Would this be considered "cheating"

I currently have a new website under construction and it will have 5 major sections. I could construct it within one domain using folders or subdomains.

I could also construct it on 5 different domains qualifying for five accounts in the network (a major plus I think you would agree).

I am keen to play fair in the network and therefore ask:

do you guys consider this to be cheating or legit?

 

Why would it be cheating?... each registered domain can have an account... I currently have two on two domains, totally unrelated.

From what I understand so far though, you might be shooting yourself in the foot, in that each account would have a lower weighting, as each would only have (say) 1/5th of the adspace. And you will have five smaller sites, when the thing seems to be to go for a larger site with more pages and internal linking (as far as I can gather). Given that you can run approved ads for any site on the one account, you might give yourself a little more flexibility if you go for the former option.

Please correct me someone if my reasoning is fallacious.

Adam

 

Thanks for your input Adam.

The answer to the question you pose depends upon whether the site is large enough to sub-divide in this way. If it is then a major bonus can be achieved.

One site I have in the network already is 25,000 pages plus and I am happy to contribute this number of extra pages to the coop network (I am totally grateful that Shawn created the tool and you guys all came on board).

The site I am currently working on will eventually be much much bigger than 25,000 pages e.g. if I can make my forum a success it alone could be bigger than this.

So I am looking at site structure from a number of different angles (mostly SE related) but the coop network is also a potentially important angle.

 

As I understand it, with all else being equal, one (1) larger site vs. five (5) smaller sites is a more successful model not only for the Ad Network but for SEO too.

 

Sorry Jeffrey but I would have to disagree. For SEO the 5 sites would be much better than one.

What would be a lot worse is administration.

 

If you don't mind me asking, what advantage do you see to five (5) smaller sites compared to one (1) "Authority" site?

 

I am talking about 5 'authority' sites (though I am of the opinion that authority sites are not part of the algo).

Let me give you an example - I am SEO consultant for a client who used to have a few thousand pages of his site indexed - the content has not changed but he now has >2million indexed pages and >3.5m uniques monthly.

I considered the one site option for.... all of about 5 seconds.

 

If you don't mind me asking, what leads you to belive that "Authority" sites are not part of the algo?

 

Either way, You won't see a boost from having multiple sites.

At least i'm pretty sure you won't.

 

5 sites is always harder because you have to get 5 times as many backlinks. Its easier - not only from an administration point of view - but from a linkbuilding point of view to have 1 larger site and work on it instead.

I used to have 5 ecommerce sites; I'm down to 2 now and it is sooo much easier to improve rankings now since I'm not dividing time between 5 disparate sites.

 

I agree that they are multiple issues to consider and its the administration overhead for 5 sites that has me most concerned.

However, a combination of the coop network and a potentially very large number of pages (for 1 site!) has me leaning in the 5 site direction at present.

As for authority sites - I am not saying they aren't part of the algo - simply that I have so far seen zero evidence to support the concept.

 

keep in mind you may run into the "cap" with 1 large site, whereas you are less likely to hit the cap if you have 5 smaller sites. Just to throw my $.02 in about 5 vs. 1 for SEO, there are advantages both ways, but if you have the 5 smallers sites all hosted on seperate C-class ips, you would have the distinct advantage of inter-linking them all, thus boosting your rankings for all 5... it's easier to rank better for a larger number of search terms with 5 sites than it is with 1... it's a good way to spread yourself out a bit wrt SEO.

 

I agree "thebassman" - getting all your pages spidered has got be the top priority (it doesn't matter how good the content if the SE doesn't come around).

As no-one seems interested in my original question I will offer my own answer.

"It's OK to use 5 different domain names and have 5 different coop accounts but to hold to the spirit of the network you should ensure that the SE's recognise them as 5 unique & different websites"

I have deliberately not said "put them on different class3 IPs" because I have not yet seen any evidence that this makes a difference and... the SE's could go beyond IP addresses to include other factors.

 

You can have as many unique sites as you want in the network... in fact, the more the better! Just don't register http://circlemonkey.com and http://www.circlemonkey.com and http://www.circlemonkey.com/forums as 3 different sites, kwim?

 

Patient> you haven't seen evidence for the Authority technology, nor for the IP/Host Affiliation filters...

Have you looked for it?

 

Hi TOPS30

It isn't so much that i've exhaustively looked for it. Its more the case that I have so much evidence that same IP linking without any authority inbounds can work exceptionally well.

I haven't done much posting on forums though I have lurked a lot from time to time. But one thing I have noticed is a tendency for people to quote chapter and verse at each other on an issue where their experiences are actually very narrow and very different. Its a recipe for misunderstanding and confusion.

Whilst my experience is reasonably broad you must take account of the fact that >80% of my experience has been gained on sites that are very large with lots of moderate competitive KWP. The other 20% is your more straightforward approach with highly competitive keywords.

 

OK. Just wondered how you got to your ideas on these subjects.

I have different experiences myself.

 

I would be very interested to hear your experience with authority sites if you would care to share.