In one of the sessions today Matt Cutts discounted directory links by saying "Google doesn't give them a lot of weight." The consensus of the panel was that only relevant links, especially from related authority sites are worth pursuing. Not a good comment for us directory owners.
Lets see what happens after the release of that news, usually we need a reaction before we pre-judge They are many more valued added factors within the Directory matrix of functionality and benefits This is certainly 'not the end of the world' for Directory Owners The future is still very bright for Quality Directories period
I think it should be fairly obvious that directory links are taken as being of low quality. Directories generally have the following features of bad sites: Duplicate content: All the descriptions and titles are repeated so many times on various directories. Almost no unique content: I'm saying they don't make much new content, definitely nothing resource worthy Way too many external links Obvious selling of links Low Traffic: not counting webmasters submitting link
Most of the directories are also using the category dumps. And the structure and the URL's are all same. Plus when a webmaster starts a directory submission he or she blasts the links on atleast 500 or so directories. And that is a sign of duplicate content.
I think the problem here is lumping all directories together into one group. The vast majority of directories are *not* quality directories. So, people look at the majority of directories and say that directories are useless. However, the fact is that there are a number of quality directories out there. What applies to most directories does not apply to the quality directories. Yet people don't make this distinction. I'm sure, for instance, that Matt Cutts isn't saying that a Yahoo! directory listing is not worth much. That's definitely not the case. It's valuable because it's a trusted resource. I think that the trend in directories in 2007 will be towards quality directories. IMHO this has already started. A year ago I would have said that there are about 25 quality directories out there. Now I would say that number has easily doubled. But when people are talking about "directories" they are talking about the other 5,000 or so that aren't quality directories.
Agreed. It was also the reason why I started to peg the lists back and stop adding every directory that might pop up (though I will continue to help those that help themselves). I think there is probably a small core chunk of directories that hold a high weighting, a larger chunk that holds a medium weighting, and then a broader chunk that everything else gets lumped into. Does it mean that people should give up? No. It means that people need to concentrate on building their directory into a worthwhile resource.
He says "not a lot of weight", so that means google gives the directories some weight, and we also know that some get more that others. I have been able to get a pagerank 4 through exclusively submitting to directories and nothing more. I also have been able to rank many terms just through directory submissions. In addition, google is not my only concern, and directories help me with yahoo and msn too.
Is that even news most directory are crap, even those with higher pagerank, however, i still submit to some better directory (most are paid).
Well what makes a quality directory then? I'd say some of the key factors would be: Unique category structure Unique descriptions - Long ones preferably Unique coding structure (makes the site appear different then the thousands of others using the same script). Deep links to internal pages from relevant websites, IE: IHI a big insurance company links to your insurance category page. No or few sitewide links Non-user edited titles How many directories actually fit these specs? Not too many..
I would like to see the actual quote of what he has said....I do agree with dvduval directories give weight and help in ranking for terms. The one thing I have noticed lately is Google seems to be cracking down on duplicate anchor text. I am guessing that if they encounter something like x amount of anchor text that is the same they start discounting the value of the incomming links. It might be 10 or 100 I don't know but that makes the most sense to me in them helping to filter out massive amounts of purchased links or directory submissions. For the past 6 months I only submit to around 100-200 directories per new site and concentrate more effort on other link building methods.
Yeah, I have a html directory which doesn't have the predictable structure of the cookie cutter category dump directories. When adding my own sites, I've seen a good bounce in allinanchor for the targeted keyword, so it does have some value.
Unique category structure Unique descriptions - Long ones preferably Unique coding structure (makes the site appear different then the thousands of others using the same script). Deep links to internal pages from relevant websites, IE: IHI a big insurance company links to your insurance category page. No or few sitewide links Non-user edited titles well i can honestly say that my directories 1. have a unique catagory structure yes all mine do 2. have longer descriptions.. mine are set to 250 charactors 3. Deep links have been purchased in 4 of minz for all inners top catagories 4. I dont have many links on any of mine sitewide. So 4 out of 6 isnt bad but couldnt figure out what you ment by: Non-user edited titles ??? thx malcolm
YAY now this is the way of looking at it. While most of us see that the glass is half empty dvduval here sees it is half filled. And he is right You get PR 3 - PR 4 by submitting the site to the directories.
I think Matt didnt say anything we didnt knew. Directory links dont have big value, but they still have some value. I have just come on page 7 of one of the most compettive, and most searched terms with only directory based links. I dont have any link from link exchange with that anchor text, doesnt link from my other sites with that abchor. I havent made an onsite optimization for that keyphrase. I only use it in directory submissions, and it works So, I would discount directory links so much, they're still good
Agreed, this is not ground breaking information. Just thought I'd pass it along for what it was worth.... I think the take home messages to directory owners are: 1. Don't use duplicate templates, customize your script as much as possible. Uniqueness is king. 2. Don't use category dumps. Again, be unique. 3. Add value to your directory in any way you can. Quality and originality are the only way directories are going to be worth any value in the SEs eyes.
Funny, some sites have gotten to top 10 serps with: 1) on page optimization 2) 400 free directory submission 3) 2-3 strong paid directory submissions So sorry, you can believe your expert or try it yourself from and see that directory links are valued. Maybe not as much as a link from the homepage of a relevant site but they do count.