Annual renewal fee directories SUCK

[WebGeek182]

Originally Posted by John Scott

I submit to a lot of directories, from Yahoo! and Umdum to DMOZ and rlrouse.

I don't submit to BOTW, and haven't for a while now, because of the annual listing charge.

But now it seems a lot of web directory owners are going the annual listing route. I have held off saying this for a while now, because I consider most of these web directory owners friends. But it needs to be said:

Yearly renewal fees are beyond stupid. The spirit of annual renewal fees - well, it feels like greed to me.

And the "review fee" is bogus, a lie. If a website is listed in your directory, you should be reviewing it on a monthly basis anyway.

Now, let's do the math. Say a directory charges $69.95 per year. That's $349.75 for five years, and $699.50 for 10 years.

Now, for arguments sake, compare that to Umdum's $40.00 one time fee. I can say without a shred of doubt that Umdum sends me more traffic and more link juice than 90% of annual-renewal directories out there, and at a discount of $659.50 over 10 years.

But more than that, it is a matter of principle for me. If I pay for a review, it should be a review. If it's accepted, it's accepted. But with these BOTW type directories, these clowns actually remove your link if you don't pay the fee.

Even Yahoo! doesn't remove links, but these people do, making it obvious that they are not in the directory business, but in the link-leasing business.

Why remove the listing if you aren't in it for the money. I have two full time and one part time editor ADDING sites, searching for and adding sites on the basis of heir merits. So the idea of removing a site just seems absurd.

I mean, was it removed because it did not add value to your directory? If so why the hell did you approve the listing in the first place?

Great post John! I couldn't agree more.

[Cornbread]

Originally Posted by minstrel

I assume you mean this DigitalPoint thread.

They aren't claiming "authority status" basaed on the dash but rather based on the Google listing:

I still don't get it, why does that Google listing make them special? Is it just those four little links under the main link? V7n doesn't have those links and I always thought V7n was more authority than Aviva.

[minstrel]

Originally Posted by Cornbread

I still don't get it, why does that Googlr listing make them special?

It's an expanded listing with sublinks below the main link.

The question is not "why does that listing make them special?" but rather "what makes them special enough to get an expanded link?".

[Cornbread]

Originally Posted by minstrel

It's an expanded listing with sublinks below the main link.

The question is not "why does that listing make them special?" but rather "what makes them special enough to get an expanded link?".

Interesting. I just checked and I only think seven directories are currently authority directories:
1. DMOZ
2. Yahoo
3. Business.com
4. Best of the Web
5. Aviva
6. Joeant
7. Web World Directory
*Google and Exact Seek are also, but they are just mirrors of DMOZ aren't they?

Did I miss any authority directories?

[minstrel]

According to that DP thread, Alive is in there too.

[Cornbread]

Originally Posted by minstrel

According to that DP thread, Alive is in there too.

Yep, and I just found three more "Abilogic" "Wow" and "Go Guides"

Does anyone know of any others?

[Cornbread]

Well if that means these are the "authority" directories I guess John Scott was correct about Aviva, maybe Aviva is worthy of that premium yearly reoccurring price tag. John what say you on this revelation?

[harmu.com]

Originally Posted by Cornbread

Interesting. I just checked and I only think seven directories are currently authority directories:
1. DMOZ
2. Yahoo
3. Business.com
4. Best of the Web
5. Aviva
6. Joeant
7. Web World Directory
*Google and Exact Seek are also, but they are just mirrors of DMOZ aren't they?

Did I miss any authority directories?

Uncover The Net

Site Sift Web Directory

Seven Seek Directory

Skaffe Directory & Search

Wow Website Directory

Directory Critic

even i may miss a few!
anyways,
cheers!

[Cornbread]

Originally Posted by harmu.com

Uncover The Net

Site Sift Web Directory

Seven Seek Directory

Skaffe Directory & Search

Wow Website Directory

Directory Critic

even i may miss a few!
anyways,
cheers!

WoW was already listed above, Uncover the Net and Skaffe are authority directories, but Seven Seek and Site Sift are not. Directory Critic is just for directories so it isn't included in this general directory list. Anybody else?

[harmu.com]

also, the v7n is an authority site:
http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1B2...=Google+Search

site sift: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&r...ft&btnG=Search

there are a few more, google is perhaps on the update of authority sites at the moment!

[minstrel]

See http://www.v7n.com/forums/google-for...tml#post625454

[Cornbread]

Originally Posted by harmu.com

also, the v7n is an authority site:
http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1B2...=Google+Search

site sift: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&r...ft&btnG=Search

there are a few more, google is perhaps on the update of authority sites at the moment!

What's weird is how sensitive Google is to how you type it in. When you type V7n it doesn't come back as an authority directory, the V must not be capitalized. And if you capitize Site Sift it doesn't come back as an authority?

[harmu.com]

yes it is a bit difficult to find out, i have tried a few combination for some of my best sites, but as expected it did not come up as authority site.

v7n is a lot bigger site, i think it should come up as authority site with all possible combination!!

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&r...7n&btnG=Search
anyways, i guess the capitalization of Vv dosenot matters!

[jhnrang]

Originally Posted by Cornbread

Interesting. I just checked and I only think seven directories are currently authority directories:
1. DMOZ
2. Yahoo
3. Business.com
4. Best of the Web
5. Aviva
6. Joeant
7. Web World Directory
*Google and Exact Seek are also, but they are just mirrors of DMOZ aren't they?

Did I miss any authority directories?

I have a list of 21 authority directories --- --submitting to them one by --one --9 done --12 to go

The number is actially 24. Jeff --of Aviva has one post on his blog about it ( I have to add 3 more on my list from Jeff's)

Jeff's List

Authority Directories
skaffe.com
gimpsy.com
Joeant
GoGuides
business
directorycritic.com
exactseek.com
dmoz
dir.yahoo
site-sift
Alive
uncoverthenet
botw
webworldindex.com
clush.com
webopedia
abilogic.com
wowdirectory.com
sevenseek
Aviva

Enjoy guys

PS: Besides -Congrats John --V7N is now an Authority site. (Check Here) . Jeff says --the directory is also authority -but I could not verify it after lots of try.

[mauiman]

I haven't been here for awhile due to time constraints, but I must say that I ALWAYS find this forum very useful and interesting and this thread is no different thanks to John's bold statement to kickoff this discussion!

Great brainfood!

[sitetutor]

[QUOTE=minstrel;619797]Yes. They call that "advertising". Nothing wrong with that.



"Brand"? Is this a new word you just learned? Do you have any idea what it means? What the hell has that got to do with annual fees for directories?



Straight from the University of the Bleeding Obvious.



If you think these bidding directories, like the one you're currently flogging in your signature, aren't immediately flagged as paid links by Google, you're just not paying attention. Gotta love those threads at DP - the same people who complained about Cutts asking for informants are now making it easy for Google to identify those paid links, all in two or three convenient (and public) threads.

Originally Posted by sitetutor

But just because Matt says "It's ok for you guys to have a review fee", should that change everybody's submission and payment policy? You can do what you want with your directory.

Of course. That's already been acknowledged:

How to report paid links: Update, May 12th, 2007





Define a scammer: One who k nows what he sells is worthless but sells it to the naive and uninformed anyway to make a quick buck.



That word again. :rolletes: It has nothing to do with branding.



You don't seem to have the vaguest idea about any of this. One moment you're claiming it's about branding, the next it's about advertising, the next it's about not complying with guidelines given to you by Matt Cutts, the next it's not about traffic, the next it's about traffic... I don't think you understand any of it.

Want to sell advertising? Go ahead. The links won't pass PR. Google is fine with that.

Want to sell advertising using a Yellow Pages annual fee model? Google is fine with that, too. No effect on PR.

Want to try to actually sell links for PR? Cutts even tells you how to do that safely. But apparently the terminally confused in the crowd can't even follow and accept those simple instructions because you may lose a buck or two on your dollar store bidding directories.

All of this is painful proof once again that P.T. Barnum was correct.

I've had my settings for the immediate email notifications turned off for this forum, so I wasn't aware of this response. Let me get to this one by one:
"Is this a new word you just learned? "
Umm, no. Nice try though. You obviously have a one track mind evolving around search engines. Do you need permission from Google to create a site you believe in?

"If you think these bidding directories, like the one you're currently flogging in your signature, aren't immediately flagged as paid links by Google, you're just not paying attention. " Same thing again, what exactly is your obsession with pleasing Google and Matt?

"Straight from the University of the Bleeding Obvious."

Not really, read thru many of the threads here and on DP and you will realize that what may be obvious to you and me is not to 80 percent of the crowd.

Sorry, don't have time to respond to the rest of your "points" right now, maybe you can try to be a little bit shorter and less drawn out the next time, then I may be able to answer you and take my time knowing I won't waste it on something that shouldn't even require a response.

[sitetutor]

Originally Posted by Cornbread

Yep, and I just found three more "Abilogic" "Wow" and "Go Guides"

Does anyone know of any others?

there are many many others, directories and niche directories such as blogcatalog.com
Also many sites which are not directories. SO basically, what I'm trying to say in this thread is that whatever your site is, is what your site is. People like Minstrel with seo tunnel vision will not understand that. Neither will 80 percent of the regular seo forum crowd. If all you know is how to follow someone who makes money and try to imitate that person, you will be a follower and pick up the crumbs. Think of something new and you might make something of youself

[minstrel]

Originally Posted by sitetutor

I've had my settings for the immediate email notifications turned off for this forum, so I wasn't aware of this response. Let me get to this one by one:
"Is this a new word you just learned? "
Umm, no. Nice try though. You obviously have a one track mind evolving around search engines. Do you need permission from Google to create a site you believe in?

I'm sorry. Was that an answer to my question about your understanding of the word "branding"? It doesn't seem to be. As for Google's permission, I believe that question has already been answered many times: Create any site you want. Do with it what you will. And Google will evaluate it according to their principles and algorithms. Ignore that at your peril, if you truly care about the site.

Originally Posted by sitetutor

"If you think these bidding directories, like the one you're currently flogging in your signature, aren't immediately flagged as paid links by Google, you're just not paying attention. " Same thing again, what exactly is your obsession with pleasing Google and Matt?

See above, moron. Read more; post less. You might learn something.

Originally Posted by sitetutor

"Straight from the University of the Bleeding Obvious."

Not really, read thru many of the threads here and on DP and you will realize that what may be obvious to you and me is not to 80 percent of the crowd.

Obviously, you've put yourself in the wrong category there. You're clearly in the 80% group. Oh and we're not at DP, in case you missed it.

Originally Posted by sitetutor

Sorry, don't have time to respond to the rest of your "points" right now, maybe you can try to be a little bit shorter and less drawn out the next time, then I may be able to answer you and take my time knowing I won't waste it on something that shouldn't even require a response.

I'm sorry. I should have remembered that you don't have the attention span or intellectual capacity to comprehend anything longer than about two sentences with balloons that say Kapow! and Bam! :rolleyes:

But for the record, you haven't actually responded to any of my points.

[sitetutor]

Uh huh, did you ever have a point to begin with?

[minstrel]

Originally Posted by sitetutor

Uh huh, did you ever have a point to begin with?

More witty repartee from the master of nothing useful...

Try reading the thread, boy.