What everyone seems to be missing is that the value of directory links is a relative measure. If you have a couple of hundred directory links, your site is going to rank better relative to other sites that have few if any backlinks. Yes the site with a handful of quality backlinks is going to rank higher, but we all know how difficult it is to build up authoritative backlinks. It all depends on the relative competition you are facing in the SERPs. Directories are always going to be the low-hanging fruit of the trade.
Break it down to a cost/payoff ratio. How long does it take to get 10 authoritative backlinks? a couple of days at best? One really great idea? (and how often do those come along?) How long does it take to submit to 500 directories? Sure the payoff for 10 authoritative links may be better than 500 directories, but I can do the 500 directories in one afternoon. Even if only half end up sticking around more than a month and get spidered, I still have a chance that each one will generate some traffic and that I will get at least some weight from the link. Plus, I can still work on getting the 10 authoritative links. In short, I'll have my cake and eat it too.
Yeah, that soon. I've seen more than a couple directories start up and offer free links so they can get good organic links from people posting lists of free directories, but then they find out out it's a daily chore to review links. Maybe they let it pile up for a week or get frustrated by the huge number of spammy submissions, but the end result is the same. No new links are approved, and eventually te directory is wiped out to make way for the next "easy money making" idea.
Sorry i don't quite agree with this @Tim, i still do directory submission and i can see some good sites approve my link submitted.
I think there is really a pyramid for directories with tons of link farms making up the broad, wide base, and a few authoritative directories forming the narrow top. Authoritative directories: Try to offer value for surfers Are careful about who and what they link to Gain a variety of deep inbound links from natural and quality sources because surfers want to link to them (Link bait) Have unique descriptions, text and categories Are old Link farms: Are oriented toward link submitters and search engines Link to anyone or anything (or anyone who pays) Rarely have deep inbound links Acquire low quality inbound links by unnatural methods (smells fishy like bait) Used the submitters' descriptions which were submitted to 500 other sites Are new Perhaps google can't tell the difference as well as they'd like to, but I would bet they are trying.
This post is great, I think exactly the same and follow these rules on my directory to make it high quality. * Try to offer value for surfers * Are careful about who and what they link to * Gain a variety of deep inbound links from natural and quality sources because surfers want to link to them (Link bait) * Have unique descriptions, text and categories * Are old (This I can not change only time )
The source was my own ears. I think it is reliable, I wasn't drinking yet as it was 3 o'clock in the afternoon. 4 hours later and it would not have been at all reliable
I agree with the "Old" part the most . Old+Niche link is probably a lot more helpful than anything else.
We have known this for a very long time... Quality still rules with Google and aslong as you have a quality directory don't stress.
I still do directory submission too. I was simply pointing how some directories die quickly. Someone (you?) had previously laughed at the concept of directories that quickly go defunct. I'm not proposing all die swiftly, or even that a large percentage disappear in weeks, just that I have seen about 4 or 5 where the webmaster either died or quit caring because the directory languished and withered. I'll still submit to every directory I see, because sometimes there's no way of knowing which directories will grow and which won't.