What 456 billion links failed to show SEOmoz.org

[jonathanleger]

I just posted this to my blog:

What 456 billion links failed to show SEOmoz.org

SEOmoz.org has released the conclusions they've reached from analyzing the hundreds of billions of links and web pages they have indexed in their massive database, Linkscape.

There's not much new there, which is no surprise, though it's nice to have some hard evidence support the conclusions I've drawn from analyzing Google's search results for the last few years.

I recommend you read the whole post, but here's the gist:

1. Get links from unique domains to your site.
2. Have the keywords in the domain name.
3. Have the keywords in the title.
4. Don't overdo it with the keywords.

Some of the common myths are busted in there too:

1. PageRank is the holy grail (the data shows it isn't).
2. On-page factors matter a lot (except for the page title, no they don't).
3. Subdomains with the keywords help (nope).

However, SEOmoz is failing to discern a major component of why Google's search results look the way they do. They say in their blog post regarding their results that they don't have the whole picture, because it's clear from their data that although getting links to the ranking page shows a real correlation with the page's ranking, it's not the whole story. The page with the most links doesn't always win.

I am floored that they don't know the reason why, despite their obvious technical capability of building such a massive, sophisticated database.

What they are missing is this: they are not taking into account the ranking domain's authority (the number of links to the WHOLE site, not just the ranking page). They were only analyzing the number of links to the ranking page itself.

I bet if they took into account the total number of links coming into the ranking site they would quickly see why the SERPs aren't based solely on the number of links to the ranking page–some of those results have lots of authority despite having few links to the ranking page.

Wikipedia pages, for example, rank primarily because the Wikipedia site has hundreds of millions of links (198 million according to Yahoo! Site Explorer as of right now), which in Google's eyes makes the inner pages trustworthy to rank even though they have few links themselves. This happens with lots of other sites, too (EzineArticles, Amazon, etc.).

I can't believe SEOmoz is even looking at H tags (H1/H2/H3 etc.). H tags have had virtually zero impact for many years.

Let me make it real simple for you. To rank for anything in Google, all you have to do is:

1. Register an exact-match .com/.net/.org domain name
2. Include your keywords in the title tag.
3. Get lots of links from unique domains

and

4. Don't be surprised if Wikipedia still outranks you (unless you can come up with 200 million links yourself).

It's not that complicated. That's obvious to me from years of analyzing Google's search results. And I didn't need a database of hundreds of billions of links to only come to a partially correct conclusion.

*** In case you want to post a comment: What 456 billion links failed to show SEOmoz.org : Jonathan Leger

[paulgl]

Interesting post, but your research failed on the domain name thing.
You can take xyz.com and rank for any keyword you wish.
But I have killed this topic to death with a few quick examples
like zillow.com, and many others that I am too tired to dig up.
In fact, most big, and I mean BIG websites have made up
nonsense names that have nothing to do with their chosen
keywords. But we shall end it with the domain of this forum.
I wonder what keyword they were going for by picking warrior?
I guess they did not get the memo to put "internet marketing"
in the domain. That example alone should send you back to
do some research on domain names. warrior forum is on the
first page for internet marketing forum. But digitalpoint.com,
probably the biggest, is #1. Hmmmmmm. Digitalpoint.com. I
don't see internet marketing forum in that domain either.
While others are worrying about keywords in domains, others
are taking anything.com and becoming an authority site.

Here's another quick one: threadless.com Have any idea what
they rank #1 for? I'll let you do the research, but it aint threadless.
Pity they don't have the keyword in their domain.

Websites are ranked. Not domains or urls.

Paul

[axleman]

Originally Posted by paulgl

Interesting post, but your research failed on the domain name thing.
You can take xyz.com and rank for any keyword you wish.
But I have killed this topic to death with a few quick examples
like zillow.com, and many others that I am too tired to dig up.
In fact, most big, and I mean BIG websites have made up
nonsense names that have nothing to do with their chosen
keywords. But we shall end it with the domain of this forum.
I wonder what keyword they were going for by picking warrior?
I guess they did not get the memo to put "internet marketing"
in the domain. That example alone should send you back to
do some research on domain names. warrior forum is on the
first page for internet marketing forum. But digitalpoint.com,
probably the biggest, is #1. Hmmmmmm. Digitalpoint.com. I
don't see internet marketing forum in that domain either.
While others are worrying about keywords in domains, others
are taking anything.com and becoming an authority site.

Here's another quick one: threadless.com Have any idea what
they rank #1 for? I'll let you do the research, but it aint threadless.
Pity they don't have the keyword in their domain.

Websites are ranked. Not domains or urls.

Paul

That's odd.

When I search the term "threadless", threadless.com comes up #1 & #2...

threadless - Google Search

In fact, 9/10 of the listings on the first page of Google have the term "threadless" in the url somewhere.

Perhaps you should choose a different example to make your point.

[warrior123]

Originally Posted by axleman

That's odd.

When I search the term "threadless", threadless.com comes up #1 & #2...

threadless - Google Search

In fact, 9/10 of the listings on the first page of Google have the term "threadless" in the url somewhere.

Perhaps you should choose a different example to make your point.

The keyword phrase "threadless" isn't a very competitive term.

In a hyper competitive market where fortune 500 companies are going after highly searched, short-tail keywords you'll often see that the majority of the 1st page listings don't even have the keyword in the domain. Not only do these companies already have a ton of backlinks but Google is also giving their sites some love due to their trusted brand.

ex., Google "loans", "real estate", "insurance", "mortgage", "payday loans", etc...

[kkchoon]

The Coolest Guy on the planet is here, welcome! Anyone using Linkscape ? How does it compare to Majestic SEO?

[jasonmorgan]

both of you totally missed the point...

Originally Posted by axleman

That's odd.

When I search the term "threadless", threadless.com comes up #1 & #2...

threadless - Google Search

In fact, 9/10 of the listings on the first page of Google have the term "threadless" in the url somewhere.

Perhaps you should choose a different example to make your point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by axleman
That's odd.

When I search the term "threadless", threadless.com comes up #1 & #2...

threadless - Google Search

In fact, 9/10 of the listings on the first page of Google have the term "threadless" in the url somewhere.

Perhaps you should choose a different example to make your point.

The keyword phrase "threadless" isn't a very competitive term.

In a hyper competitive market where fortune 500 companies are going after highly searched, short-tail keywords you'll often see that the majority of the 1st page listings don't even have the keyword in the domain. Not only do these companies already have a ton of backlinks but Google is also giving their sites some love due to their trusted brand.

ex., Google "loans", "real estate", "insurance", "mortgage", "payday loans", etc...

threadless.com ranks...

#1 for t-shirts
#4 for shirts
#2 for graphic t-shirts
#3 for buy t-shirts
#4 for buy t-shirts online

shall I go on?

I'd say those are some competitive niches and we are also talking one and two keyword phrases

using that example was spot on accurate.

actually, that example destroys a lot of common SEO beliefs. Check out those anchor texts... not a lot of mention of t-shirts, yet they still rank so well, hmmmmm?

do I win a prize?

[jonathanleger]

paulgl / jason:

Having the exact-match domain name gives a nice boost to your rankings, but you do not have to have an exact-match domain name to rank (obviously). It just helps if you can get one right out of the gate.

#1 for t-shirts
#4 for shirts
#2 for graphic t-shirts
#3 for buy t-shirts
#4 for buy t-shirts online

That's because threadless.com has almost one million backlinks (according to Yahoo Site Explorer). When you get that many, you can rank just based on the authority of your site and the keywords found on the ranking page.

However, it would not take a million links to beat threadless.com in ranking for those terms since Google values links with the keywords in the link text much more than links without it.

[jasonmorgan]

However, it would not take a million links to beat threadless.com in ranking for those terms since Google values links with the keywords in the link text much more than links without it.

Perhaps, but, tshirthell.com and t-shirts.com both fit your criteria and they are both behind threadless and cafepress.

Aside from that, I think domain names can give you a boost, I just don't feel it's as strong of as boost as you feel it is. I also think that boost can be quickly overshadowed by other SEO factors. I think the same of anchor text, I think there is a limit to how much anchor text affects rankings.

Obviously, I'm trying to figure all of this stuff out and don't have all of the answers but when I dig into the big sites a lot of SEO myths appear to be thrown out the window and the methods that work for low competition keywords aren't the same as what is working for the big sites.

[kkchoon]

I totally agree with you Jonathan!

You have ranked with the Coolest Guy on the planet with all kinds of on page and off page optimization, while Brad Fallon uses powerful backlinks and authority to rank with the same keyword, just too bad even an authority site of PR5 still lost to your PR3!

However, I think Brad Fallon is really cool! Because you can't find a word about the keyword - "coolest guy on the planet" on his site !

Kok Choon

[kkchoon]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

Perhaps, but, tshirthell.com and t-shirts.com both fit your criteria and they are both behind threadless and cafepress.

Aside from that, I think domain names can give you a boost, I just don't feel it's as strong of as boost as you feel it is. I also think that boost can be quickly overshadowed by other SEO factors. I think the same of anchor text, I think there is a limit to how much anchor text affects rankings.

Obviously, I'm trying to figure all of this stuff out and don't have all of the answers but when I dig into the big sites a lot of SEO myths appear to be thrown out the window and the methods that work for low competition keywords aren't the same as what is working for the big sites.

Try Google for this keyword "Google Bomb"

[jasonmorgan]

Try Google for this keyword "Google Bomb"

I don't see how google bombing is really relevant. Any site can have it's keyword relevance raised with backlinks and anchor text, I don't think anybody questions that.

[axleman]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

both of you totally missed the point...



threadless.com ranks...

#1 for t-shirts
#4 for shirts
#2 for graphic t-shirts
#3 for buy t-shirts
#4 for buy t-shirts online

shall I go on?

I'd say those are some competitive niches and we are also talking one and two keyword phrases

using that example was spot on accurate.

actually, that example destroys a lot of common SEO beliefs. Check out those anchor texts... not a lot of mention of t-shirts, yet they still rank so well, hmmmmm?

do I win a prize?

Actually I did miss the point. I misread the post and thought he was saying threadless.com did not rank for the term "threadless".

I do agree that exact match domains are nice to have and do help, but are not the holy grail for sure. My own site reflects that as well as numerous examples of larger, established sites.

[desi4eva]

"Get lots of links from unique domains" < can anyone explain further as to what this means??

[jasonmorgan]

"Get lots of links from unique domains" < can anyone explain further as to what this means??

Your better off getting 100 backlinks from 100 different website then you are getting 100 backlinks from a singe website.

[kkchoon]

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

Your better off getting 100 backlinks from 100 different website then you are getting 100 backlinks from a singe website.

True! in fact, you should get backlinks from authority sites, they are more valuable and can really help you rank high much easier.

Try Angela's backlink, one of my favorite backlinks all time!

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by kkchoon

you can't find a word about the keyword - "coolest guy on the planet" on his site !

Kok Choon

Kok look again under business links on the left hand side. Its right there
"2nd coolest guy on the planet"

[jonathanleger]

Perhaps, but, tshirthell.com and t-shirts.com both fit your criteria and they are both behind threadless and cafepress.

tshirthell.com has about half the links that threadless.com has (460k+), and t-shirts.com only has about 5,000 backlinks. Those two sites have the keywords in the domain, but tshirthell.com is not an exact match domain, so it does not fit the criteria of what I think works best in Google.

Aside from that, I think domain names can give you a boost, I just don't feel it's as strong of as boost as you feel it is.

The fact that t-shirts.com is ranking as well as it is with its 5k links among sites with hundreds of thousands of in-bound links is proof that having an exact-match domain is a very significant boost indeed.

I also think that boost can be quickly overshadowed by other SEO factors.

The factor that can overshadow the exact-match domain (or any other factor) is links. Get enough links from unique domains and you can rank for anything.

I think the same of anchor text, I think there is a limit to how much anchor text affects rankings.

I have to disagree here. I've ranked far too many sites with far fewer links than my competition because of the links having the right link text. Link text (when done right and varied appropriately) is extremely effective in ranking in Google.

Obviously, I'm trying to figure all of this stuff out and don't have all of the answers but when I dig into the big sites a lot of SEO myths appear to be thrown out the window and the methods that work for low competition keywords aren't the same as what is working for the big sites.

Nobody has 100% of the answer but Google, that's the truth, but my years of experience and ranking countless sites (thousands of sites if you include those ranking well in my networks) has demonstrated over and over again that what I said in the original post of this thread is the bottom line:

1. Register an exact-match .com/.net/.org domain name
2. Include your keywords in the title tag.
3. Get lots of links from unique domains

[Fraggler]

It really depends on the type of site you are building. That is great for thin affiliate/adsense sites which you pop up like mushrooms and want indexed and ranking well in minimal time. It isn't needed if you are building an authority style site as the backlinks over time will be enough to remove any advantage.

An exact match is by definition only going to allow you to target 1 keyword - what do you do for the rest of the site?

[jasonmorgan]

I have to disagree here. I've ranked far too many sites with far fewer links than my competition because of the links having the right link text. Link text (when done right and varied appropriately) is extremely effective in ranking in Google.

What I mean by this is that having 100% or even 90% of your backlinks all with your targeted keywords isn't necessary. It may even hurt your rankings.

There is no question that backlinks with your desired anchor text is going to help your site rank.

I have to disagree here. I've ranked far too many sites with far fewer links than my competition because of the links having the right link text. Link text (when done right and varied appropriately) is extremely effective in ranking in Google.

Yeah, that's more or less what I meant. Varied anchor text and keeping everything appearing natural seems to work best. From my experience, when I mix it up and keep the backlinks appearing like natural link growth, those sites do well.

Averaging around 40%-60% of my backlinks targeting my primary keyword and using the other half mixed up between secondary keywords has been working well for me. Sites that I have gone keyword bonkers on, the same anchor text making up around 90% of the backlinks have seen sudden short-lived boosts then disappear from the SERPs for that keyword, long-tail searches seem to be unaffected.

In a case like threadless.com, the site has a huge number of backlinks but a low percentage of anchor text keyword optimization.

The huge number of backlinks has given the site a lot of authority.

Due to the authority of the site, anchor text has almost become irrelevant and the site is ranking at #1 based on page content or something else.

Unfortunately, I can't see all 2 million backlinks so I may be completely wrong.

I've seen other sites that are ranking very well that have the same sort of backlink footprint... high number of backlinks with less emphasis on anchor text.

This is why I have the conclusion that anchor text is very important but at some point it is overshadowed by other factors.