Google and paid directories

[sniperhiga]

Maybe it is only me.... but i noticed some positions drop for websites who did a lot of submissions in directories and paid directories.
One of website i know droped from 2 page to page #11... 80-90% backlinks they have form directories, my own website drop from first page "Free website promotion" to second page and i have about 30-40% backlinks from directories.

[kevingibbons]

I haven't noticed a change myself but there was a Google algorithm update last week and it's definitely possible that they are reducing the rankings of sites where the majority of inbound links are coming from directories.

[Ferre]

If Google has intelligent people working on those algos they should definately reduce the rankings of sites that have their majority of backlinks from directories. Sites that get no natural linking are not worth visiting anyway, and I fail to see why Google should rank those sites in competitive positions.

Just face it, the internet has many niches that are over-populated with sites that add nothing to the net, besides the greed of those site owners. Filtering out the crap is what makes a search engine a 'quality' search engine and to be honest, Google has a lot to catch up with to get back into the 'quality' since they themselves have introduced ways to monetize garbage sites. I guess they are fixing some self-created gaps in their algos.

[maldives]

I have not noticed anything like this! I know link building is good but have not found concrete evidence that paid directory inclusions can hurt ranking in SERPs.

[sniperhiga]

Originally Posted by Ferre

If Google has intelligent people working on those algos they should definately reduce the rankings of sites that have their majority of backlinks from directories. Sites that get no natural linking are not worth visiting anyway, and I fail to see why Google should rank those sites in competitive positions.

Just face it, the internet has many niches that are over-populated with sites that add nothing to the net, besides the greed of those site owners. Filtering out the crap is what makes a search engine a 'quality' search engine and to be honest, Google has a lot to catch up with to get back into the 'quality' since they themselves have introduced ways to monetize garbage sites. I guess they are fixing some self-created gaps in their algos.

v7n got a lot of links from directories. I found you Guys in AbiLogic, Yahoo dir, SEOPedia, DirectoryVault, AliveDirectory, Advertisingsoup, Greatdirectorysite and more....

Most directory owners refuse to approve poor quality sites... so, Google should penalise directories who approve bad sites instead of punishing websites with many links from directories.

[John Scott]

v7n got a lot of links from directories. I found you Guys in AbiLogic, Yahoo dir, SEOPedia, DirectoryVault, AliveDirectory, Advertisingsoup, Greatdirectorysite and more....

Even with as many directory links as v7n has, it is only a small part of our link profile.

Originally Posted by Ferre

If Google has intelligent people working on those algos they should definately reduce the rankings of sites that have their majority of backlinks from directories. Sites that get no natural linking are not worth visiting anyway, and I fail to see why Google should rank those sites in competitive positions.

Agreed.

[sniperhiga]

Every directory has a chance to become next DMOZ, JayDe, or Business.
Why Google should reduce link value from directory if webmaster refuse 65% submissions and pick only quality websites.
For example... Webmaster who own music website got a letter from related music website with request to add link. He placed link on the page "Related music resources".
The same way, directory owner submit only links he likes....

Google should punish directories who approve spam and poor content websites.

[Ferre]

Originally Posted by sniperhiga

Google should punish directories who approve spam and poor content websites.

Google already 'punishes' poorly managed directories. They have been doing that for at least the past three years.

Google does not 'punish' poor content websites, but those websites should not be showing in any serps anyway so if they don't get rankings it's not 'punishing', it's just a normal consequence of the algos.

The point is, I guess, the balance between 'natural' linking and links from directories and other 'managed' linking. When a site has the huge majority from 'managed' links and only few 'natural' links, Google should assume that those sites add nothing to the net that other sites in the same niche, with many natural links, already do.

There are way too many worthless sites that have owners who submit them to tons of directories, tons of backlinks from directories does not take a good website, all it takes is many submitions to directories. To get natural links, however, takes a site with content that is worth reading, or a product that's worth buying. Google should count that into their algos, not more than logical.

[sitetutor]

I would shy away from any directories which seem ¨mass produced¨. Too many directory owners think that the more directories they have, the more money they will make. Which of course is total bogus. What they wind up with is a lot of empty directories. When you have 2 or 3 it´s easy to manage them and build content in addition to the directory itself. Having something like a forum, a blog, some tools etc. can get you further in Google and will give people a reason to visit your directory site again and again.



- Mike

[QwkSand]

This goes to paid directories only? I submit my sites to directories with free submissions and so I don't know anything thats been going on with sites submitted to paid directories.

[Dustin07]

Some of my best rankings have come after getting listings in quality directories. However, I think a good variety of types of sites is still important.

[David E]

Originally Posted by Ferre

If Google has intelligent people working on those algos they should definately reduce the rankings of sites that have their majority of backlinks from directories. Sites that get no natural linking are not worth visiting anyway, and I fail to see why Google should rank those sites in competitive positions.

Just face it, the internet has many niches that are over-populated with sites that add nothing to the net, besides the greed of those site owners. Filtering out the crap is what makes a search engine a 'quality' search engine and to be honest, Google has a lot to catch up with to get back into the 'quality' since they themselves have introduced ways to monetize garbage sites. I guess they are fixing some self-created gaps in their algos.

I disagree, who is going to link to a commercial ecommerce site just for the fun of it? Does this mean the site isn't worth visiting? I don't think so, Why should everyone blog? Plenty of poeple just want to offer their services online, How do you expect a normal small to medium sized business to build up links naturally?

BTW - Directories still work as ever it's just some have seen the PR drop a bit, the sites that have lost positions have not got enough variation in anchor text.

[Dustin07]

commercial sites need to pay for marketing. That's how commerce works.

and people do link to commerce sites just for fun. They say, hey is this the blue widget I need to power my thing-bobby machine? and other people say "yes".


sometimes they say "no."

but the point is, people do link to commerce sites on their own freewill when you offer what they need and give them a reason to link to it. Make the description more useful than most (rather than slapping up some duplicate content like I usually do) or create guides... etc.

[David E]

I know from personal experience that a natural link can be worth between 100-500 normal links, but for my clients and for just about every business website in the UK it just does not happen, I am working on a site at the moment that is selling mp4 players dirt cheap, even though they are really cheap nobody has linked to it naturally, I have received a few natural links for my site and a couple of them really helped, the others are either bots picking up parts of my site, or dumb ass bloggers who nick my articles and don't even bother removing the contextual links to various pages of my website, but I feel I am in a minority certainly in the UK.

[vangogh]

You might have to give them a reason to link to the site. Create some useful resources. You mention having a blog. That's something people will link to. People might not link directly to a product page, but you can still create pages they will link to.

As for directories most are just garbage automated applications that will accept anyone who fills out a form. If you were a search engine how much would trust that kind of link. Probably not much.

Some directories can be great links. A directory that has a manual review process will be probably be more trusted than the auto submit kind. Niche directories on your topic will probably be better than a general directory.

And like John mentioned above it's about your entire link profile. If you have a lot of good quality backlinks then you can get away with having a lot of junk directory links. If those are your only links though they probably aren't helping much.

[sniperhiga]

Originally Posted by sitetutor

I would shy away from any directories which seem ¨mass produced¨. Too many directory owners think that the more directories they have, the more money they will make. Which of course is total bogus. What they wind up with is a lot of empty directories. When you have 2 or 3 it´s easy to manage them and build content in addition to the directory itself. Having something like a forum, a blog, some tools etc. can get you further in Google and will give people a reason to visit your directory site again and again.



- Mike

You right... many webmasters create 10-15 directories...
I want to ask webmasters who own 20 directories.... How many backlinks you have for all this directories? Now imagine if all this backlinks for one directory.
Also, how many quality sites submitted? Now imagine if all this sites in one directory.
If you spend 2-3 years with one directory, you will reach directories like BOTW and will have hundereds daily paid submissions.

[backgammonnn123]

The trick is finding the seo friendly free directories and they are rare and few in between the thousands of trash directories out there. My friend took this a bit further
and found directories that specifically gave sites accepted into it a backlink in google.