I submitted to directories but get no lovin back, they must be crap

( A personal View Only )

Lately we are seeing many posts, is it still worth submiting to directories, they don't send me any traffic, so they must no longer work.

Well of course it probably won't, Lets look at why so many are expecting way to much and are on the wrong track.

First people are not prepared to pay a nickle, thats like putting ad on the overcrowded notice board in a daggy shopping center, what sort of results do you expect. This i want it all for free but make me a millionaire stuff has long gone from the net ( unless your part of the QBC and they are getting rolled quicker these days )

Lets say i place an ad in a free paper, do i expect everyone who picks that paper up to magically run to my ad and contact me ? No, OK so lets say 1/100 stop and read my little ad, do i expect all of those 100 people to call me ? No maybe if i am lucky i may 2 calls if that.

We all have placed newspaper ads and had similar results, but did we slam the paper ?

So to increase my return from that paper maybe if i took a block ad this would increase my chances yes ? but now this costs more, OK now i want front page block, even more more money but even more returns would be expected.

This principle applies to all media types TV ( prime time spots / 4 am spots, radio and yes the web is no different.

But are directories still worth it then ? well yes they give you some back end push and if your lucky you may get one of those occasional readers find your deep down ad and press that link, and if you cop one this way then rather than winge i only got one hit, look at it as a bonus, now if you submit to lots of of directories that back end push would be like being at a gay madi gra with a bigger back end push and maybe some more clicks, but once again these are bonuses.

But they are important in an overall part of your promotional campaign ( and will stress check the directory out and don't just submit to crapola sites that charge a nickle n dime or are free ) just ask how these people will promote your site and do not confuse good free or cheap directories with crap, use your gut feel.

Further to that and from there you need to look for directories that are right up to speed, have smick looking outfits, are attracting the visitors and then take out specific banner and text ads with those directories.

Further to this do not think for one minute that if you run some banner ads life is sweet n Rosy and your set or you will be fooling yourself.

Why because your marketing should never stop if you want to play ball, you must be in the faces and minds of your customers at every chance, I used coca cola in another post as an example, these people advertise during winter or any season and the reason is this when an ad is run do not expect instant response, some people may see an ad 100 times before they need the product, and it is at that time the first thing they think of is your product. thats why we don't ask what do we want to drink on a hot day, the thinkings implanted, "I'll have a coke please"

In conclusion yes submit to build your back end lovin, but that needs to be complimented with a well run marketing campaign of banners and text ads and that's just not in directories but all related sites and even includes any other type of media, TV , radio and papers, business cards. T shirts even a darn sky writer if you can.

You might say settle down i just want a little site, well your wish is granted if your not playing ball soon it will be just a little forgotten site, make no mistakes these times are not about to change they already have, just travel the web today it's all in front of you now.

If there is one other very important thing It would be this, if your site is a heap of rubbish, with poor content, poor graphics, poor anything, do not bother sending people to it or you will waste your dollars, you don't need a 2K armani suit but you do need to be clean and neat n tidy.

flame suit on.

 

it depends upon the quality of dirs which you have your site submitted to. for best approval ratio you should submit your site to new born directories

 

Some directories are still worth it, but in all honesty a vertical portal is the way to go for the future.

 

I dont agree that the free directories are not good enough or that the ones charging less are not good enough either.

Myself and someone else here before said that they managed to get sites ranking well with nothing else used for promotion other than free web diretories.

The running down of free or cheaply priced web directories backfires as it looks desperate by the paid and higher priced directories, it sends out a confusing message to submitters and the message becomes distorted as it gets passed on and turns into an all directories are crap message.

Also nobody seems to grasp this: that if you keep telling people that free and cheap isn't worth it, and those submitters listen to you, they probably wont have the funds to use your directory, thats why they were looking for free and cheap in the first place, now if you successfully put them off using the free directories and they in turn get no revenue from their own sites then that leaves them with nothing to spend in the paid directories.

Also if people keep pushing the message of dont use the free and cheap directories then they may just decide to do a little damage on yours for contstantly knocking their free or cheap service.

With regards to traffic, well thats what many webmasters receive and expect from other forms of promotion, from adwords to link exchanges, so if all you can provide is a backlink and actually dont get much true traffic yourself then you cant expect a submitter to pay too highly.

I dont agree with style and graphics being important, look at google, il visit any site that has the right text content and what im looking for, il read for hours as long as it doesn't blind me with contrasting colors.

Believe me, over the top designs are wasted on me, im put off if i cant see what im looking for because of a trendy layout.

A nice presentation is cool, but its nonsense that you need a good design, only other webmasters will appreciate that and you may get a bit of a buzz about your directory for a day or two in a thread.

To do a favour to the business it needs to be promoted as a whole, if you try to create boxes of heres the good ones, heres the bad ones, you confuse people and that leads to the regular threads by people then asking "are directories still good"

Even if you believe your directory is better, well, most people wouldn't announce that.

Dont keep referring to some directories as being crap as its not working.

Their not crap at all, they have a right to exist like any othr web directory out there.

Il recommend a free web directory any day.

Load of nonsense that general directories are not worth setting up now too, and that niche is the in thing, thats crazy to say things like that.

General,niche,free,paid theres room for them all.

 

I think you may have missed the point of the post or i am mis understanding yours. The quality of a directory has very little to do with a high submission approval rate. In fact it is quite the opposite.

Quality directories will also set themselves up in a manner that will limit the amount of low quality submissions they recieve imo.

OP made many good points in the post though and if I could I would rep you again for it. Seems I like too much of what you say and need to spread it around first though.

 

DownUnder, that's not a personal view - it's exactly how things are.

Can't disagree with anything in your post, very accurate and hopefully it will bring some back down to earth with a crashing thud. Constant promotion is the key to keeping in the minds of searchers.

 

Yup, can't disagree with that either.

 

That was a really good post DownUnder.

Down to earth and pretty much the way things work.
The only down side to those banners and marketing ways is the wrath of what the monopolizing search engine will do to you if they don't like it that you aren't using their adwords and/or services.

 

hmmm tis a problem that. So how to get revenge on the search engines like Google. Refuse to buy adwords nor run adsense?

 

Yes that's it, brilliant idea, they'll really be worried then

 

The clean white van comes to mind. Great post, about time someone did.

 

Pipes i said this ( quote )

but can agree i could haave worded it better, there are many good operators of these directories and are definatley worth it.

EDIT: there are also some operators charging way to much for rubbish, each case must be taken on board and price is only one factor

 

This reeks of pay for inclusion spin. With very few exceptions people people do not use directories to search the internet, and search engines devalue links from these directories. Pay for inclusion directories are the new herbal Viagra, you pay good money for a product that is cheap to produce, sold for many times its actually value, and most importantly does not do what it says it does.

 

Yes i agree it can and probably will lead to some pretenders trying to cash in, but in todays world consumers are not stupid and will not be taken for a ride, if people are out there not playing ball then it wont take long to nail them down, it really is about building a trust with the operator and people gaining respect.

Jo fly by night in a hooded cape wll not make the grade. It will be more about the owner than the actual pretty directory

 

Give me an answer without a personal attack here if you can manage it.

We're all more than aware you hate pay for inclusion directories so what is it that free directories can offer? Why do you think dmoz has failed? (I can only give that example as its the best).

Its because no editor is paid and the warm fuzzy feeling of being 'part of a community' soon wears thin that the standards are so poor.. If dmoz went paid it would make an absolute fortune and may even turn out to be a great resource as I'm sure was the intention in the early days. Would you be so anti paid directory then seeing that your an editor with them?

 

I am associated with one site which is little more than a business card, which isn't listed in the ODP,. My motivation was and is being part of a movement that was primarily interested in creating an environment where a sites value was judged on its content not on the skill or the budget of the entity promoting it. I have a background in applied mathematics and I have an interest in the algorithms that SEs use. When I started back in 1999 these algos used only a few on site factors to determine relevancy which lead to very poor results. As a consequence directories had significance back them. Nowadays they are very very very good.

I do not think that the ODP has failed, quite to the contrary it has been extraordinarily successful. But it has a had its time, it has struggled to evolve, and like all directories it is becoming less relevant by the year. It does suffer from the limitations of all comprehensive directories.

The future of directories is not that same old, same old, we see today. One of the features that many people overlook when talking about the ODP is the free RDF dump which is used for many purposes, including, might I add part of the directory structure of the directory in your sig. One other thing in the pipeline is the ability for the integration of DMOZ data in other resources and applications, by creating "mashups". Is this the convulsions of a dying dinosaur? I Dont know.

The pay for inclusion directories we see being promoted here with such enthusiasm were one reasonably successful at duping search engines, that is no longer the case. Now it is the humble webmaster that is the target.

 

Dood you keep singing that one tune, and it does not sound like a sweet fiddle your playing, the arguement is one sided and a closed view, with very little knowledge of what your saying. I agree there are many sharks trying to take the pizz but that happens in all walks all games.

Mate post here as long as you like ( in this thread or a new one ) and make some valid reasons, give facts for your statements to back up what your saying, get it all of your chest and make it good. Then we can discuss the issues in a rational way.

this hopping from thread to thread sounding like a repeating parrot on non based gibberish is not good.

 

Great post DownUnder. I specially like your coca cola example I don't know why you expected flame. You will only get fame with these kind of posts !!

@an0n: I see directory critic selling their own banners and premium listings. Do you think the websites advertising there will face gaygle wrath? I don't think so.. Adsense and Adwords are doing well (so far) and until the banner advertising hits their bottom like they are not likely to change their search engine algo to punish guys buying advertising but not from them

Do you think introducing 'nofollow' was a to promote their advertising framework? It's a nice conspiracy theory.

 

Some good comments, re MR G ( and my view again ), is the G is not your enemy but your Friend, G wants good sites that attract visitors and like any other business there is no reason not to display their ads (text/banners), in addition also using G ads to promote your business as one of the many options open to you is worth while looking at it and with that see no reason for any valid business to worry at all.

 

Sure, I shall continue singing the tune, and here are the facts.

Firstly, most of the the pay for inclusion directories that we all told about the benefits of submitting to have such a minuscule amount of content that one is very unlikely to find the site that they were looking for. If you did the same search on a 100 of these directories you would still not find what you are looking for.


To make up for this the owners put reality to one side and have created an imaginary world that they describe over and over again to the point that some people start to believe it. Here is an example: What they say is oh yes the reason that our directory has so few sites is that we are so selective, that few sites are of acceptable quality to be listed in our directory. This is classic pay for inclusion mumbo jumbo and what it really means is no one has paid us to review the sites that you are looking for. The reality is that there are millions of useful sites that they could list if it wasn't for their revenue generating model.

In your sig you give a perfect example of the approach and say "It's not the 1% of sites that you accept but the 99% you reject that will build a quality directory". This is complete and utter nonsense. A directory is judged by the quality sites it lists. Sure reject sites that do meet your criteria, but the most important thing by far is finding sites that are quality and would benefit your users. To use the scorched earth approach to directory does nothing to help potential users of a directory, It is simply a means to justify lack of content, and assist in revenue generation. This is one of the many ways that directory owners create an illusion of value around their product that has more in common with herbal Viagra than a resource for real people to find sites.

SecondlySome directory owners actually have not accepted the delusional world that their colleagues have formulated and agree that real people are unlikely to use their "product" These guys (and gals) will tell you all about how being listed in their directory will help with your SERPs. Some will also tell you how important page rank is and how you will get lots of it if if list in their directory.

The undeniable reality is that google quite clearly say in their webmaster guidelines that they give little credit for such links from these directories.

There are two possibilities. Google are liars, and are not very good at what they do OR they treat these links as the crap they are and that links from all but a few directories are devalued to a level to a level to that they are either worthless or or near worthless.

Here is what google says, you decide for yourself.

In short the vast majority of pay for inclusion directories do not attract anyone to actually search for sites and search engines like google treat them as being worthless. Despite this the pay for inclusion has created a fantasy around their sites for the primary purpose of deceiving webmasters.