Does Google prefer single- or multi-page sites?

[James Tudsbury]

If anyone knows what does best at the moment, that would be cool. If it's as straightforward as that.

Let's say that all things being equal (relevancy, etc.), is a one-page site with info, a video maybe and a buy button or squeeze page raked higher by Google, or a site with a couple of tabs or pages?

I'm asking because I've heard a few differing opinions lately, but I would really like to hear from someone who actually knows a bit about Google’s algorithms.

I know they always seem to be changing.

Thanks!

[JMichaelZ]

I cannot say I have ever heard anyone saying tha google does not prefer multi page sites.

There are some folks who have singel page sites that do as well as multi page sites, but that is how the two are compared. The way the interent is put together I would think that most, if not all, tiems a multi page site is going to do well.

Depending on what you have on your site and what market it is in makes a big difference, but between those two choices, multi page for sure.

[bertyounger]

Combined with SEO Google loves good original content, end of story.

[JohnMcCabe]

The only people who really know anything for sure about Google's algorithm work for Google.

That said, my guess is that the actual number of pages isn't a big deal. One thing that is a fairly big deal is authority, and single page sites have a hard time establishing authority. Even 'thin' multi-page sites such as you describe (home page and a couple of tabs) will be challenged on establishing authority.

If you look at crossing over into paid search (Adwords), single page sites like squeeze pages have had a hard row to hoe recently. From the number of closed accounts and 'slapped' campaigns, it's pretty certain Google has concluded that thin sites do not provide a good user experience.

[funkdoctor]

I can 100% positively absolutely say multi-page websites. Just take a look at the sites that rank well and those that don't.

I ran a one page website for a while and it constantly got slapped in Adwords.

Google is looking for sites that can bring VALUE to their users. If you've got a one page sale page/squeeze page/whatever, you're almost definitely offering less value than a multi page site that mixes quality content with its promoted products.

Just my take on it.

Funk Doc

[Alexa Smith]

Originally Posted by funkdoctor

I can 100% positively absolutely say multi-page websites.

This "must", "surely", be right?!

I mean, I don't know and I can't prove it, but from my experience with websites, and Google, and from all the authoritative sources I've ever read on SEO and the significance of inter-page linking structures and all the rest of it, I'd be absolutely astonished if multi-page sites didn't have some sort of "edge", however slight, in the SEO stakes. How significant it might be, I have no idea.

If someone tried to convince me that single-page sites actually had an advantage, I'd require overwhelmingly convincing evidence before taking them seriously, anyway. And I don't think that's going to happen.

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by AbstractProductions

If anyone knows what does best at the moment, that would be cool. If it's as straightforward as that.

It's not, but it's similarly straightforward.

Search engines like sites with a good FACE - they are Focused, Active, Connected, and Established.

A single-page site is generally pretty focused, and tends not to be active, but can still be highly connected and well-established.

The danger with a multi-page site is that you can lose the focus of the site, and you may still not be active.

Most SEO gurus are hyping the "connected" part of the equation as all you need, and only grudgingly admitting the "established" portion. They leave "focused" for you to figure out, and so long as you're employing their services to keep you connected... well, that counts as "active."

[funkdoctor]

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

This "must", "surely", be right?!

Totally.