Paid Directory Collapse
Posted by John Jones on 03 Sep 2007 at 06:50 pm | Tagged as: Paid Inclusion Directory News
Today it was reported that a lot of pay-for-inclusion directories have suffered a penalty in Google for possibly providing the types of services that they provide. While over at Sphinn.com it appears that there is quiet a commotion going on that resulted in a few members being temporary banned for not being respectful in their accusations against certain individuals or maybe even Google.
I’m not for or against directories. I’ve paid for some and have enjoyed free inclusion with others. However let’s be honest with ourselves for a minute and ask why exactly do we pay a yearly fee for a link on a website?
Most directories that my clients participate in are purely for the link love. We have a select set of directories that we’ve researched and monitored before deciding if they were worth the price but in the end our biggest focus has been on link love. In fact very few directories on our list will actually drive direct traffic on a regular basis and if we only looked at that factor our clients would save some money.
Even before Matt Cutts started asking us to report paid directories I started paying attention to my reasoning behind directory renewals. If it is only link love that is my motivation then I am not so much prepared to spend even the smallest amount of money on a link. However if it
drives traffic or if the site is consistently found at the top of searches I perform then I am more inclined to push for a submission to that directory.
I think Lyndon over at Sphinn said it best when he said, “The rules have changed but the directories have not.”
I communicate with directory owners on a weekly basis. Because of our client volume we have a lot of renewals and potential new submissions. So when renewals stop coming in and new submissions don’t happen, I am often called and asked, “What’s going on; where are the submissions?” I’d say a good portion of the time it has to do with their inability or unwillingness to bring their directory up to par with meeting today’s standards. Let’s face it, a directory that has nothing else but a bunch of pages with a title link and a description is old.
For those who are wondering, “What Now?”; I might suggest reading my previous blog post on Social Networking and Link Building.
As for me, I’ll still continue to promote directories like BOTW and GoGuides because they still prove themselves time and time again as directories that don’t fear change but adapt with it. Both directories may be slightly more costly then some out their but they are the luxury cars of the directory world while many others are the beat up volvos of the car industry.
- : 1.3
- : 1.3
- : 2.8
[…] pm | Tagged as: Paid Inclusion Directory News So as mentioned in my last blog post titled, “Paid Directory Collapse” I called out two directories that I’ve always enjoyed working with and feel as if they are the […]
The cause still is’nt clear to me.
Link selling? I don’t think so. Directories really don’t sell links. The exception might be when the review fee is excessive.
Link buying? Perhaps…
Niche and topical directories still make sense. General directories with links for PageRank only are outdated according to Matt Cutts. Nonetheless I like the new type of general directories based on PHPLD. If they offer a subpage where you can add a lot of text to describe the purpose of the site you submit they still are useful.
Sorry, I feel your post is a bit “all over the place.” The fact that a few directories don’t rank for their own name is not an indictment on all directories.
Also, you say Matt Cutts asked us to start “reporting paid directories” and that is not the case. The post from Cutts is about paid links designed to game Google PageRank, and doesn’t imply that you can’t submit to paid directories anymore.
There are plent of directories out there still up and running and ranking for their own names as well as plenty of other phrases. No need to paint with such a broad brush stroke.
David: If directories don’t sell links; what do they sell?
Tad Chef: I work almost exclusively with niche directories and I’ve seen a lot of them go down the tube. We were advertising on 36 or so at one point in time and now we are down to 27. We’ve already started making submissions an option and not a requirement.
Darren: The post on Sphinn indicated that a lot of directories had fallen. I simply added on what my experience has been with directories as well which when combined is a fairly decent amount of directiories.
I might also add that I gave a link to Matts blog post which is only ONE posting on what became a rather heated debate in forums, on blogs and chat rooms.
I painted a broad brush stroke because I predict that it will become more and more of a reality for directory owners. We are all entitled to our opinions and predictions as you are. And hey; if I am wrong then I am wrong and thank goodness because I’ve helped build a directory or two out there over the years.
My $0.02
Saw this coming.
There are natural links and artificial links.
Google loves the first - hates the second.
‘Paid’ directories contribute to the second ;->
Let me forecast this too!
Article Directories are headed for a drop soon too!
Good morning Clint,
I’ve not dived into article directories so I can’t say I agree or disagree but let me ask this…
Do article directories include sites like PRWeb which distributes press releases (articles) to the AP? If so, I’d say they would be pretty safe because it is the business relationships they foster that make them a successful marketing tool.
If you are not talking about sites like PRWeb, what kind of sites are you talking about?
Sorry for asking questions on my own blog but I only wish I can claim to know it all and have done it all.
[…] updated this week The paid link debate, part 241 The power of Link Building & Public Relations Several paid directories got bitch slapped by Google How to build links with Google […]
Google’s all algorithms has failed. Google is doing hand ranking and obviously they can’t sustain it expect the web 2.0 collapse soon….. the banner advertisement hype went on for about 3 years 1999-2001 before collapsing, so i will give adnonsense about that much time………. 2005-2008 RIP.
Hello Joe,
That is a pretty bold accusation on an SEO Blog. I haven’t seen a recent increase of Google jobs on Monster or Dice lately so i’m curious what proof if any you have on this?
I of course know that you are just rambling. Google still has a working algo. However rant on Joe, I’d love to hear your gripes and predictions.
[…] prediction I have is that in a year or two, paid directories will be useless to website owners who are looking to buy a one way link. I think Google will devalue in bound links […]
[…] Internet Marketing in 10 Minutes » Paid Directory Collapse Posted by admin on 03 Sep 2007 at 06:50 pm | Tagged as: Paid Inclusion Directory News. Today it was reported that a lot of pay-for-inclusion directories … www.10minutes.org/marketin/paid-directory-collapse/ - 17k - Cached - Similar pages […]
With all the pounding that the paid directories are taking from Google, there’s something I do not understand, if you search G for the term “paid directories” look at the ads they still run. They do not want you selling links, but yet they still run ads promoting sites that do.
I have been hearing about Google’s backlash against several websites lately. And their PR dropped faster than they have conceived. I hope this gets resolved soon.
Link popularity algorithems are currently very primative and lazy devices. When some one creates a really nice website that is pleasant to look at and read and enjoy it on it’s own merrits, that site can easily end up in the abyss of the internet. Link algorithems don’t measure entertainment value and cool graphics, the very thing that really does make a site interesting. Directories were supposed to bridge the gap by actually reviewing the site by a human being. Unfortunately, most directories are out for the money and end up automating the selection process that’s not much better than those mysterious google robots.
Maybe the real solution lies in the BACK button on your browser. A great place for web surfers to check off a 1 - 5 radio button popup to provide their personal rating. If these stats were integrated into the existing algorithems we might have a better ballance in site ranking. Directories could continue to provide their measured influence in the overall mix. It makes no sense to put this directory technology into the graveyard.
Hello Kern,
This post continues to amaze me in the amount of traffic it gets and occasional comments.
Anyways, the human rating system can easily be manipulated by savvy marketers. Look at Digg as one minor example. There has been numerous complaints about people who Digg knowing others and maybe even paying for Digg’s. Even I’ve been guilty of hitting up my friends & co-workers for such positive reviews. What’s to say that someone won’t pay to have positive ratings or maybe even have 5 - 10 or 100 ‘friends’ vote in their favor?
I wrote another post on this blog well after this one titled, “Approving In Bound Links” which I think would help the situation at a much deeper level then user ratings.
In the end I think accountability is the issue here. Websites run rampant with useless and irrelevant links to them and I think these kinds of links really hurt the natural growth of things.
As with any commenter on my blog, I welcome open dialogue on these kinds of things.
John Jones
- 10 minutes of SEO, SEM & Internet Marketing
Hello John,
If a site is well promoted and getting hundreds of hits a day, the exit rank concept will hold true. How many friends could someone come up with to plug in a 5 rating when they only get one vote per IP address? They would have to come up with 30 or more fresh computers a day to have any serious impact. After a month or two, even the most savy marketeers will eventually exhaust their resourses, and the other rankings would continue on for years. It would just create a modest blip in the overall curve.
Hello Kern,
I see where you are coming from but then ranking would be based off of traffic. A brand new site cannot compete against a site that has been around for years and has an established visitor base, rankings and so on. In theory you’d have a web economy where the rich keep on getting richer and the poor stay poor because they’d never be able to compete on the same level.
I think you’d be amazed at the power of social networks like stumble upon and the type of traffic word of mouth can produce. Add to that the fact that proxies make it easy for people to mask their IP address and people like to find ways around systems and the ‘rating’ system wouldn’t hold up all that much.
From another point of view there would have to be one standard for search engines for something like this to work. Every computer would have to have the Google Toolbar for example. Since this isn’t going to happen you’ll also have to keep in mind that your concept wouldn’t cover the complete world wide web.
Happy New Years boss.
John Jones
- 10 minutes of SEO, SEM & Internet Marketing
John,
All I can say is that it’s up to guys like us to brainstorm potential cures for the current system. The main problem, as I see it is the competition for advertising revenue that is at stake for the search engines and their pay per click programs. Because both Yahoo and Google do not have niche directories built into their system, specialty directories definately have their use.
All those general directories that try to cover the whole gammit of subject material, well, maybe those should fall to the wayside to a large extent, but they will die a natural death eventually without any prodding from google. General Directories inside big general directores (like Yahoo) just creates redundancy.
Hello Kern,
Many people think that Dmoz has seen it’s better days. It is a large and old directory covering all subject material. It may be that it will see a natural death eventually but my guess is it won’t be any time soon which leaves them open to get a little creative… sink or swim.
Yahoo’s directory is still holding up pretty good. I think I know more people not willing to pay the yearly fee then people who would invest in it but so long as it continues to bring an income and serves useful to Yahoo I wouldn’t expect a natural death. I’d be more inclined to believe that Yahoo will continue providing life support.
Interesting theory to toss out here but could one reason Google nailed directories so hard this last update be due to money? Scare people away from putting money into directories and they may turn around and put it into PPC. I guess I can’t say I’d put it past them or any other search engine.
By the way, I think BOTW.org still does a pretty good at covering the whole gammit. I don’t know details about their financials or any of that but they appear to remain strong and keep getting stronger.
I’ll agree to redundancy by the way. Many people including myself have a tendancy to submit websites to multiple directories for the link juice. Either free or paid, many people use the same old title and description. What we end up with is a lot of the same websites across hundreds of directory websites which equates out to be trash trash trash.
Anyways, it will be interesting to see how search engines evolve. Google was a first of its kind to pay close attention to links and making them a staple within their system. It is high time something new came along for us to brainstorm on and then manipulate.
John Jones
- 10 minutes of SEO, SEM & Internet Marketing