Why are there so few listed sites in the top directories? I've been looking around and noticed most top directories have around 20-30 sites listed per a category (surely, there have to be more than 30 credible websites for each generic categories). Is this because the owners are afraid that too many sites will look upon as a poor quality web directory? Are there any good/credible paid review directories with alot of website listings (besides Yahoo directory)? Thanks in advance, -DigiP
They are very strict about who they allow in their directory. These are what we call quality directories. These directories don't just get visitors who are looking for another link for their website. They get people who are looking for websites for research, resources, etc. They actually get some quality traffic.
What mediahost said Plus there other factors such as Quality directories do not set out to include absolutely every website, being human edited, this would be impossible Hosting costs go up when a directory gets really massive, and if its size is not being directly translated into revenue, this would be a serious cash flow issue Essentially, most quality directories have to strike a balance between content , quality, size, cost ,,,, Just like any decent publishing business
Why do you need 20-30 sites listed in every category?? If there are 5 or 10 very good sites listed, I guess you can find the info or product too. Ofcourse there are topics which are better of with a lot of sites (like local real estate agents or local hotels), but I can't imagine why someone needs 30 sites about a Great Pyrenees, or 30 sites that sell all the same bikinis. Hugo
I can't speak for the others and my directories are niche and free so that does change things a bit. That said, I have never intended to recreate a search engine by listing every site out there - I'm looking for great sites that I would find useful if were I looking for a product or information on that topic. From time to time I add sites on my own but I simply do not have the time or money to do an exhaustive search for every site out there. After all, I am running a directory not an index of the Internet. Think about it a little differently. If you purchase a fishing magazine there will be advertisements among the pages and in the classifieds section in the back. Even if it is the biggest and best fishing magazine on the planet it will never have every company advertising with them. The magazine does have limitations on the premium advertising (the ads in between the articles) but as a rule there are no limitations on the number of advertisers in the classified section. Directories are the same as that magazine - there's a limited amount of space for premium advertisers but virtually unlimited space in the classified/regular listing sections. Whether or not a website or company owner opts to advertise in that magazine or on a directory is entirely up to that website owner. That fishing magazine may have the largest subscription base in the industry. Does their not having every company that sells lures make the advertising any less effective? Not a bit; it would be easier to argue that by not having every company listed that the advertisers who are will get more exposure and ultimately more sales and a greater return from their investment.
Hi, Why more than 30 in a category? Why not? I mean, if you are going to average 30-50 websites per a category, why stop at 30-50 and not 100-200 websites per category? If we are going to maintain a quality directory, shouldn't there be only ten or less per a category? Don't we always use the common "top ten" or less concept when discussing our favorite things? So why expand the ballpark when it comes to our "favorite" websites? Most categories are generalized, so if you are going to list 50 sites for the category hotels or real estate, why not 50 sites for bikinis? Even though I'm not in the bikini business, I'm sure listing less than 30 bikini websites is not going to cover the whole market ( just like any other market). As far as reducing the amount of sites due to bandwidth costs. Is having 30-50 sites per a category compared to 100-200 per a category that much of a significant growth in server expense (assuming it's a general directory with an average number of categories)? Thanks in advance, Digip
As long as the content in each category is absolutely relevant to the title it doesn't matter if you have one or one thousand in there because the user is going to find 'something'.
When you get a large database of say 50,000 plus sites like Skaffe, BOTW, JoeAnt and WoW you can get a very slow database growth due to the number of websites that become unresponsive and have to be removed every week. In fact sometimes you will see a negative weekly database growth. Keeping your topics from becoming overcrowded is one of the many directory operator’s tasks but it does a fair job of it all by itself with the correct software.
Tell me about it, we're re-reviewing a lot more listings than that which were in our old dbase and yes you are spot on it does take time, but it's worth it in the long run.