So Google Now Considering 1 yr Registered Domain as Spam?

[AltamashSid]

When I was registering domains for a year and hosting on blogger which of course by Google used to have good DA-PA of over 15+ now after recent moz DA PA updates DA gone down to 9 and PA nowhere but at 1, and it seems like every domain's DA PA rank are considering on number of years it's registered for!

So here is my website <snip> used to have 20-19 DA PA respectively is now have 9-1 DA PA respectively, which have every post with over 1500+ words high quality content and good alexa ranking.

So, am I guessing right? DA PA ranking getting consider based on number of years it's registered for, as a major factor?

[edited by: aakk9999 at 7:12 am (utc) on Jul 9, 2015]
[edit reason] No URLs nor domain names for New User please [/edit]

[rish3]

The title of your thread implies you think that Google has decided that a specific domain is spam. Then, the body of your post keeps talking about DA and PA, which are controlled by moz.com, not google.

It seems like your concern is something you should ask moz.com, and not something that's google specific. As such, this "Google SEO" forum isn't a great place to post your question.

[AltamashSid]

"DA and PA, which are controlled by moz.com, not google."
Everybody knows it, that's not the point. My point is to ask that Moz DA PA update is very much based on Google point of view. How Google see particular content, domain, page, site or blog are very close and related to how moz react. So, if moz giving such DA PA ranking to the sites/blog which used to have double or triple ranking earlier that means Google also very much, close enough see that blog/sites as moz see! which implies that 1 year registered domains are on the downside and considering as blacklist?

And that's why I think this question is related to this "Google SEO" forum and that's why I am asking if Google blacklists the 1 year registered domains and and consider it as spam, as may be Google think that 1 year registered domain more likely will be used for spam?

[supercyberbob]

That's what she said.

[toidi]

I only register my domains for 1 year at a time and none of them are blacklisted. I refuse to be locked in to any registrar for any length of time.

[rish3]

Everybody knows it, that's not the point.

So, roughly, your point is that moz.com is really doing a terrific job of tying DA/PA to exactly the sort of things Google values, at the right weights, etc? Therefore, if your PA/DA goes down, Google must be viewing your site unfavorably?

I'm sure Rand F would love to hear that, but it's just not true. Chasing ghosts based on some third party "Google Lovemeter" isn't going to help you.

[martinibuster]

Rish3 is correct. The Moz metrics have nothing to do with what is actually calculated at Google. The Moz metrics are based on what Moz feels are ranking factors, things that sites that rank tend to get right and qualities that sites that tend to get banned get wrong.

But those factors are superficial factors. There are many deep factors that are not well known by Moz and many marketers that are not being factored. There is also confusion about what constitutes as a ranking factor. For example, CTR is considered by Mozzers as a ranking factor, but the truth of that depends on what constitutes a ranking factor. I don't consider it a ranking factor because CTR is used by information retrieval algorithms AFTER ranking has been calculated. There are different things going on behind the scenes and I feel it's important to properly understand what they are and where their PROPER place in the algorithm is. Otherwise you will have less than a precise understanding of the algorithm.

A flaw in ranking metrics
An important consideration is that Moz is looking at ranking factors. But there are thousands and thousands of high quality sites that do not rank well and according to Moz's metrics they have low metric scores. But those are high quality sites. They just aren't trying to rank for anything. This applies to Google's own PageRank Toolbar. It doesn't tell you if a site is high quality.

Ultimately you are trusting Moz's opinion. But it's important to understand that Moz's metrics are opinions. They do not represent the thousands of processes that go into ranking a site by Google, Bing or any other site.

[Robert Charlton]

So, am I guessing right? DA PA ranking getting consider based on number of years it's registered for, as a major factor?

No. The number of years for which a domain is registered was one of those hypothetical factors floated in Google's historical data patent, as I remember, that Google probably patented because it was there and no one else had claimed it... but, since then, a number of Google spokespeople, Matt Cutts for sure, has explicitly said that length of registration is not currently a ranking factor. Google doesn't use everything it's patented. Superficially, length of registration does suggest a degree of commitment to a domain. It certainly wouldn't make good sense to register a slash and burn domain for ten years. On the other hand, registration term by itself it would be flawed as a ranking metric, and I think Google knows that. Eg, it might well make sense to register a blue chip domain only for one year, say because you're checking out the registrar.

Now obviously Moz might perhaps correlate length of registration with its DA and PS numbers anyway, and superficially the correlation might hold... I really don't know. But correlation is not necessarily causation. A causal relationship between rankings and domain age, IMO, would more likely be due to ongoing efforts put into building a good site (old domains likely have had more work done on them than two month wonders), and less about what kind of deal you've made made with your registrar. As noted, Moz, in coming up with DA and PS, isn't privy to the actual Google algo factors.

Other factors cited, like number of your Alexa ranking, make me wonder how much some of these factors you cite really matter. This Alexa ranking fetish is something we dismissed in the US quite a few years ago.

I think gut level assessment of whether a site is informative, engaging, and useful would be a lot more accurate than any of these numbers, which are iffy at best... but such an assessment is harder to squeeze into a number and assign it a label, and would require some independent judgement which many "SEOs" lack the experience to make. And as martinibuster points out, one number generally doesn't hold for all situations.

[aristotle]

I can also remember discussions about a related possibility, specifically that Google's algorithm would wait a year before showing full confidence in a new domain that was only initially registered for one year. According to what some people claimed, if the domain survived past the first year and was re-newed for at least one more year, then its rankings would begin to improve from that point on. In other words, the algorithm would wait a year to see whether or not the domain would be re-newed.

This is another old SEO adage that is similar, but not exactly the same, to the one that the OP mentioned. Actually it does make sense, and as far as I know, has never been either confirmed or disproved.

[martinibuster]

Just a reminder that many spam classifiers are not used by themselves. It's a matter of fact that false positives happen when there aren't enough classifiers used to identify spam sites. Accuracy increases when various kinds of classifiers are used together. Thus, there are:

* domain level features
* query-independent features,
* query-dependent features,
* page level features,
* user-behavior features.

The amount and kinds of features used to identify spam are more than that. That list is just a sample of the many kinds of spam identification features (classifiers) that are combined to find spam.

What this means is that you cannot take one feature in isolation (length of domain registration) and use that feature in isolation to label a website as spam. False positives would occur.