But the type of sites these tend to be (old domains, fewer outbound links, good content etc) means that they do give a boost to any sites which they link to. What Matt is meaning is that they don't get a boost just because of the domain name.
The reason they may be better is: 1) They have long term placement of the link 2) Long term placement of the content 3) Limited outgoing links 4) Huge amounts of varried incoming links I do not however feel there is any benefit just because of the TLD. So, in 50 words or less, I agree.
I'm a bit disappointed about this as I was quite chuffed that I have .edu and .gov links to a few of my sites. Matt, I'm feeling sad buddy. Can you give us some good news in the seo myths department soon please. So who else has .edu or .gov links?
I should have a .edu and a .gov link in a few weeks, so I was hoping for a boost. It would make some sense, as these sites have to maintain a level of responsibility, and therefore aren't going to link to bad quality sites. Oh well, back to the directories I guess.
I believe the "extra value" of .edu or .gov links are in the long term stability of the link - they're less likely to lose their importance (PR) or disappear. Getting .gov or .edu links aren't really that difficult. If you check the bottom of the page there's usually the contact info for the person responsible for maintaining the page or section of the web site. There's also a "page last updated" date and you can see if the resource is maintained or not. Try those sections that have been updated within the past year or 18 months. I doubt it would be worth trying to get a link on a page last updated in 1999 or 2000. But you never know. For some government resources the link addition has to be approved by a committee. You should note that your domain name registration could have some influence on obtaining these links. I doubt you'll get a link for any domain registered for less than 5 years. Their looking for professional and stable resources. Don't suggest a page littered with affiliate links regardless of how good the content is.
I came here to post a thread asking whether it would be worth paying (more) for links from .edu sites. Seems my question has already been answered.
heres my (newb) take on .edu/.gov links: its not so much the extention that gives these value, but the fact that many (most) .edu/.gov website have high PR with that said, a PR 8 .edu and PR 8 .com (or any other extention) should be the same
I think it's wrong to say .edu and .gov don't give you a "boost". And for the record that quote from Matt doesn't prove anything. It even contradicts itself. There is no boost but they are high quality links? How can a link be high quality and not give you a boost? So I agree with everyone that says this "possibly" means that the boost doesn't come from the domain extension itself but the quality of nearly all sites associated with that extension. So for me this changes nothing. I'll still take a .edu or .gov or even .mil over a .com or .net any day. Simply due to the fact that it'll have better longevity, usually is ranked higher, indexed better, has more authoritive power, etc.
To clear things up, the issue is if Google gives extra weight to links from pages on a .edu or .gov site. Matt said they don't give any *extra* weight than usual. So normal seo principals apply - higher PR is good, sites with fewer outbounds is good, links that last longer over time are good etc. Fine, they are still good links potentially, but the issue was if Google gives them extra voting power simply because of the .gov or .edu domain and they don't so that's the news folks!