Are Directories Still of Any Value?
-
I know directories are an out-dated way to gain backlinks but the more I look into competitors that rank high link porfolio - many of thier top links come from paid directories. Granted, these can be old links but they still maintain highest authority, etc.
Do you guys find directories still valuable as a linking building strategy?
-
I will start out by saying I am not answering your question, really. The whole reason I found your question here is because I was about to jump on and ask THE VERY SAME QUESTION.
I am working on several projects, and on at least 75% of the projects, I am seeing the exact same thing. The one or two sites I am targeting in OSE are CRUSHING ME with what Google and Cutts would perceive as crappy backlink sites. I have seen some people have responded to your question by saying "don't let OSE, Raven, Majestic or whatever" be your guiding light in this regard, as Google doesn't use any of these services.
But the pattern cannot be denied. Backlinks STILL work. Now, it's possible this could change at any time, and I am - for the most part - refraining from duplicating their (in Google's opinion) backlink strategies on these thin directory sites.
However, it is really difficult to explain to your client why slow and steady will be better in the long term for their SERP efforts than blasting their link and anchor text out to dozens or hundreds of sites.
Of course, there is this - which was pointed out on inbound.org I believe:
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/34432?hl=en
Before May 27:
In general, webmasters can improve the rank of their sites by increasing the number of high-quality sites that link to their pages.
After May 27:
In general, webmasters can improve the rank of their sites by creating high-quality sites that users will want to use and share.
==
With this in mind, I think a lot of those sh*tty backlinks that are beating my arse are likely on their last leg.
Again, this is all conjecture. But that sly change with no real announcement is interesting, no?
edited for formatting
-
Yes your Right my friend, Now a days Some of directory sites are not good for you to submit. The best thing for you Dylan, is find a Relevant Directories Surely you will be a Successor!
-
I would strongly suggest only submitting to directories that you believe will benefit you outside of search. i.e. directories that will deliver relevant traffic by themselves.
-
I agree with Matt, there is no go-to directory. A directory or listing can have value for one site but not for another based on relevance, location, and site quality.
If you're looking for a list of directories that MIGHT be valuable then you're going about it all wrong. Don't waste your time with directory listings. Instead, spend time building good off-site content and link bait. Look at the two following discussions for ideas and caveats.
http://moz.com/community/q/niche-directories
http://moz.com/community/q/seomoz-directory-list-some-clarity-needed
-
I was hoping that wasn't going to be the part of that reply you focused on!
Honestly, I don't think that there is a single "go to" directory that I would use for every project. The ones that have value are those that are valuable resources that just happen to be in directory format. The common themes are that they are likely to be hand curated, tricky to get in to and cover one particular niche. They will also often form part of a larger site that has a user base that actually uses that directory.
-
I think it depends on the actual directory as well as its relation to the website's niche. Some directories will still hold value, while others might actually hurt a site. If the directory is related to the site's niche and has a natural www, http, or branded anchor text then they should offer value. With paid directories I would be super careful though, unless it's something like the BBB.
Local directories and citations are still important for local business site rankings too. In addition they give awesome referral traffic because the site or business profile page will show up in serps.
Some of our clients have old directory listings with anchor text that is over-optimized, so we're working on diversifying and/or removing them completely.
When you look at these competitors' paid directory links and their authority, you also need to consider a couple of other things: their relevance to that directory's topic, the date the listing was created, and whether a user would find that listing valuable. At the end of the day it's all about user experience, and there are still a few directories out there whose listings would be valuable to a user if they found them in a search.
Does anyone else have any advice on directories and their place in a site's link portfolio?
Hope this helps
-
Can you list what you think are good directories to name a few?
-
but they still maintain highest authority, etc.
Be very very careful with that assumption. Just because OSE (or whatever your backlink analysis tool of choice is) reports a high metric for a link, it does not mean that link actually has any value. Google doesn't use OSE! (or majestic / ahrefs etc). Only they know for certain which links are passing authority/weight and how much and we know that they have cautioned us about directories.
Use of directories for backlinks is one of the strongest correlation factors I have witnessed with site that have dropped during Penguin updates. Be very very careful indeed.
Now - all that said... here is where I seem to contradict myself!
Some directories are great! Google doesn't actually have an issue with directories. It has an issue with links that have no value - which includes the vast majority of directories. Those that do count though are few and far between and it is now probably best to steer clear if you are not certain.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Assessing the true value of a backlink
I want to start a discussion about assessing the true value of a backlink. Here's a scenario: I've just started working on SEO for a new client. Once I've got the strategy stuff out of the way, I like to start by looking at backlinks that competitors have. I use Moz OSE (and other tools) and filter by followed links to the root domain. This gives a good starting sense of where competitors are getting links from. As I start to explore those links, I see some black-hat (or grey-hat) practices at play: display:none links, footer links, sidebar links, comment spam, etc. The problem I have is, there seems to be no way of knowing whether or not those links are responsible for boosting the competitors rankings. They come from sites that have good DA and PA, yet we're told that tactics like display:none and comment spam will either get those links devalued or may cause some sort of manual action. My question is, how do others evaluate the full spectrum of the value a link has that goes beyond trust, authority, and citation flow?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SEMbyotic2 -
No cache still a good link for disavow?
Hi Yall, 2 scenarios: 1. I'm on the border line of disavowing some websites that link to me. If the page is N/A (not available) for the cache, does that mean i should disavow them? 2. What if the particular page was really good content and the webmaster just has the worse seo skills in not interlinking his old blogs, hence why the page that's linking to me is N/A for cache, should i still disavow it? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Shawn1240 -
Competitor Bad Practice SEO Still Ranking Well But Why ?
Moz Friends, A very close competitor have always been challenging for similar competitive keywords. We seem to have the advantage for alot of long tail keywords but on one of the higher traffic relevant keywords they seem to do well. I really struggle to understand why, particularly with the back links they use Just my thoughts and notes on the two: Our Page Better written text content (Maybe slightly written to for experienced target audience but we are working on simplifying things) Good Clear site URL structure and navigation for usability Fresh content updates Mobile optimized Reasonable page speeds Good on-page optimization Good back links from industry influences Competitor Page Negatives Site structure and URL's are inconsistent and messy Lower quality content site wide They use tried and tested on page optimization methods like Keyword spamming, Bold Keywords,Underlining Keywords (Sarcasm) Terrible back links, all directories and free article submission sites (Seriously take a look) Less focused on page optimization Not mobile optimized Most of the rest of the sites carry on the same sort of differences, Engine: www.google.co.uk Keyword: Sound level meters **Our Page: **www.cirrusresearch.co.uk/products/sound-level-meters/ **Competitor Page: **www.pulsarinstruments.com/product-information/Sound-Level-Meter.html Any feedback would be greatly appreciated please, i am really struggling to get my head around this Thanks James
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Antony_Towle1 -
Low quality websites with spammy EMDs still ranking higher than genuine websites?
Hey guys, I've just been doing some searching and couldn't quite contemplate how heavily low-quality and spammy EMDs are still running some Google searches. Just take "cheap kitchens", for instance. Here are a list of URLs that appeared; http://kitchenunitsdoors.co.uk/ http://www.kitchenunits9.co.uk/ http://www.aboutkitchenunits.co.uk/ http://www.cheapkitchenunits1.co.uk/ http://www.cheapkitchensonline.com/ http://www.buycheapkitchens.com/ http://www.cheapkitchenscheapkitchen.co.uk/ http://www.cheapkitchensforsale1.co.uk/ http://cheapkitchensaberdeen.co.uk/ http://www.kitchensderby1.co.uk/ http://www.cheapcheapkitchens.co.uk/ http://kitchen-cheap.co.uk/ http://www.cheapestkitchensinbritain.co.uk/ http://www.cheapkitchenss.co.uk/ http://www.cheaperthanmfi.com/ http://cheapkitchenuk.co.uk/ As you can see, none of them appear to be genuine retailers and are setup purely to influence Google rankings. I'm amazed that Google is still giving so much weight to these types of sites - especially considering how search is meant to be better than it ever was before! Any insights into why this is?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Webrevolve0 -
Macrae's Blue Book Directory LIsting
Does anyone know more information about this directory? Is it a good quality directory that I should pay to get listed on?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | EcomLkwd0 -
Why are "outdated" or "frowned upon" tactics still dominating?
Hey, my first post here. I recently picked up a new client in real estate for a highly competitive market. One trend I'm noticing with all the top sites they are doing old tactics such as:
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Jay328
-Paid Directories
-Terrible/Spam Directories
-Overuse of exact text keywords for example: City name + real estate
-Blogroll/link exchange
-Tons of meta key words
-B.S. press releases blog commenting with kw as name Out of all the competition there is only one guy who is following the rules of today. One thing I'm noticing is that nobody is doing legit guest blogging, has great social presence, has awesome on page, etc. It's pretty frustrating as I'm trying to follow the rules and seeing these guys kill it by doing "bad seo". Anybody else find themselves in this situation? I know I'm probably beating a dead horse but I needed to vent about this 😉2 -
Are directory listings still appropriate in 2013? Aren't they old-style SEO and Penguin-worthy?
We have been reviewing our off-page SEO strategy for clients and as part of that process, we are looking at a number of superb info-graphics on the subject. I see that some of current ones still list "Directories" as being part of their off-page strategy. Aren't these directories mainly there for link-building purposes and provide Users no real benefit? I don't think I've ever seen a directory that I would use, apart for SEO research. Surely Google's Penguin algorithm would see directories in the same way and give them less value, or even penalise websites that use them to try to boost page rank? If I were to list my websites on directories it wouldn't be to share my lovely content with people that use directories to find great sites, it would be to sneakily build page rank. Am I missing the point? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Crumpled_Dog
Scott0 -
White Papers! Is this still good for SEO
Does publishing a white paper good for SEO? We are trying to decide to publish one or not for the purpose of SEO. If it will not help, we will spend money for other things.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AppleCapitalGroup0