Doorway Pages

[dpam]

Although I've heard this term any number of times, I'll admit that I never had a clear definition of it. I've always assumed it was somehow related to cloaking or used an auto-redirect to take people from one place to another. Tonight I read an article on Clickz by Shari Thurow (filled with idiotic statements, but I'll leave that to another time or post) which lead me to two other articles, one by her and one by Danny Sullivan. Here's the links for anyone who cares.

http://www.clickz.com/search/results...le.php/3293791
http://www.clickz.com/search/results...le.php/3116421
http://www.clickz.com/search/opt/article.php/1581511

Danny defines 'doorway pages' as "A doorway page is one targeting a particular search term. You tweak the title tag, meta tags, and body copy in a way you hope pleases the search engine's algorithm." And speaks of this very unflateringly and then states that the practice is 'on the decline'.

This makes absolutely no sense to me. As far as I can tell each page is in its own battle to win targetted search terms, and unfocused pages are at a serious disadvantage as compared to highly focused pages - I'm speaking from both a content and optimization point of view. Even in light of what I know about the impact of links, anchor-text, and the other off-page stuff, it seems that a series of topic-specific and keyword optimized pages are the best way to build a site to get high rankings for lots of pages on lots of search terms.

Someone please argue with me if this is not right!!

Both Danny and Shari immediately cast their version of 'doorway pages' into the spam dungeon (the former much less so than the latter). And while I understand and have seen the sloppy and manipulative form of the practice, I would vehemently argue that a site full of well segmented targeted pages, each with good related content and generally 'relevant' to any human who found it because it matched their search term, is a damn good way to design a site. Following it up with targeted inbound links to the targeted pages makes the page-counter spin. Right?

The alternative is what? To pretend we don't know that search engines will rate targeted and optimized pages better than jumbled pages, and build sites that end up on page 172 of the SERPS. This is what the 'experts' want us to do?

I don't even believe the search engines really want that. Somebody help my throbbing brain....

[John Scott]

I'll read those articles and get back to you tonight.

[dpam]

Thanks, it'll be interesting to hear your thoughts.

As usual I agree with Phil, and his points do clarify things a bit - although I realize this entire argument is like the 'ethical' vs 'unethical' one, and I wouldn't have put any thought into it had it just been Ms. Thurow but with Sullivan kicking in there I got a bit agitated.

Phil says "because search engines don't want pages that are not created as genuine content pages, sites using doorway pages can be penalized if found. The biggest risk is associated with auto-generated cookie-cutters; i.e. doorway pages that are all identical except for their target searchterms." I think this is the kind of clarity that 'type-now-think-never' writers such as Ms. Thurow don't think is necessary.

BTW: I stood in a Barnes & Nobel over the weekend and read her book on search techniques - it is filled with proprotionally just as many thoughtless statements as her one-page articles. Coincidentally, her and JW seem to have a mutual admiration society...

[seo-dave]

I haven't read the articles, but know what a doorway page is.

Back in the days when on page optimisation was all you needed to rank well it made a lot of sense to make multiple pages whose sole purpose was to rank high for a keyword or small set of keywords (the content didn't have to be good).

With enough doorway pages you could get a lot of traffic.

So a doorway page is a page made primarily for a search engine and may consist of randomly generated text (especially true if you made a lot of them).

There use today is limited (I don't use them) because you now have to have the off site factors (links, anchor text etc...) right. So if you made yourself 500 doorway pages but didn't get them a reasonable number of links they would fail.

If you have the time to get 500 crap (content wise) pages a reasonable number of links it make much more sense to use that time to better optimise your current pages for specific searh terms and get those pages links.

If you use this approach you will see every page of a site as a potential entry point to a visitor and optimise accordingly.

David

[dpam]

Thanks. I understand that definition (now) but both of the authors I referred to essential say that any page within your site that intends to be the 'landing page' for search engine results (and is entirely tailored and optmized to do so) is a 'doorway page' and 'bad'. It's just a crazy 'fundamentalist' view of SEO - the distinction that both you and Phil make, which is that empty pages which exist as keyword holders only are doorways and real optimzed pages are not, makes much more sense.

It seems that the SEO fundamentalists take all these terms (ethical, spam, doorway, etc.) and come up with extremely narrow yet somehow contantly shifting definitions just so they can condem anyone who's not exactly like them. (Hm, sounds like some other fundamentalists I've seen...)

Elsewhere in her 'article' the author essentially says that all affiliate sites are 'spam' because they repurpose content from the originating vendor. It staggers me that anyone could write (and that anyone else would print) a comment that stupid. All the same, in the future, when I build a site, I'm going to send her the URL before I make it live to ask if she minds if I post it on her internet

[John Scott]

I think there are two types of doorway pages. One type is the spewed doorway page. This is often a page which is created by a software which analyzes other top ranking pages for the given search term, and mimics it. The text on a spewed page is generated by software, and makes no sense. Because of this, the consumer never sees the doorway page - a Javascript redirect takes the visitor to a proper web page.

For example, if you searched for some odd search term that www.quality-web-hosting.net ranked for, you would never have to see the ugly, keyword spamming web page - it redirects to www.v7inc.com

Even though it redirects, people complain about it because it's "cheating". Usually only SEO's complain, because they failesd to achieved rankings. (Envy.)

The other type of doorway page is often called a "content page". For example, we built a pretty site for Jim Kujala - www.BeartoothKawasaki.com - but we don't want to mess up the pages with a bunch of ugly text or content pages. So we built www.kawasakimotorcycle.org with a content page for each keyword. What we did there is create a page for each model. Do a search for "Kawasaki Eliminator 125" and you get there; do a search for "Kawasaki Vulcan 2000" and you get there. They are content pages because the content is "legit".

See also: www.honda-motorcycles.org

Either way - whether the consumer is redirected or lands on a content page - the consumer's search has taken them to relevant results.

I see no problem with either way.

[Emancipator]

John.

Enjoying reading your views. The problem with doorway pages is the name in itself. I prefer to call it developing a theme. Most common method I will use is to buy a second domain of value to my theme, and then develop user relevant content which matches that theme. So for example if my theme is "html programming canada" I am going to have content related pages that are relevant to a users search and interlink them into a theme of various phrases.

All be it some people would call this a doorway page, it is not. I am designing it for my customers, and for their needs, it just so happens by carefull research and use of key phrases, even with no onsite factors you can sneak into the top 20 on google for some medium density terms.

Sounds John like you and I are talking about the same thing.

Cheers
Eman.

[compar]

John,

In your Kawaski example. Are all these site listed on the same server or within the same IP block?

[Emancipator]

Probably a better example is needed then the kawasaki one of offsite factors.

John would you not agree this one is a great converting term that you could have gotten just as good of results without your offsite content?

I like how you used the term since I use similar tactics in my own development strategy.

Cheers

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by compar

John,

In your Kawaski example. Are all these site listed on the same server or within the same IP block?

Until recently, I had the three sites on three different servers. Now I have them on two different servers. I haven't noticed any decrease in rankings yet.

Originally Posted by Emancipator

Probably a better example is needed then the kawasaki one of offsite factors.

John would you not agree this one is a great converting term that you could have gotten just as good of results without your offsite content?

Actually, I like the Kawasaki site as an example of off-site vs on-site SEO. Reason being, the site was built with SEO in mind. We were able to see exactly how far on-site SEO would get us, and then by adding hundreds of links to the site, we were able to see the power of anchor text and IBL's.

Without the IBL's, KawasakiMotorcycle.org was getting 200 uniques a day. Now it's doing over 2,000 uniques a day. And, to address the people who say "forget the most competitive search term and go after less competitive, more specific search terms", I should report that a full 49.47% of pageviews originate from the search term "kawasaki motorcycles".

The bottom line, of course, is sales. He is shipping ATV's to Hawaii. He's shipping cruisers to North Carolina and Nevada. He did over $2m in online sales last year. He lives in a tiny town in Montana, and is one of the top producing Kawasaki dealers.

[Emancipator]

John.

Thanks for clarifying. I was referring to the terms above

"Kawasaki Eliminator 125" and you get there; do a search for "Kawasaki Vulcan 2000"

Kawasaki Motors is a totally different conversation, I must have overlooked that mention somewhere. not questioning your logic, just asking questions

For the record, you are 100% right. THe bottom line is sales. Those two keywords you listed above would have been the two I would have gone for as well. Its not about the quantity of traffic, but the quality. The more money it puts to your customer, the more they generate for you

Good thread.

[LazyJim]

I havn't much experience but the differnce between S-E-Spam and SEO in my opinion is the target for the "optimisation".
If the target is to get high-rankings and beat the competition no matter what else, it is spam.
If the taget is to help real people find your site, with a real interest in your genuine content, it is not spam.

there are many in-betweens and also the line of ethical and unethical is blurry, especially when you factor in the following two points:
- se's have different requirements to real people
- in a world where you compete with soleless/heartless people using unethical methods, you have to do *something* to get a heard over the noise.