Is a Z almost as good as an S?
-
Possibly seems a strange question, but let me clarify...
I have a new site in mind and all the domain names I was considering for it have been taken (I want a .com or a .net if at all possible). However, I can get the domain with a z at the end rather than an s
Example: www.keyword-guides.com is taken, but www.keyword-guidez.com is available.
Am I completely wrong in thinking that it will still match well for anyone searching Keyword Guide, and should match fairly well (even though it is a partial match) for people searching Keyword Guides.
As the keyword is the most relevant bit of the domain, and as the first word on the domain is given the most weight, will having Z instead of S at the end make any difference at all?
Personally, I don't really like the Z option, but if it would have no (or little) impact on my SEO efforts, I could live with it.
-
Thanks for your input guys. I will definitely forget the Z option and carry on looking for a non-hyphenated alternative. Since reading your replies and taking on board your advice, I have found a couple of possibile alternatives and I am even considering a domain without the keyword in at all.
Sadly, EGOL, buying www.keywordguides.com is probably not an option. The budget for this project is tiny... I guess I am just going to have to be a bit more creative
-
www.keyword-guidez.com
You will lose traffic to keywordguidez.com, keywordguides.com, and keyword-guides.com
Not a good idea.
I would try to buy keywordguides.com. The price might be high and it might stretch my budget... but I would splurge on it.
And only retreat if the price was insane.
-
You are already at a disadvantage using a hyphenated domain name. It's just another challenge using the "z" replacement.
Think about the user experience. How many people looking at your site will go to keywordguides.com when they are actually looking for keyword-guides.com? The same idea with the "z" replacement.
From a search perspective, you will not be an exact match. You will be "one off" which will put you in the same category as other mis-spelled words.
It is definitely preferable to get a .com, but if push comes to shove the options I would consider are:
-
search for other TLDs such as .org, .info, .biz, etc. From a search engine standpoint, the TLD doesn't matter. Your focus would be ensuring those who look for your site are aware of your extension.
-
create a brand. Twitter, Google, Myspace are all brands whose name has no indication as to the type of content is offered on their site.
-
www.keyword-guidez.com is a bad option. It's bad for users who are looking for your site, it's bad for creating a keyword phrase match, and it appears a bit spammy so even when users find your results in search engines they may be less likely to click on it.
-
-
While Google might account for spelling errors, and possibly the understanding that a "z" is sometimes used as an "s", I dislike it when the "z" is used, speaking as a consumer and business owner.
While not use an "a" at the front of the domain, or "my", or "your"? www.mykeyword-guides.com. Or even better, without the hyphen, mykeywordguides.com?
Going back to the spelling aspect of things, I have always disliked it when a business uses a "k" for a "c", e.g. Johnny's Used Kar Lot, and the same goes with the z.
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
-
Why is Moz's Schema so bare
I use to use Moz as an example by looking at their site using Google's Rich snippet tool, Today I checked and it is so bare with errors https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/#url=moz.com What happen?Why the sudden change?
On-Page Optimization | | uBreakiFix0 -
True or False? Having your phone number in the header of your nav bar is good for SEO?
I have been told by a a few different SEO and Marketing Agency friends that by putting your address and phone number in the top section of your navbar is great for SEO. Does this myth have any merit or is it just misguided? Tksac28
On-Page Optimization | | UndergrndMarketing0 -
Using Hidden Text Behind the Logo as H1 is good seo practice?
Hello Experts, For my website if I use use logo as h1 for homepage but that logo will not be actually h1 but hidden text ( text is my brand name or website name) behind will be h1 so it is okay to use in this way? Using hidden text as H1 is fine as per google? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | pragnesh96390 -
Good CTAs for Meta-Descriptions: Direct, Indirect, Narrow, Broad?
It is no secret that good meta descriptions should be written to incite the searcher to click on the result without misleading them. Time and again I read that there are measurable effects by including "strong" CTAs (calls to action). What constitutes a call to action seems by some to be taken really narrow (i.e. "Click here to learn more!" - a very specific action that is spelled out) and by others rather broadly ("... Offer available till December 31" - only implicit, the action [buying/securing] not even mentioned). I now wondered: Many "guides" still recommend rather blunt calls like "Click here", "Read more", "Discover how". Personally I find those really unattractive and often a waste of space. However, I am not the benchmark and favour the informational side perhaps a little too strongly. Do those direct but general CTAs really work well in every case* or should one be more elaborate/indirect? I am looking forward of hearing your experience/opinion! Nico Yes, of course it is "test, test, test" and to some degree each case is different; looking for general patterns, though 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | netzkern_AG0 -
H2's vs Meta description
in some of my serp results the h2's are showing up instead of the meta description. i have read that H2's arent really valid anymore. can someone clarify this for me?
On-Page Optimization | | dhanson240 -
Website redesign and it's impact on ranking
Hey Everyone, I have had a website in place for over 7 years and I am now at the point where I need to implement a redesign in order to sell our product more effectively. -URL's will stay the same
On-Page Optimization | | Justin45
-Content will change but be very similar page-to-page
-Title & Meta tags will remain the same I'm planning on taking the site from a non-backend site to a wordpress site so the navigation will change. Does anyone foresee that this change will have any dramatic effect on site ranking? Thank You!0 -
Image URL's have knocked my sub-pages down (WP)
I had most of my keywords within the top 10 for this site, some were even ranking in the top 5. For a possible minor boost, more-so to cover all the bases, I decided to add images to all of the pages, and they were uploaded as a gallery with most of the image file names being the same as the keyword. Thus, url's were created with our targeted phrases, extending off of the corresponding sub-page. After that, Google quickly picked up the url's to the images and began indexing them, when that occurred the sub-page which was to be the landing page, quickly tanked. Nothing else on-site changed besides the uploading of the images, so I'm sure they're conflicting and for whatever reason Google can't decide which page to index. The page that contains the images used, or the actual intended landing page. With WP I didn't see a way to not have them link to anything at all, and just be static when using a gallery, stock at least. So, my question is how can I quickly alleviate this problem and what should I do in the future to avoid this? I believe if I change link thumbnails to image file instead of attachment page, that should fix the issue... Then, I'll have dead URL's which I suppose I should 301 to the sub-page. Alternatively, is there a better solution that will work, I was also thinking about no-indexing the attachment URL's, but that doesn't seem to be an option.
On-Page Optimization | | JayAdams320 -
Google's Page Layout Algorithm Change
Hello Everyone, Google says they've implemented this change because they are answering the complaints of users who have to search for actual content after they've clicked on a result. They go on to say users want to see content right away. Now while most of this talk is about ads, I wonder if this will also apply to websites that are image and flash heavy above the fold with very little content. I am working on a few auto dealer sites where 99% of the content above the fold are flash banners and images. Below all of this noise you can find about 200 words of text talking about their dealerships. I'd love to know everyone's thoughts on this...Does the new page layout algorithm change apply to only ads or to images and flash as well? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | wparlaman0