Stop Buying New Domains for SEO Development
July 28th, 2006 by Michael Gray in Grayhat SEO, Ideas, SEOIf you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Read my top posts or learn more about Michael Gray. Want more frequent updates follow me on Twitter. Thanks for visiting!
Is it even worth buying a new domain and spending 12-24 months developing out link worthy content anymore? I mean Google has the authority knob locked up tighter than the gold at Fort Knox. I haven’t seen any changes in their love affair with the Amazons, EBay’s and Cragslist for some time. So rather than fight the enemy embrace it and feel it up for any weaknesses.
As I see it you you’ve got two choices, buy an old domain, or start getting involved in parasite SEO. Yea I know the old SEO rule, don’t try to rank for something on a domain you don’t own. However with the trust settings the way they are it’s incredibly easy to rank on other people’s web 2.0 authority domains. Heck I have pages that are ranking on the title alone, with the pages being completely empty. Sure if you push things too hard they will ban you so learn where the limits are before you develop something valuable. And by all means once you’ve got something going get started on your backup cash register. Adapt and overcome or wither and die.
Now if I could just stop talking to Webwork who fills my head with ideas of type in traffic my registration bills would stop growing ….
Sphere It
July 28th, 2006 at 5:49 am
I’m afraid I have to agree with you on this one. Too bad, because there’s alot of good new sites out there.
Do you see this changing anytime soon?
July 28th, 2006 at 9:36 am
Where can i register old domains?
Thanks
July 28th, 2006 at 10:49 am
Playing devil’s advocado here, but google knocking out SEO’d sites is the best thing they can do in my opinion. Their goal is and always has been finding meaningful content, ie. filtering out the crap created by people who “learn where the limits are”.
Maybe I’m just getting old and jaded, but I want google to show me stuff that has some soul - not pages created purely to drive traffic.
July 28th, 2006 at 11:16 am
Agreed crappy sites are crappy sites, but age and trust don’t always equal quality.
July 28th, 2006 at 4:39 pm
I don’t think knocking out “SEO’d sites” is a good solution either. Frankly, a well-optimized site should rank well shouldn’t it? At the same time it’s important to remember that Google’s search engine tries to emulate the academic systems that Google so highly reveres. They rank websites and pages in the same way that research papers are ranked. The most important ones are the ones with good content, good references, and is refrenced often elsewhere. By the same concept Google is taking the approach that it’s not always what you know but who you work for.
A paper written by a professor at Harvard, Stanford, or MIT will automatically carry more weight than a paper written by a professor from ITT Tech, Montana University, or some other small college or university. The logic is that if something comes from a professor of a highly-respected university, then it will be higher quality. However, when you apply that same logic to a website, that concept tends to fall on its face for the same reason that ranking pages based on links is a bad idea. As long as there is a financial motivation for ranking high in the search engines, people will buy, cheat, and steal if that’s what it takes to rank #1.
July 28th, 2006 at 5:44 pm
I don’t think that is accurate at all. I reg’d a brand new .com domain three weeks ago, put up a site, and it ranks #2 for its main term (started to last week). It has about 5 links from related sites that are by no means “authorities” but are on topic or related. BTW, this 3 work term has the words “loan” and “refinance” in it.
But, I also have put up other sites that are ranking very well in G with little to no “SEO”. I think that might be the key to SEO today in G…don’t do much SEO.
July 28th, 2006 at 6:06 pm
Good things come to those who wait?
It sucks being forced to do multiple sites on subdomains simply because new ones do not go anywhere.
I have a domain name ready for my solar blog but I am afraid to move it off a trusted subdomain.
My question is, if you move a blog from a trusted subdomain does the trust travel with it and allow the new domain to rightfully shine? I should be able to vouch via 301 redirect right Matt Cutts?
Note, these are not spam sites either, I bust my ass on them every freakin day.
So far my history on the internet has been working within tight algorithms fighting spam, when are us non spammers going to get a break?
Good subject.
July 30th, 2006 at 10:30 am
Dont you think setting up a 301 redirect would pass on most of that autorithy to the new domain?
July 31st, 2006 at 6:01 am
you’re ridicolous.
you want to make sites without having any particular skill or any useful info, or any serious reason to get readers in the first place.
WHY in hell should people read your ads-infested sites ?
you may get traffic, no problem, but will they click ? will they come back ?
it may work for a while, indeed, but you can forget about making a career out of webmastering if you “don’t having anything to say”.
this blog is probably the maximum you can do, give up your hopes and your dreams about becoming rich and famous, you can’t : the few ones making serious money with blogs are people with TALENT, or professional black-hatters.
you’re none of the above so…
July 31st, 2006 at 9:13 pm
Dude you made me laugh …
August 5th, 2006 at 7:52 pm
Wow mg - you sure got someone’s panties in a bunch eh?
August 9th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
Ok, disturber, haha, funny pretend post… who are you really?
Jeez, settle down.
August 10th, 2006 at 10:38 am
I agree with this 101%. There are better and cheaper ways (and there allways will be).
Thanks for the article.
July 7th, 2007 at 1:45 am
This was a real good article thx
http://www.crawlingthenet.com