Google to drop DMOZ?

[clasione]

Now that's a pretty juicy title their, but I figured I'd bring up a point that has been on my mind for some time....

Don't know if anyone has ever brought this up before but I think Google will need to drop DMOZ sometime in the near future...

DMOZ has been around for a long time but there reputation isn't nearly what it should be from many posts on boards like this about alterior motives and editor favoritism.....

I feel pretty confident that most of the DMOZ data is good and acurate, but some have been minipulated a bit.

Also there track record for taking long periods of time in reviewing submitted sites hasn't gone unnoticed...

Does anyone else feel that Google will soon handle their own directory submission soon and have human reviews?

I think Google would be able to put alot more weight on their own directory listings if they did....

After all, in a fight between the engines, Yahoo! and MSN have their own.... :rolleyes:

[Crazy_Rob]

I think Google has more important things to invest in.

[Blogmaster]

I think the time factor will play a major role. I also wouldn't doubt if Google went with a paid directory eventually just like Yahoo!

[clasione]

I also wouldn't doubt if Google went with a paid directory eventually just like Yahoo!


No doubt it would be a lucretive decision....

They really could just start off with the DMOZ data, move in editors and start requiring paid inclusion while they clean things up.....

[anthonycea]

What the hell does Google need a directory for or why do they need DMOZ anymore? It was great in the early days when they had no index.

No one uses directories to find anything anyway.

We have AOL who is investing in the search business and I feel "they" will try to use DMOZ for themselves one day and that will cause Google to drop it.

They don't even need a Google directory in my opinion, I have never used the Yahoo directory to find anything or anyone elses directory for that matter.

[schlottke]

The reason I don't think google will create a paid inclusion directory (unless it *does not have an effect on the SERPS) is because a link from their domain will undoubtably have a very positive effect in rankings in the current situation.

With that said, a directory is useless, really, when you are talking about a search engine that is suppose to be able to find anything on the web easily. If Im looking for a Chiropractor in Phoenix, I dont want to have to click on six sub categories to find it, I want to run a search and get the page in 0.05 seconds. That is one of the reasons google did away with the directory link on the main page to begin with.

[clasione]

well we have already began to here that periodically Google will human review a site here and their and make a decision based on that. I remeber someone mentioned somewhere that ofcourse they would never admit it but they do review some here and their.....

Their own directory would give them an opportunity to review everything and this way if they applied more weight to somethings than others they would have good reason to do so....

I think it would be a better way for them to assign weight.

But you never know, I have even heard others talk that Google may give a little more weight to sites that are in Yahoo directory because when it comes down to it, they can atleast count on the fact that someone really did review the site and it cost someone (in most cases) 300 bucks just to submit it, so it should be pretty decent....

[anthonycea]

Google does not work that way, they believe in coding and computers and scalability across their network, not people doing the work.

Don't count on a directory, they are really outdated and everyone has one just like everyone has a forum now.

Google will only human review a site if they have a lot of spam reports on it or if some webmaster is on their ban list.

They have also removed sites when they had a lot of complaints like they had with the Jew Watch site that was coming up number 1 for the search term “Jew”, they will do a human review in cases like this.

[schlottke]

I understand your point of view, and it does make sense on a fair playing field... However, Google would need hundreds of editors to take on the task, and the websites are ever changing. DMOZ, which has a huge base of reviewers, has hundreds of BS sites in the wrong category because domains expire and porn sites or other people buy them and stick crap up in place of the existing site.

I personally think it would be a waste of resources and wouldn't really be that useful.

[daamsie]

What the hell does Google need a directory for or why do they need DMOZ anymore? It was great in the early days when they had no index.

No one uses directories to find anything anyway.


Well, actually, I use DMOZ from time to time. There have been plenty of instances where I couldn't find a site in Google, Yahoo or MSN. Drilling down through the categories in DMOZ has often helped me find such difficult sites. You have to remember, not EVERYONE knows how to SEO and as a result, sometimes very useful sites simply don't show in the engines.

That said, I doubt very much that Google will introduce their own directory. I think their current idea to just slap a PR ranking on it is about as far as they'll go. Mainly, I just think they've got bigger things on their mind as pointed out.

I do agree though that it would be a good idea for google to have a PFI directory. I don't think the argument about the reason being that the link would be TOO valuable is really valid. They wouldn't be any more or less valuable than links in the current Google directory. And in the deeper categories, they still aren't all THAT precious right now. If a paid reviewer decided that a link belonged in a top level category, then that site must be well worth it I'd think and it only benefits Google to give them a boost in the serps as well.

[anthonycea]

Well Google would just be a pay for play search engine and that would bring more conflict of interest into the reasons for sites to be in the index.

I know that some sites have been high in the SERP's because they were networks of spam sites that carried ADSENSE, it matters not if another soul believes this.

I know that it has happened and is still happening but I will not bring this back for anyone to see again.

A PFI directory would bring even more conflict of interest along with the linking toolbar that is bringing more attention to possible conflict of interest on Google's part.

The bottom line is this, down the road most SERP's will be pay for play in one way or another, there is no stopping this as companies who want to reach the online crowd will be willing to pay for top SERP positions.

Poor old webmasters will be forced to buy ADWORDS and other programs to get hits in the long term future as more and more sites come online.

[schlottke]

"They wouldn't be any more or less valuable than links in the current Google directory. And in the deeper categories, they still aren't all THAT precious right now"

The difference is that if Google took on a project like this, they wouldnt be feeding the data from somewhere else, so they'd have a strong PR10 directory, rather than a PR8.

[Blogmaster]

Google's stockholders will make sure every avanue of revenue will be explored. I believe that paid directory listings will happen. When, I have no clue !

[anthonycea]

That would be the largest strategic mistake that Google could ever make and would ruin the search engine in my opinion.

[Mia]

Does anyone else feel that Google will soon handle their own directory submission soon and have human reviews? :rolleyes:

When that happens there will no doubt be thousands of threads talking about how Google's directory sucks, and only the big boys with cool toys get listed, or those with bucks.

Personally I would rather stick to manually submitting to various SE's and other locallized directories, freebies, the coop, etc.. It seems to carry more weight per buck if you know what I mean.

[anthonycea]

Does anyone ever get a referral from any directory? Most of us are lucky to get one from MSN or Yahoo search most of the time so what the hell are we getting up in arms about these sorry directories if webmasters get little or no traffic from them?

[Mia]

Out of 3329 referring sites this month on our McCoyPottery.Com site we got 43 from the Google Directory:

http://directory.google.com/Top/Recreation/Antiques/Ceramics_and_Pottery/
(http://directory.google.com/Top/Recreation/Antiques/Ceramics)

[schlottke]

We do get some, well under a half of a %. Im not saying they don't generate sales, but I can't see Google ever wasting their time on something like this. Why would they waste so much man power developing this when they could be spending their time coming out with *new* ideas, rather than wasting time on old, out dated ones?

Google's stock holders will sit and watch the company create revenue, just like they have been. The only way I could see something as useless as another directory come into play is if they started to fall off the map and it was a last ditch effort to pull in some coin before they went belly up.

[daamsie]

"They wouldn't be any more or less valuable than links in the current Google directory. And in the deeper categories, they still aren't all THAT precious right now"

The difference is that if Google took on a project like this, they wouldnt be feeding the data from somewhere else, so they'd have a strong PR10 directory, rather than a PR8.

I'm not sure I follow why it would have a higher PR if they weren't 'feeding' the data. Providing they don't link to it from their front page, I would expect it still to be a PR8. Since when does the PR algorithm take into account whether or not the content is from a feed?

The only way that their directory would get a PR10 is if enough other sites linked to them (or google changed their site's internal linking structure); simple as that. Well, I guess they could manually tweak it, but I doubt they'd bother.


That would be the largest strategic mistake that Google could ever make and would ruin the search engine in my opinion.

This has little to nothing to do with their search engine. It is a completely seperate product we're talking about.

As for traffic from directories, you're right, they're not much at all. So far this month we've had just over 60 from yahoo's directory. I can't tell how many from google due to our stats software not seeming to take into account the url variable.. but I imagine it's about the same. All up, that's about 0.017 % of traffic. :)

Not many people seem to use them anymore (if ever they did). Still, I find it a great way to locate badly seo'd sites.

[Blogmaster]

For the last time, PR means nothing, get rid of the foolbar

[anthonycea]

Daamsie it is a completely separate product, just like the toolbar is right?

One would not have any effect on the other?

Adsense and Adwords are separate products but they have no effect on the search engines organic results either?

If Google were to take money for inclusion in a directory that would not give any incentive for them to list companies in the organic search engine results?

We do live in the real world, correct?

[Crazy_Rob]

If Google were to take money for inclusion in a directory that would not give any incentive for them to list companies in the organic search engine results?


Have you ever heard of a little program called "Adwords"? :D

[schlottke]

"I'm not sure I follow why it would have a higher PR if they weren't 'feeding' the data. Providing they don't link to it from their front page, I would expect it still to be a PR8. Since when does the PR algorithm take into account whether or not the content is from a feed?

The only way that their directory would get a PR10 is if enough other sites linked to them (or google changed their site's internal linking structure); simple as that. Well, I guess they could manually tweak it, but I doubt they'd bother. "

If they put that much effort into a product, it'd become a PR10. I think its pretty simple to see that if they released something this big, every related site would be linking to it, as well as themselves...

"For the last time, PR means nothing, get rid of the foolbar"

riiiight. A link from a PR8 or PR9 page wouldn't help you any more than from a PR0 page...

[Blogmaster]

I don't see Google stripping down the current directory rather than stopping to accept new DMOZ results and instead requiring a fee to get new listings in. That would be the easiest way to do it.

It may no longer be about what the best long term strategy is, I believe they are getting more and more short sighted and pressure from the stockholders will not help when it comes to making the most beneficial decisions.

About PR - the whole structure is a-changing, who is comparing PR9 to PR0? :rolleyes:

[schlottke]

You are sitetutor, by saying PR doesnt matter.

[Blogmaster]

Yeh, PR does matter when it comes to such a high difference in numbers. It does have some relevance statistically speaking.

but many members here focus on it so much, they lose track of their strategy.


Relevance of content and weight of the domain you are linked from is far more important IMO.

[Crazy_Rob]

I believe they are getting more and more short sighted and pressure from the stockholders will not help when it comes to making the most beneficial decisions.

What leads you to believe this?

[Blogmaster]

Not sure, just watching the pattern. Less of an interest in fixing what is broken and more of a focus on exhausting the power source they have created. Yahoo and Overture create more revenue than Google, right?

I think the guys who created Google are no longer into it like they once were and will be giving in to suggestions which will benefit them financially.

It's kinda of like the Wild West once was, land was free. Now we're standing in a commercial mecca.

it's just the way human nature works IMO. If you have something worth something, you eventually focus on benefitting from it once the initial fire and excitement has burned down.

[Crazy_Rob]

Yahoo and Overture create more revenue than Google, right?

Not much more.

[daamsie]

For the last time, PR means nothing, get rid of the foolbar

The 'foolbar' PR as you call it may not mean anything, but the ACTUAL PR is still a very important factor in SEO. But yes, you can't really judge a site on what the toolbar says these days, as it seems to perpetually be out of date by several months.


Daamsie it is a completely separate product, just like the toolbar is right?

One would not have any effect on the other?

Adsense and Adwords are separate products but they have no effect on the search engines organic results either?

If Google were to take money for inclusion in a directory that would not give any incentive for them to list companies in the organic search engine results?

We do live in the real world, correct?


Conspiracy theories aside, there is no base to such a claim. Sure, people would get a boost in the engines by paying to be in the directory (thanks to the decent link), but the same goes for ANY directory you can currently pay to get into. You can pay your way to the top of the google index without much trouble at all really, so why shouldn't google be the one being payed??

What's more, if google were to do the reviewing, presumably they would do enough scrutinising to ensure crappy sites don't pay their way to the top. In a lot of ways it would be better for the search results than relying on OTHER directories' approval mechanisms (like DMOZ).


If they put that much effort into a product, it'd become a PR10. I think its pretty simple to see that if they released something this big, every related site would be linking to it, as well as themselves..


Ok, well following on from that argument, you might think that Google News or Google Images would be able to do better than a PR8. There's plenty of effort that went into those and they even have a link off the front page. Sorry, but you're making no sense. A PR 10 is simply not that easy to get, even for Google (unless of course they manually tweak it, which there's no good reason to believe).

[schlottke]

" weight of the domain you are linked "

What do you mean by that exactly?

The IMAGE search and NEWS don't require hundreds of people working to review sites, they use similar algorithms as the search itself and are not directly linked from the main domain.

http://www.google.com/services/
and
http://www.google.com/ads/

Both are, and carry PR 10.

The arguement wasn't about the Damn PR anyway, it was about the fact that wasting their time on such a stupid creation as another directory would be totally pointless. If you don't agree with that, then I'd love to hear why you think it would be profitable to have a couple hundred people working to review sites and remain *unbiased* for only a couple million dollars in annual profit each year.


If they had 50,000 sites in the directory, charging $300 a year, that is $15,000,000 gross, before paying for all of the resources needed to manage that (employees, additional servers, food, benefits, etc) ... They'd be better served working on continued improvement of adsense..

Ofcourse I could be wrong, but I just don't see why they'd totally change their ways and gear towards a non-algorithmatically solved problem, in the directory.

[daamsie]

The IMAGE search and NEWS don't require hundreds of people working to review sites, they use similar algorithms as the search itself and are not directly linked from the main domain.


Yes, they are linked from the main domain. Albeit with some url variables which can't help in passing PR. Obviously somethiing they don't care about all that much.


The arguement wasn't about the Damn PR anyway, it was about the fact that wasting their time on such a stupid creation as another directory would be totally pointless.


Hey, you were the one who brought up the PR issue. I was only responding because it seemed like a crap argument.


If you don't agree with that, then I'd love to hear why you think it would be profitable to have a couple hundred people working to review sites and remain *unbiased* for only a couple million dollars in annual profit each year.

If they had 50,000 sites in the directory, charging $300 a year, that is $15,000,000 gross, before paying for all of the resources needed to manage that (employees, additional servers, food, benefits, etc) ... They'd be better served working on continued improvement of adsense..

50,000 sites? Seems to me there would be a somewhat larger market than that. The ODP has over 4 million sites, or so they say. I mean, if you had 200 people reviewing sites, you'd think they would pull in more than 50,000 * $300 in that year. A full-time reviewer should be able to do 20 sites a day. To get 50,000 sites reviewed in a year, you'd only need about 10 reviewers (and they don't need to have a PHD either, so shouldn't be the most expensive of employees!).

I'd say 500,000 sites a year would be a better estimate though (based on my imagination only). And in that case, $150,000,000 should leave plenty of room for taking care of the costs with a fairly tidy profit on top of that.


Ofcourse I could be wrong, but I just don't see why they'd totally change their ways and gear towards a non-algorithmatically solved problem, in the directory.

That I can agree with and that's pretty much why I doubt they would do something like this; it's just so very UN-google. Then again, you never know what shareholder pressure could achieve. And really, what kind of algorithmic problem does Google solve with Blogger.com? They've already changed their ways in other areas of the enterprise.

And to me at least, a little "Google Reviewed" icon in the search results would be a nice feature. :D

[schlottke]

You know what, I agree with everything you just said!

[anthonycea]

PR is a sideshow and is a marketing tool of the Google engine that webmasters have on the mind, the average surfer could not care less what PageRank is nor do those who shop for goods online. It is something that is part of the toolbar which is something that Google uses to manage their business in real time given in return for page links and page rank gauge. It is more important to SEO and webmasters versus to the average guy on the internet.

PageRank has brought on all of the buying and selling of links that contribute to the lack of integrity of the search index and the "so called buying your way to the top".

[Haichi]

So we should all hate PR now?

If the toolbar does not show true PR what is the best way to find your true PR?

[kepa]

The ODP has over 4 million sites, or so they say.
It really can't be that many as a large chunk of it are sites the were abandoned...by either the webmaster themselves or the DMOZ EDITOR THEMSELVES! Dead for years! They don't work on old crap and clean up the house, they just want to index more sites, which is why the quality of what is in there is so poor - yet they are quick to spew out these AWESOME numbers...

A paid directory could be more biased, but at least there would be quality standards. If there really is a value added by a directory (which I'm not convinced there is), then why not it be paid if it is truly a good source of info?

It's all about control and DMOZ is out of control as each editor does their own thing, based on their own work ethics and their own whims. Not all of them are honorable like cbp.

[Blogmaster]

Not much more.
True! It used to be a lot more and they must have thought "Hey, we are #1 in popularity, let's cash in on it."

I mean, if I was the Google owner, I would be upset that the ones less popular make more dough ...

[Mia]

I really doubt the previous owners of google care much about that. They have long sinced cashed out. That's what an IPO is for.