Hello mates... I'll write here my situation, and you guys will try to explain if it's right... I'm trying to Rank #1 in a keyword who has something about 1.5kk monthly searches... I'm about in 4-5 spot...but it's ok... The problem is THE FIRST RESULT... Lets see... 1- Both sites (mine and first spot) has the "normal SEO": titles, URLs, Metatags and these things optimized. 2- My main page has about 650 backlinks at google. The First Spot's Main Page has 250 Backlinks at Google. 3- My main page has about 110.000 backlinks at yahoo. The First Spot's Main Page has 41.000 backlinks at Google (-.-) 4- My website has PR 4. The First Spot Site has PR 5. 6- If you do "Site:mysite.com" in Google, it shows about 5.000 results. If you do "Site:thefirstspot.com" in Google, it shows about 2.000 results. THE ONLY THING MY WEBSITE LOSTS IS: My site was created in February, 2009. The first spot was created in July, 2005 So, now comes the question... Is 'Site Age' really so Strong for SERP?
Might be the quality of links going into your competitor as compared to you. Or the site already reached authority site status. Do you see sitewide link for them ?
Yes age matters on google,i noticed some sites which are one year old ranks good on yahoo but they are nowhere in google.
I'm going to have to go with the quality of links pointing to the site. That's the main factor in the algorithm. Domain age may be an indicator of persistent quality but beyond a certain point it can't be a huge factor. If it had a .1 weighting for example, a 6 month old site may get a .05 and a 6 year old site may get a .09. This is obviously a grossly over simplified estimation but you get the point. I would guess quality of links (aggregated link weight, etc.) would have more like a .5 weighting, by comparison.
I do think so... imo, google measures, among others: 1. popularity (visitors). 2. authority (number of quality backlinks). 3. sites age. 4. url structure (i find Google prefers sites with friendly urls).
As per google patent, the longer that a site has been around, the higher is the value assigned to it as google sees fit.
Age is very important to Google. I have competing against a site that has a 5 year lead on me. It has 123 incoing links, I have 20,000. It doesn't matter, I never get closer than no. 3 Remember this is both good and bad. In five years time you might be pleased that your competitors cannot get close!
Popularity and Authority is what matters to google. w3.org can have a url of w3.org/applesandgrapes, and rank #1 for "Online Banking" if it wanted to. Riiiiiteeeee?
I am begining to believe that in my area of e-commerce, two years is a milestone for a site's age. Most of the sites I manage are 4 or more years older. The one that is a little over 2 years is just now getting some number top 5 rankings. Age is a factor but it may be part of authority.
yes for sure. if you compare two sites with equal seo quality, the older site will win. anyway, your if your PR is higher, increase seo optimizing, and more backlinks, i guess you will beat it.
you can kill the site age issue, just go and extend the domain registration period for as many years that you have lost out to the site on first spot, that is, for example if your firstspot site has 4 years of domain age and your domain is regd in feb 2009, get the domain registration period extended by another 4 years and wait for a month, if site age was the reason for the low rankings then that issue will be killed on that count
Site age is one of the important factors, and by no means the most important. I notice sites do start to get better rankings after a couple of years with all other things being equal, so certainly it helps... its just the waiting that's frustrating...
obviously it is all about PR, you are PR4 and your competitor has PR5. add more quality backlink to your site and i think you will be in the first place in a short time. you are almost there!
Age factor definitely improves your site's weightage in SERP's. Google has strict algo's for new sites.
I think you may be confusing age with trust. It does take time to earn trust, but time by itself isn't necessarily going to earn trust. As an example: If a spam site started today, and was still spamming in ten years time, it will not have gained in rank because it will not have earned any trust. The first site has 40k backlinks that were gained over 4 and a half years, or 54 months. That's around 750 links per month. Your site has gained 110k links in 10 months. That's around 11,000 links per month. How many of those links were naturally gained from trustworthy sites? Although getting lots of links over a short amount of time may increase page rank, I don't know how affective it is at increasing trust rank. (It may even be counter productive) Cheers James
as we know serps are affected by many many factors only some of which have been mentioned here. i do believe that age of the domain (also age of the backlinks pointing to that domain too) and the quality and quantity of backlinks are 2 major factors. tattoos also makes a very good point about backlink growth and 'trust' and 'authority' you may wish to refer to this insightful article for ideas on some of the more important factors of seo ranking thekeywordacademy.com/search-engine-optimization/ factors: Keyword use in title tag Anchor text of inbound links Global link popularity of the site Age of the site Link popularity within the site’s internal link structure Topical relevance of inbound links to site Link popularity of site in topical community Keyword use in body text Global link popularity of linking sites Topical relationship of linking pages work on these other factors to gain advantage over domain 'age'