Forum Moderators: open
I'm working on a new site right now, and I would like to hear opinions on whether or not "keyword1-keyword2-keyword3-keyword4.com" domains are acceptable by the search engines - or if they have the *potential* to be banned or penalized in the future. The idea is to add a keyword address in addition to a brand address that contains no industry keywords (ex. of brand address - "amazon.com" does not mention the industry keyword "books" in their primary url).
At this time, it appears to be acceptable by Google and other majors to have a separate URL pointing at a site. I have detected in posts to this and other seo forums that some SEO's consider this somewhat questionable, while many other reputable seo's employ it regularly.
I am not interested in using this as a doorway page (personally, I don't like them), but to simply point this hyphenated keyword url at my root - not as a mirror, or with duplicate content - but as a parallel pointer.
Once again, do these names have the potential to be penalized down the line? I don't want to leave a client in a bind by having a site penalized a year or two down the road for something that was once considered acceptable.
Comments are appreciated -
Check this its a good start and good reading
[searchengineworld.com...]
/Ove
A domain name itself can not be banned regardless of hyphen use or number of words (characters -- up to 63, some country codes only allow 26 characters). It will be the choice of optimization you do that may be too close to the "spamming" edge that causes a penalty, or linking to a penalized site/bad neighborhood.
The only real concern you have when using hyphens is people remember your brand "poppycock widgets but remember it without a hypen and thus potentially going to someone else.
As for using two domain names for the same site, you might want to read this
[webmasterworld.com...]
An alternative is to use keywords in your directories and html file names. That way you still have keywords in the URL, and they're meaningful to site visitors, more so than /store/ or id392.html
this thread: [webmasterworld.com...]
contains some discussions on the multi-keyword url names.
Fathom and Marcia rightly pointed out that such sites would or could be considered SEO'd. I would not be suprised if, in the years to come, one would see a reversal of this trend, from multi-keyword url's to simple brand name url's. Not for penalty reasons but for image reasons. (as search engines get more sophisticated they tend to ignore and not penalise).
Some argue that you are helping the surfer if he sees
blue-widgets-information.com in the url.
others would say
Johnson.com/blue-widgets/information.htm
would be just as informative.
Thanks for the thread link. You made some great points there as well.
I'm seeing through this a bit more clearly. Google claims they *do not* weigh keyword domains as heavily as most people think. I believe this is true. The hyphenated keyword name seems to influence *humans* to call it the suggested keywords in the alt-descriptive text of the URL. This factor appears to be the common theme in backlinks of top SERP's.
When a person links out to a site, they usually describe it by it's web address identity. If the identity is the brand name, they use the brand name.
<a href="http://www.amazon.com">Amazon</a>
If the "brand" is descriptive keywords (the hyphenated URL), it is labelled by the keywords in the highlighted link text - this weighs heavier than the domain itself, a "keyword vote" if you will.
<a href="http://www.books-for-sale.us">Books For Sale - US</a>
My challenge now is to get other relevant web site linkers to use my keywords in the highlighted text of the name. I think I will be able to skate on the hyphenated name at this time, mainly because my chosen url is an acronym that also happens to imply highly searched keywrod phrase.
Once again, it appears the challege will be to build links that are the full title words, and not the acronym.
My challenge now is to get other relevant web site linkers to use my keywords in the highlighted text of the name. I think I will be able to skate on the hyphenated name at this time, mainly because my chosen url is an acronym that also happens to imply highly searched keywrod phrase.Once again, it appears the challege will be to build links that are the full title words, and not the acronym.
Although your statement may be true, it is more likely that other site owners would rather post your company name as an anchor text vice a domain name.
In addition, books-for-sale.com isn't the same as books for sale, and a title attribute adds at least the same weight as a physical domain.
I have also seen [123.123.123.132...] at the top of results as well with NFP org's laying weight that all domain names/IP's are equal or at least "content is still king".
The reverse -- short domains are getting harded to come by but "longer", was that with 3 hyhens or 2 is as difficult to remember as a numercial IP.
as opposed to
<a href="http://www.bfsus.com">BFSUS</a>
..because nobody is looking for "BFSUS".
While the example may be a lame generic name, you get the idea. I'm sticking with relevant terms, and relevant content.
Amazon, Microsoft, IBM, and NASA are brands as much as a company name. They are also the domain name... very few need to find a link or search query to go to their sites.
And they all started out that way and laid a foundation that most can easily remember.
Books for sale ... is what a visitor can do, but BFSUS is where they can get them. You will never develop a following if they can't remember where to go.
If it is going to be more than just a "search engine site" there's got to be something short and memorable about it - ideally the brand and domain name, but at least one of them.
For sites that will be promoted on and offline but hve no aims of becoming some huge company and spending enough to build a brand, I usually advise a short memorable URL and a more descriptive (ie with keywords) company name.
Many companies that get indexed in a search engine are exceptionally happy to find that they can type in their business name in a search engine and find themselves at #1.
But when others start doing this (query a specific name) rather than looking for some generic term, product, or service you have brand.
In general, your domain doesn't have to be a business name, or brand as long as it's preempted (non-disposable) selection is somehow synonymous with you.
GoTo fought long and hard to develop and then protect their brand only to become something completely different "overture".
Long term sustainability must always be a defining goal, for big companies and small. You can only peddle your wares yourself for so long.
Deciding whether or not to use 2 domains to promote site
Check my sticky, a company domain name (primary site), 2 brand sites and a keyword domain. In this context they complement each other very well.
Sorry, I didn't actually read the small print. :)
While I don't want to get into a big brand discussion, the url I will be using will imply both the brand and keyword, though the keys are an acronym, to avoid an extra long fully spelled url:
ex. www.acmebi.com
as opposed to
www.acme-bricks-inc.com
My actual url is much longer than the example shown above.
As related to my other posts above, no one would be searching for, "acmebi", but they would be searching for "Acme", or "bricks".
My original concern was forfieting a company name/brand name domain in order to develop a keyword one.
By nature, the engines reward keyword-based names, and they tend to ignore brands by default. This is not because they give the domain more PR weight, but because of the way it influences the anchor text of these same urls.
When your site is "brand-name.com", *humans* that link this domain are naturally going to call the anchor text by the brand-name - not by its descriptive keywords. A keyword url will naturally be titled with more descriptive keywords in the anchor text.
ex.: Search google for the term "cars". The obvious result is #1, but where is Ford, BMW, Dodge, Mercedes, etc?
The backlinks for cars.com is "cars" in the anchor text.
Because link popularity and anchor text are so crucial, I think this is why many webmasters deem it necessary to add an extra keyword rich url to their keyword design structure. Maybe instead of keyword urls, we should all work harder to include a couple of relevant keywords in the anchor text of links. This would require closer review before validating a link, but also return more relevant search results as a whole.
I'm still sticking with my earlier declaration to go with my keyword-acronym-brand domain. No hyphenated keyword urls for their own sake.
