xml sitemap that's generated is any better than a selectively crafted .html sitemap, if the site's getting crawled and indexed to begin with anyway?

[Kristos]

it's not, you are right. an html "on-site" site-map id better

[WW_Watcher]

"If it ain't broke, Don't Fix it"

Are you considering a sitemap, because someone is trying to sell you one? Or do you have some sort of issue with the search engines not being able to find and index your pages?

Back To Watching
WW_Watcher

[Marcia]

A sitemap is not SEO.
Properly channeling the flow of PR through a site (or trying to) is.