All my recent comparisons of me website against those sites that sit above them in searches on google have now led me to believe that domain age is very important in search results. While other things like title, content, url name, back links are all really important you'll find alot of sites sitting at the top of search results that appear inadequate for all of these except their domain name has been around a long time. Afterall, how many sites have you seen on the first page in a competative keyword market with no links? When optimising my sites I alway compare to the market leader and try and have better 'everything', but the one thing I can't change or manipulate is the domain age. Does that mean my older competitors will forever have an advantage. Yes, but it means I'll have to build lots and lots of backlinks to beat them. Please analyse your competitors and tell me if you have found similar?
It would not be logical for Google to put so much emphasis on domain age. It would be unfair to any newer websites. Perhaps in your niche there simply aren't many new quality websites. In niches I deal with the top ranked websites all have a strong link profile. In an uncompetitive niche I could imagine a lot of older sites on the first page. Google has claimed that they have introduced some ranking factors that are based on trust. Trust can be built up by things like domain age, age of links, quality of websites linking to you, etc.
Yes, domain age is a very important factor. But that does not mean you cannot outrank your competition, you just have to build beyond them.
I agree with Crimsonitex, the age does add value, but you can out rank if the rest of your SEO and SEM efforts outweigh the competition. Google wants the results to be natural, they want the factors that would matter to the end user to influence the results. If people feel they get the best results searching on Google, they will stay with Google.
The sites age has always been an important part of the google algorithm. It doesn't mean that you can't outrank an older site, but they certainly have a starting advantage. http://www.seobook.com/googles-relevancy-algorithms-change-keyword
Google has patented domain age as a factor in their algorithm so I am pretty sure it plays some role in determining SERPs.
Domain age does affect rankings. However, it is probably only one of the 200+ factors Google is looking at... They could possibly have a few factors that depend on your domain registration... like how old is the domain name and how long has it been since the domain has changed hands. Either way, even if 2 or 3 of the 200+ factors depend on registration dates and such, it probably carries about as much weight as having keyword rich URLs or bolding a couple keywords on a wall of text... not a lot IMO.
How can they do that when their algorithm is not public domain? Domain age seems a bigger factor in the serps then what it really is because older sites are more established in the search engines.
Their patents are public - and factors of their algorithm are indeed included, however, what it doesn't disclose is the assigned weighting to each factor, or what is and isn't currently being used.
According to this site, Google filed US Patent Application #20050071741, which mentions about domain age in their algorithm.
Put it this way, if you get an aged domain which was never a site and was not indexed in G, you are basically starting fresh. Domain age is such a small factor its not even worth talking about.
Site age is a large factor in the google algorithm. A domain that hasn't ever been used is treated no different than a newly registered domain.
Well, you can't have an established site without factoring in domain age - and the OP was talking about other sites ranking well having older domains. This is why I clarified "site age". As you said, running out and buying an "old" domain that has never been used will not help you at all. Google is also wise to people buying an established site like "jackstowing.info" and trying to turn it into a health site.
I agree. But established sites are not ranking based on domain age in itself. They tend to be well developed with good link profiles and have proven themselves to be trusted sites. Let's not get stuck into the .info argument with Google, there is already so much misinformation on DP regarding this issue.
I used .info just as an example - I could have used .com .org or .tv - I wasn't making any argument about info's.
So most of us agree domain age plays a role in serps. Most of us also agree there is a direct corelation between Page Rank and the number of inbound links. Then how is it that there are sites around that have PR with little or no inbound links? The answer is domain age is one of the determinants of page rank and therefore serps!
I disagree. I could go with: "google gives some unknown weight to domain age" it's not that much, you can outrank powerful trusted sites from the start in keywords they havent optimised specifically for, but that you would think they would hammer you in, through domain age and trust. we've been doing it recently, PM if you want examples.