How to Create a Really Bad Directory

There have been a couple of threads discussing bad directories. Here is my analysis.


With respect to SEO, here are the top things you can do to create a crappy directory:

1. Share a database between your network of directories. Having the exact same listings with the same text over a network of related sites would be awesome.

2. Automatically approve listings without any quality control at all.

3. Interlink the directories of your network. Using sitewide links would be best.

4. Offer a service to list a website to your large network of directories, thus creating a type of link-farm with lots of duplicate content.

5. Host your directory network on the same IP. If not, you can always host a large network on the same IP C class.

6. Use blackhat link techniques. These methods may help your directory in the short-run but the long-term viability of your directory is unsure.

7. Rather than create your own categories, use a readily available category dump. Why not have the same categories as thousands of other bad directories.

8. Create a network of identical directories.


Note: For optimal performance, please feel free to combine the factors above.



Factors that are not good for your customers.

1. Use techniques that create fake toolbar PageRank.

2. Call your site a free directory even if you have no real intention of approving free submissions.

3. Use dropped domains.


Comments are welcome

 

thanks for shareing that i was thinking about making my own directory but i dont know if i should make it a free or paid directory..

 

Hahahaha...
ANd once you get your network up, come on DP and promote!

Worse I see on any directory?
Using the default template!

But now the IP thing?
Google and other search engines do not get excited one bit about 2 or 100 or a 1000 sites (directories) using the same IP.

 

“Make sure that your chosen domain name as no relation to directories, something like buyanewhome.com”

“Always refer to your directory by PageRank” i.e.: New PageRank 5 directory!

“Explain that you will be buying loads of links to maintain your fake PR6 domain”

Thanks Brian

 

Funny and true (sad but true).

How about:

Say your directory has been around since 1999 when you created it 3 months ago.


There are a lot of "winning" directories.

 

Best is to make regular links at $29.99 per year.
Featured links at $99.99 per year.

Then fill the directory with your links, your friends links, and other bad links.

Then promote it saying look at how many links there are and they paid for the links.

 

Brent, intriguing post with an attractive topic. I don't want to say "Wow, nice thread" and sit down there. Rather I want to challenge some of your points and lead into a discussion of implementing them, which is where the real trick is.

While I agree with almost every point of yours, following are worth discussing when it comes to implementation.

Of course I agree with you. Listing a website in multiple directories with same description, keyword anchor text is just an act of adding garbage. This is definitely not healthy. However what do people think of creating large network of directories? Do you guys think creating network of directories with good level of edition is better? Let's take a scenario: Adding a single website in the network with different description (Unique content for every directory) is good?

Yes, it is essential to have unique category taxonomy. However most of the directory network use the same category structure. This is just to save their time. Creating 25 different category structure will certainly take lot of time. Every one talks about it. But no one gives a solution or suggestion to create better category structure. What do you think is the best way to do this? I do the following:

- Hire different folks for different category structure. Give them base main categories. Ask them to go through dmoz and other large directories to pick few inner sub categories and fill up category structure.
- Create new categories for websites that doesn't fit the existing category structure. This is critical. If you do this correctly, your directory will have a good unique category structure.

Yep, it's not good either. So, what do you think can be the differentiating factors? I can only think of design and category structure.

Every one talks about this. But no one gives constructive ideas on how to implement it. Let me share my experience as a person who is running directories for just 3 months. But I am doing things correctly right from the start. Did some mistakes, of course, but learnt from them. A free directory will get hell a lot of submissions. If your PR range is above 4 you can expect 500 to 1000 submissions per day. If you analyze carefully, almost every listing is nothing but BS. Don't get me wrong here. When I say BS, i am talking about the content. Most of the content used are either scrapped from the site, or they are just used in some other 100 directories. How in the world can you maintain quality if you get these many number of listings per day with majority of submissions being BS. The effort that you may need to spend for finding the gem is too much that you either don't have time or you don't have a revenue model to support it. Can any one here boldly list, best edited free web directory that has a revenue model as well? Of course don't show me DMOZ. Please show me some revenue generating free directories that are best edited. I am asking revenue generating because we are not doing social service right? If you spend few hours per day doing quality work, don't you expect to get paid?

What I am saying is, people talk about quality. I agree we must talk. But very less people nail down the implementation strategy. From my experience, i would say free directories are just complicated. I can only see two types of free directories. 1) Free and has nothing but BS. Accepts everything and offers no value. 2) Free for the sake of free and upsell their paid submission. Does approve few free submissions for the heck of it, however does good edition and thus can be called as quality directory (In my view)

Please feel free to add / critic my thoughts.

 

I still think the worse is just having the wrong domain for a directory.
Please don't fall into that trap!
Regardless of the page rank on a domain, if it has nothing to do with directories or a niche that could be a directory, leave it alone or develop it as a different type of site.

In that vein, I ran up just now a list of two-word .com domains.
All end in the keyword "directory".
All are available to register at your favorite registrar.
See here;
Directory Domains

 

1. If you'r only free listing is the reciprocal option and u come on DP and announce it as a free directory.
2. If you are going to accept free submissions with a no-follow attitude.
3. If phpld its the only script you know.

Sorry Brent i cant remember of any at the moment. Hope this few will help.

 

Several interesting points have already been made but here's my 2 cents.

Just thinking out loud here about something Samdar said. Don't know myself how to program or implement but...it seems most of the spammy crap gets submitted in bunches. Perhaps one could limit the number of submissions per IP/per day? SEO firms could be invited to submit via email. Much easier to delete one email than several dozen submissions.

I've never figured out how someone can manage a free general directory much less a network of them. A free niche directory would seem to be the only free directory model that can be managed by one person, be well-edited and still make an income.

If I were building a general directory from scratch, I would start with the top level categories and let folks submit to them. I would maybe research which are the largest/busiest sub-categories on well-established directories and include them too. Then as each category filled, I would start building the secondary and tertiary categories. It serves two things...it limits empty categories and keeps the pages changing to entice Google to visit my new directory more often. As the site grows, I would either prohibit submissions to the top cats, limit them to sites where there isn't a sub-cat yet or make that a premium upgrade.

And finally, to differentiate myself further...if a category got more than 5-10 pages deep, I would break that category down - maybe by alphabet if no topic really presented itself. I've seen so many here whinging that their submissions have dried up. Why would I pay to be listed on the 50th page of a category? Why would I pay for a featured listing when the first 2-3 pages of the category are already filled with featured listings?

 

Great ideas for building a good directory. But why build a good directory when you can follow the points above and create 50 bad ones.

 

Oh, I don't know. I guess because I try to build sites for the long term. Of course, I must admit, if it weren't for that pesky conscience of mine that says it's not nice to cheat people, I would probably give that revenue model a shot. Sadly, they must be making money otherwise there wouldn't be so many thieves doing it.

 

I am offering some QBC lessons, let me know if you make you mind up

 

You conveniently left off the first part of my statement... I'm not a fan of ripping people off.

 

This kind of fraud model will continue to thrive unless and until Google catches these folks at an early stage. Sadly too much of our efforts are dependent on Google and Google has too much of things to deal with. This is not healthy either. People will create, cheat and run away with xx% of profit before they are caught red hand. Once that network is down, they will rinse, repeat and run away again. It is up to the end user to realize and judge a directory before submitting to them. Unfortunately not every one does their research.

This is applicable with paid blog networks. How many blogs we see in link sale forum that are crappy with no / BS content that are built just to sell links. Though Google penalizes sites that outrageously sells link, they are too slow to catch up. This model thrives and so will be the Bad directory model. I guess no one here can do anything about it except creating awareness and educating end users.

 

Information about what not to do is as if not more valuable than information about what is best to do. It is always good to look at the flip side of the coin as well. Thanks for the mind jog.

 

I agree, so much can be learned from seeing how badly others do things.

 

Yeah, yeah - never have an original name.

Directories such as yahoo, joeant, skaffe, abilogic, greenstalk, redtree - how about search engines - google, bing - do those names instantly suggest web directories or search engines to you? Are they successful?

 

But some of those that you mention had/have the power and money to turn their name into a brand, a webmaster using a ready made script doesn't have the money, resources or intention of building a brand or reaching the point where the mere mention of their domain name is obvious to people.

So i personally feel that having at least something within the domain name that suggests that it is a directory makes more sense, especially as 99.9% of directories are running on ready made scripts from a small group of different companies.

Hope you dont take offence but i would like to point out something, one of your dir's is called tajboy, im not sure what this means, is says barkin good websites which to me would make sense if it was a niche directory for dog sites but its not its a general directory and the dog looks like a kangaroo.

Taken from your own About Us page "I have no imagination so another general directory it is."

Do you really want submitters to read that?

 

Somehow I doubt they were talking about creating a brand from scratch. There's a big difference between taking a domain like skaffe or redtree and building it into a directory and using rarejunglediseasenumber5.org or chattanoogapoolinstaller.com or whatever other nonsense domain they find with existing PR and trying to turn it into something it's not.