Are Directories Still of Any Value?

[PaulDylan]

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?

[afg]

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

[jemay]

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!

[Vizergy]

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.

[waqid]

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

[matbennett]

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.

[waqid]

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

[PaulDylan]

Can you list what you think are good directories to name a few?

[matbennett]

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.