Links From General Directories - Are They Worth It?

[Planet13]

Hey everyone,

I've found some GENERAL directories that have a root domain PR5 to PR6, and I just wanted to know your philosophy and strategy for getting links from directories.

(The specific category page would have a much lower PR though.)

Would you even bother getting links from general directories like that?

How many and how quickly?

Would you be willing to do a reciprocal link if they require one?

If they require a fee to be listed, how would you determine whether the fee is appropriate?

Feel free to wax poetic on this topic if you would like to go outside the questions above.

Thanks in advance.

[greenleaves]

When it costs $10 to have someone in India submit your site manually to 200 of the top directories, why would you not do it?

I mean, if your site has any potential for monetization, this should be well within your budget.

Whether Google counts it now or latter isn't too much of a concern to me. It could be or become a measure google uses. For $10, I'm covered on that aspect.

[cnvi]

Directories arent dead. Thats like saying that content is dead. If the directory is USEFUL for the end user than it has value. Niche directories that specialize in solving the user's problem or helping the user find a very specific resource are alive and well. The common denominator here is a common one when it comes to link building: RELEVANCY and QUALITY is always king.

[Planet13]

When it costs $10 to have someone in India submit your site manually to 200 of the top directories, why would you not do it?

Well, there are people who report warning messages in their webmaster tools from google saying that google has seen unnatural link building.

There have also been people who have said that paying people in India and China to submit directories has HURT their sites' rankings.

So, those are the cons. Whether they are well founded fears or not, we need more input / corroboration before we can really make a judgment.

[dvduval]

There have also been people who have said that paying people in India and China to submit directories has HURT their sites' rankings.

I've seen a lot more people that were happy with their results. Usually, when I see penalized results, it is a case where there is something not quite right like an automated tool that add the same URL, title and description to 100+ sites, and this process is repeated over and over. There are bad examples, but lots of happy people too.

My advice would be to always review previous results or examples of work before hiring ANYONE to do link building for you.

In my case, I have a great source. The directories are paid, but they are also well edited, and I get good results. Generally when I request a link submission, the site is added to about 5 sites, not 100 or 1000. They are well maintained sites, the charge for their time, and I see results in a few months.

[pageoneresults]

When it costs $10 to have someone in India submit your site manually to 200 of the top directories, why would you not do it?

Because it isn't natural for many sites to do something like that. Tell me, what good is a link profile distorted by offshore directory links for a client who services U.S. based consumers? It serves no purpose and surely sends the wrong signals.

I've researched these so called top directories. Many of them are shells for other crap that takes place. In one instance, out of 50 directories that I performed a cursory review of, 25+ of them were owned by the same offshore network. They have a great little gig going on over there for you folks who like to throw away $10.00.

Whether Google counts it now or latter isn't too much of a concern to me. It could be or become a measure google uses. For $10, I'm covered on that aspect.

$10.00? Ten dollars? 10 U.S. dollars? Ya, those folks have one heck of a gig going. They might as well just put a donate button in place of the buy now button, that's basically what you're doing, donating $10.00.

Directories arent dead.

Yes they are. It's a 20th Century SEO tactic that has long outlived its usefulness.

If the directory is USEFUL for the end user than it has value.

Very few directories are useful for the end user. I can't remember the last time I used a directory to find something. In fact, last time I used one was the ODP and I was making sure a listing was in order. Outside of that, I don't use directories, do you? Do your parents use directories? Friends? I don't think so. Directories served a purpose in the 20th Century. We've moved on.

I've seen a lot more people that were happy with their results. Usually, when I see penalized results, it is a case where there is something not quite right like an automated tool that add the same URL, title and description to 100+ sites, and this process is repeated over and over.

100+ sites? Like Google doesn't know that those 100+ sites are set up solely for the purpose of link building? Come on now. I personally believe Google just filters all these out of the equation. There might be a couple that pass a little bit of juice but it is mostly likely short lived.

My advice would be to always review previous results or examples of work before hiring ANYONE to do link building for you.

How the heck do you review previous results? I mean, how would you know what to look for?

They are well maintained sites, the charge for their time, and I see results in a few months.

What type of results do you see?

[Webwork]

Google recently launched a beta of city specific directories - as reported by Linka Buquet/CatalystMarketing and follwed up by David Mihm [davidmihm.com]. City directories are "general directories", albeit their focus is local.

I guess the success or death of the directory model is a function of the utility, quality, depth, detail of listings, etc. Local search has always been a prime candidate for "success by directory", ergo the success of the yellowpages . . until their slow/swift death by refusal to 'put it all online NOW".

Vertical (industry specific) search is also a model that can be handled competitively, in the online world, by the directory model.

A "general directory" that looks and functions and has the same or lessor quality than the general SERPs is probably a poor choice for planting a link to your website. A well designed vertical directory would likely be far more useful to visitors and therefore a more desirable place to "plant a link".

However, in the "atomoization of traffic" future (kudos Justin Sanger), a link anywhere that might deliver a visitor/customer will be a link worth having.

[edited by: martinibuster at 4:52 pm (utc) on Jul 25, 2011]
[edit reason] Added link. [/edit]

[snickles121]

Submitting manually to link directories worked for me a few years ago and we would sometimes do 1000 submissions a month with no problem with good results. However last December we did a 1000 new submissions for a single keyword in which we already had rankings on page two. This worked to get us in the top 5 for this word until Panda came out. I am now no where in the top 1000 for this keyword. All other keywords still rank, except for this single keyword I targeted.

My advice is not to do it on a excessive level anymore unless you are a brand new site. Why risk loosing more traffic on a established domain this late in the game.

I may never get this keyword back, but who knows.

[freelistfool]

Links From General Directories - Are They Worth It?

I did a web directory experiment where I built a new site with unique content then the only link building I did was with free web directories. I started with niche directories then went on to general directories where the category in which my site would be listed was indexed in Google. All the submissions were manual and I varied the keywords and descriptions.

After one year the site ranked for 5300 keywords and gets over 10k search engine hits a month. So I believe it's worth the time to search for good directories. I wouldn't ever do mass submissions.

How many and how quickly?

For my experiment I did about 1/2 hour of research each week and submitted to 2 to 5 directories.

Would you be willing to do a reciprocal link if they require one?

I'll give a reciprocal back to good niche directories related to my site, but don't for general directories.

[greenleaves]

Because it isn't natural for many sites to do something like that. Tell me, what good is a link profile distorted by offshore directory links for a client who services U.S. based consumers? It serves no purpose and surely sends the wrong signals.

I've researched these so called top directories. Many of them are shells for other crap that takes place. In one instance, out of 50 directories that I performed a cursory review of, 25+ of them were owned by the same offshore network. They have a great little gig going on over there for you folks who like to throw away $10.00.

Whether Google counts it now or latter isn't too much of a concern to me. It could be or become a measure google uses. For $10, I'm covered on that aspect.


$10.00? Ten dollars? 10 U.S. dollars? Ya, those folks have one heck of a gig going. They might as well just put a donate button in place of the buy now button, that's basically what you're doing, donating $10.00.

Directories arent dead.


Yes they are. It's a 20th Century SEO tactic that has long outlived its usefulness.

Assume much don't we?

You assume that I do things in a certain way, then come to a reasonable conclusion that it is pointless. Well it would be pointless, if what you assume is correct.

However, did I ever say I would use the directories you mention? Nope. Did I ever mention I'm paying the directory owners? Nope. I mostly have my VAs do directory submission and I make sure they submit to good directories (if they spend 4 hours doing it, it only costs $10).

I'm smart enough to know that directories from the same owner/on the same class C IP/etc are not as important as 200 directories that are completely independent from each other.

You are assuming directories are dead, since I'm 100% sure you haven't tested it. If you would have, you wouldn't come to the conclusions you do. But don't worry, I like people who assume. Most of my competitors do; it helps me stay on top of pageoneresults. It is only annoying to the degree that assuming is 99.9% of all SEO posts and advice, and it makes it hard to find signal among all the noise.


@ freelistfool
Thanks for sharing your experiment. I have seen similar results. Funny, people who to have the most to say tend to have the lowest post counts and tend to get drowned out. The super high post counts are mostly just regurgitated "I read it somewhere, therefore it must be true" kinda stuff. It seems to me those high posts counts are too busy posting, and don't test enough. Which is the true essence of SEO; testing; not reading and definitively not echoing what 'others say'.

Here is a tip for you when you experiment, I'm sure you will find it interesting. Build different types of links at different periods.

For example, I tend to like starting by submitting my new site on social media/bookmarking sites. Since that is what is natural for a new site when it first launches. Then I send out a press release. Then directories. Then blog posts. Then blog rolls.

The results tend to be different than doing things in another order. ;)

[Planet13]

I mostly have my VAs do directory submission...

Quick Question: What are VA's? (And how do I get some?)

For example, I tend to like starting by submitting my new site on social media/bookmarking sites.

And which social media / bookmarking sites do you like?

Thanks in advance.

[onlineleben]

Quick Question: What are VA's?

Virtual Assistants
You might check out the definition on wikipedia.

[The Shower Scene]

if they spend 4 hours doing it, it only costs $10

$2.50 per hour. Virtual Sweatshop, cough cough, I mean Mechanical Turk, cough cough, slave labor without having to look the exploited in the eye, cough cough... I don't mean to say that Crowd Sourcing is modern plantation slave exploita... that is to say, Crowd Sourcing is... cough, argh, ack, vomit (pink and orange splatter), ...

[flashdash]

I submit to directories, but don't hope for a SERP increase. They just add to your link diversity, nothing more, nothing less.

[kaz]

DMOZ is alive? Says who? The log files ... when was your last referral from dmoz?

I like the idea of creating your own directory and I have had success with that route also. But keep things real when it comes to the value of a directory. Submit it and move on. One and done. It won't hurt, if you are not spamming and you will have a feeling in your gut and some sort of autosubmitter if you are.

[Cruxo]

In my opinion, if your website is already ranking well & has proven ability to obtain backlinks naturally, then submission to generic directories will not have any additional impact. But if your site is rather new and still has low visibility in SERPs, then such submissions would help.

This is not the absolute case though. Submission to quality local and niche (ie. topic or category specific) directories still carry some value as they signal strong local and on-topic intent to Google.