SEOMoz advice on only buying domain if .com version is available
-
RE: "In order to maximize the direct traffic to a domain, it is advised that webmasters should only buy a domain if the .com version is available. "
http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/domain
- I am working for a client who's had a domain live for 5 years or so without a .com version of the domain (just .co.uk) - the domain is also hyphenated (which doesn't look like a great idea).
So, just wondering what research has been done into probs caused by lack of .com domain and by using hyphenated domain. I'm trying to figure out whether it would be worth advising client to switch to a new domain.
Your thoughts would be welcome
-
Thanks guys, much appreciated and very useful. I just found Rand's whiteboard on domains and found it quite useful too - see 3: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-choose-the-right-domain-name
and this on hyphenated domains: http://www.highposition.com/blog/hyphenated-domains-google/ - but it's hard to know. Might set up some of my own tests.
-
It literally depends upon many things! Like if you client’s target market is within UK then I would recommend you to stick up to .co.uk domain as this way you will be able to get better visibility in Google UK plus visitors who are directly coming to your website will tend to trust you!
In my opinion single hyphen is fine if it fits the brand name as well but if you have a domain available that contain no hyphen and at the same time if you can afford a bit of a dip in traffic then you cna go for the new domain and redirect 301 the older domain to the new one but if you are not ready for the traffic and ranking dip then it won’t be a good idea!
Just my 2 cents!
-
I agree with the guys above, it less to do with seo (if any) and more about human error.
I used to help with a uk gaming website that had a lot of american visitors, and I notice over the years people (the old time) would link to "sitename".com instead of .co.uk, which was held by a domain shark, so lost back links.
But I think this is because of an American audience used to everything being .com
Note: ultimately we bought the .com off the domain shark, I contacted him and originally he wanted $1000s for the domain, I said $300 would be the most I would page for it and said good bye. 2 month later he came back to me and sold it for $300. So if you have a domain shark with the .com play the long game with them.
-
I don't think that is is much of an SEO problem as long as you are targeting business in the UK.
We have lots of high ranking .co.uk sites that are unaffected by the .com alternative. We have American suppliers of products who own the .com addresses and therefore we are not in direct competition.
The only time that it could be a problem is if you are physically competing the the .com version and they sell the same product and are targeting the same keywords as you.
Your potential customers may end up buying from the wrong company.
So in my opinion this is a branding issue rather than a Search Engine ranking issue.
-
It really depends which markets your client is trying to target. If their target market is UK only then the .co.uk is perfectly fine. If the .com is available then it would do no harm to purchase it to save a competitor getting hold of it and outranking for the domain/brand name. You could simply redirect the .com to your .co.uk site.
Alternatively if the target is wider than the UK then it becomes increasingly difficult (though not impossible) to rank with a .co.uk in other countries. Hope this helps.
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
-
Google not showing the recent cache info: How to know the last cached version of a page?
Hi, We couldn't able to see the last Google cached version of our homepage after March 29th. Just wondering why this is happening with other websites too. When we make some changes to the website, we will wait to our website indexed and cached, so the changes will have some ranking impact. Now we couldn't able to check if the website got indexed with changes. Is there any other way to check the latest cached version or time of last index? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Duplicate website pages indexed: Ranking dropped. Does Google checks the duplicate domain association?
Hi all, Our duplicate website which is used for testing new optimisations got indexed and we dropped in rankings. But I am not sure whether this is exact reason as it happened earlier too where I don't find much drop in rankings. Also I got replies in the past that it'll not really impact original website but duplicate website. I think this rule applies to the third party websites. But if our own domain has exact duplicate content; will Google knows that we own the website from any other way we are associated like IP addresses and servers, etc..to find the duplicate website is hosted by us? I wonder how Google treats duplicate content from third party domains and own domains. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Domain Extensions
I wanted to get everyone's thoughts on the new domain extensions that are now available. I'm considering buying a couple .lawyer and .attorney domains for clients. I noticed when I tried to buy these I was asked for verification if we're going to be offering legal services through the site. That led me to think that it may be possible in the future that with this verification, if it's required, that means that not just anybody can have these domain names. That leads me to think that it's possible that these domains may benefit from users searching for terms with "lawyer" or "attorney" in their search term. I haven't seen anything in terms of these domain extensions and SEO yet, but I'd like to know your thoughts as to how these will be treated in the future. I can imagine these will be more valuable than the old .net, .us, .info, etc., domains.
Algorithm Updates | | Millermore0 -
New .TLD domains - SEO Value?
Hi all, I see that a new wave of domains are to be released soon. We are not talking or 1 or 2 new extensions, but more like 700 new extensions on a TLD level. What's your views on their SEO value? thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | bjs20100 -
Domains dominating SERPs w/multiple listings
I know Cutts addressed this as a potential future update to the Google algo but it's driving me bonkers.. My primary targeted keyword has one of our competitors listed 4 times in a row on the top of page 2. Some of the pages have duplicate page titles and the content is relatively thin. The site has a PR of 2 and a DA of 35. Why on earth are they able to suck up a whole half of a results page?!?!?! I don't know that there's anything anyone can tell me that will help, but if there's something I missed about this update please let me know. 'snot fair. 😞
Algorithm Updates | | jesse-landry0 -
Could EMD (Exact Match Domain) have cause SERP drops?
Hi all, Another suggestion was given for our fall in SERPS. Recently Matt Cutts announced that EMDs would be hit by new algoritms. http://www.seroundtable.com/google-panda-20-15789.html Only our site with exacts matches... cours-telephone-anglais, curso-ingles-telefono, kurse-englisch-telefon, and corso-inglese-telefono were hit. Does anyone else have experience of this? Would a solution be to create new URLS and redirect? Or would a redirect carry the penalty over? Is there anyway to fix that sort of penalty? Many thanks for your help.
Algorithm Updates | | Quime0 -
SEOmoz suddenly reporting duplicate content with no changes???
I am told the crawler has been updated and wanted to know if anyone else is seeing the same thing I am. SEOmoz reports show many months of no duplicate content problems. As of last week though, I get a little over a thousand pages reported as dupe content errors. Checking these pages I find there is similar content (hasn't changed) with keywords that are definitely different. Many of these pages rank well in Google, but SEOmoz is calling them out as duplicate content. Is SEOmoz attempting to closely imitate Google's perspective in this matter and therefore telling me that I need to seriously change the similar content? Anyone else seeing something like this?
Algorithm Updates | | Corp0 -
Duplicate Content & www.3quarksdaily.com, why no penalty?
Does anyone have a theory as to why this site does not get hit with a DC penalty? The site is great, and the information is good but I just cannot understand the reason that this site does not get hit with a duplicate content penalty as all articles are posted elsewhere. Any theories would be greatly appreciated!
Algorithm Updates | | KMack0