4 things in the directory world that bother me! (Link bait? nope!)

Gotta love the witty repartee from people recognizing themselves in the OP...

Take it as a compliment. If you only want praise, just make sure you stick to ass-kissing and never, ever try to point out that half the stuff that directory owners at DP are up to puts them squarely into the box they've invented for people outside the ingroup - the one they call Quick Buck Crew. It's really quite amusing to watch all this drama.

 

I have not yet read all the posts here. I just wanted to comment on the family friendly and blog points. I will leave the rest alone. In my opinion, family friendly means no nudity or sites with adult content. I don't consider swimsuits and lingerie to be adult content, as kids see that daily on TV, on the beach, etc. As for gambling sites, the site itself does not allow usage for underage. Therefore, I don't have a problem listing those, as long as they don't have adult graphics or such and are legitimate, which I work to verify that also via searches and even a phone call a few times. I don't gamble myself...so, can't test that way. As for the blog, it's a webmaster blog because those are the topics I planned to write about. I do work to achieve more and more non-webmaster traffic. I didn't feel it appropriate or useful to anyone to attach a blog that discusses journal-like topics that are not of interest to anyone. At least the blog should be useful to webmasters, marketers, and directory owners, and it is a minimal part of the site that is available only if it is of interest.

 

Don't understand all this ADO about 'family' friendly...
Just remove it from description, title or whatever.
I do not see any reason to have such keyword.
No importance for seo, traffic or whatever...

As hundreds time here on Directories DP. USELESS TALKING ...

 

Fair enough, I understand that family friendly is subjective, and I accept everyones opinion. Ultimately, the idea of family friendly is up to the editor(s)
I appreciate your comment on this thread (I was hoping you would post) and also thank you for not complaining about alive being used as an example.

 

Agreed, and my post was not a 'one size fits all" post, and that there are certainly exceptions.
A man can rant can't he?

 

Nice to see you making your usual useless contribution.

Chris and Mikey I will have to disagree with, if you are claiming a site is family friendly then gambling sites should not be included. Just because a gambling site claims not to allow people under the legal age there is nothing preventing a child from downloading and installing the gambling software and playing the free games provided by casino's.

Lingerie is debateable, but half of them have links hidden deeper in the sites to adult toys, etc and if they don't when you review the site, a lot of them add such links for additional revenue which is why I personally would not include a lingerie site in a "family friendly" directory.

 

Not really u need to have a license like i have, otherwise its illegal to do so and Dp police can put u behind bar.

Here is my License. Now show your license before ur thrown in jail.

 

First of all,

Bob you are an SEO !

An SEO do n't likes directories as they are eating into their revenue

Because the owner of the site can easily find links for his/her site in directories without much help from SEO.

So you are here only to discourage us. and make a bad impression about directories.


QBC- though there are some valid points about QBC,I say QBC is apt word for describing some one who is trying to make quick money by selling some sitewide links of a directory whose pagerank is fake

I see again and again some experienced members selling links on fake page rank domains.(They know it,but they they do n't care it)


I like to ask one question to you ?

A site A gets listed in 1000's of directories ,but it is on 100th position in SEO

Another site B gets listed only in 10 directories but it is in 1st position


Which site is better?

A or B?

Definitely A is better than B as A is good site when compared to B.

 

That is a tricky question to be frank, you have not provided all the facts.

The situation can be very well reversed too and B can be doing something wrong. Maybe say its not even seo optimized but maybe A is more seo friendly and optimized? Ever thought of that Free ?
Also are those 1000 sites related to site B or not , and other factors. So, poor example cause it depends on content also of the site as to if site is spammy site or generic site. etc etc. and more factors come into play. Like competition site faces, keywords targeted, marketing methods and more.

 

A. I am not a "SEO genie" I am not affiliated with any SEO company.
B. The number of directories nor the position for popular search terms make a site better than another. What makes a site better than another, is the quality of the resource to the visitor. Whether that be providing informatoin, or selling products that the visitor is to buy.
C. I do not hate directories, I am not here to discourage, but rather to encourage, and I do not want to make a bad impression on good directories.
I try and shed light on situations that bother me, I expect others to disagree with me, and that is OK with me. But do not tell me what I believe, because I hold no hard feelings about directories, in fact I am working on a directory right now. (to be released later)

 

I agree 100% to the post and i am happy that you are courageous enough to bring the reality in front. People usually don't accept reality.

BTW , I Would like to add one more point. Initially (few years back), people use to sell links on directories , but after this google opposing paid links thingy came forward , many directory owners (almost all) turned the face and said that "We dont charge for links, we charge for reviewing sites" . Oh My ! How things changed so soon, Its better to speak the truth, the truth is that "We (all directory owners) do buy links for our directories so that the directory gets good PR so that we can sell links (link juice) to out buyers" . And those who say they are "Charging a review fees" is totally crap.

Try a experiment. Buy a info domain and make a site with free template and all copied content full of adsense and affiliate links (Crap MFA site) and submit it to 50 top so called quality paid directories as a featured links and then watch how many of them reject the link and refunded the payment, then get back to me. 99% of them will approve your link for sure. Most of them dont even look at the site.

I would also like to add that, Aviva is the only directory who refunded my submission once saying it was not quality submission(though it was accepted after some time).

 

100% Disagree..... How can you say Directories eat into a SEO Professional's revenues. SEO is not all about buying links links links daily. SEO Is something which revolves all around relevancy and nothing else. Links Links Links are not the only things which matter. Links from related sites, link embedded into content.... links built and acquired naturally, links with varying anchor text, age of links, links built with a speed are those which matter. I have a finance site , i should get links from sites which are finance related.

I do agree that links from strong web directories do matter and help, but make a new site and try ranking it for some competitive keyword only with the help of web directories, you will find yourself in a sandbox for sure. SEO is something very tricky. If You think, just making a site and buying links from web directories can rank it for desired keywords then you are wrong ! ! !

 

Then you say...

You mention the word 'link' seven times in that sentence, they seem pretty important to SEO.

 

What i meant is that, keeping on buying good PR links daily blindly is not the only thing that matters. Link must follow those criteria, must be relevant is also what matters. (Many other things are to be taken into consideration too)

I said that because freewebspace meant that Directories cut into SEO's revenue because people can buy links from web directories and hence there is no requirement of SEOs. What i pointed is that, Directories do help in boosting SERPS of sites at an advanced stages, but they are not everything in link building. You cannot rely solely on web directories for your link popularity campaign.

 

This thread is made by a guy who sells directory link in signature. How Ironic.

 

Why do you all get the impression that I dislike directories?
Anyway, some of us have to make money one way or another.

 

. ironic coz he made money by selling directory link. WTH

 

You misunderstood me

SEO means SEO companies

They buy links for their clients and also they submit to directories as part of their link building campaign.

They usually charge very high rates for directory submission(including paid and free)

But if a webmaster has good knowledge about these things he will not go for SEO campaigns with SEO companies,he/she will do link building by themselves.
(Directory submission,purchasing etc.,)

I am not talking about individual SEO's ,I am talking about BIG SEO companies.also I still sell my directory links as links only and not as reviews as they do n't make much difference. (As I look only into the quality of the website when accepting a site into my directory)

Another thing is I bet that Google would not be able to detect any of the paid links even though they have so much of resources with them.

They may be able to penalize some sites manually,but it is an impossible task to do it by so called algorithms!

Bobby9101 ,your newdirectory's domain name very much suits you! when you take index out of that domain name